On Wed, 23 May 2007 09:46:10 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ alt ] on Wednesday 23 May 2007 07:27 \__
>
>> On Wed, 23 May 2007 01:49:36 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> As the former Project Manager of Excel said:
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | The only way Microsoft has managed to hire so many people | has been by
>>> lowering their hiring standards significantly... `----
>>
>> I have to wonder how many developers left Microsoft simply because their
>> personal set of morals are in contention with the Microsoft way of
>> business.
>>
>> I could see people wanting to work for (and with) Microsoft if they were
>> an ethical business[1], but in their current form, I can understand why
>> people are avoiding them.
>>
>> [1] before any of you say they are an ethical business, let me remind you
>> that an ethical business does not get convicted of illegal acts in a court
>> of law and does not poach their customer's business (Ã la Peachtree
>> buyout).
>
> I often ponder this too. To many ambitious and and talented programmers,
> plenty of doors are open. At the moment, Google has a high reputation (and
> it is generally liked by most people). Even programmers from Microsoft flock
> in Google's direction. Part of a person's ambitions are tied to altruism,
> not just money. If at the end of the day your career (and CV) is tainted
> with something like "The SCO Group", then you might as well rethink.
I don't know how much damage having that sort of thing on your resumÃ
would affect your career. At then end of the day, it's about your skill
set and about your capabilities.
But I disagree to a point about your statement that a part of a person's
ambitions are tied to altruism. I find that my ambitions are tied closer
to my desire to learn. I just happen to not care if I get paid for what I
learn in a lot of cases.
|
|
