It's important to know of the new tech, but I think diving deep into new tech just because it might seem cool now can be frustrating and inefficient long-term.
There is no “long term” in technology. The best way on average to stay competitive is by keeping up with what the market wants. Sure it’s possible to start a project that is profitable or that you can get someone to acquire but statistically that’s like buying lottery tickets as a retirement plan.
Yes there is, computer science concepts like algorithms, pointers, ... exist for a very long time. General programming language principles and paradigms are reusable in other languages and libraries. Database principles and languages like SQL exist for a very long time. HTTP exists for a very long time. etc...
If you know enough of those long standing principles, you can use "framework of the week" in its week without much big deal, or ignore framework of the week and use/create whatever will solve your problem the most efficiently now.
Even if I agree in theory - and that’s the reason I have avoided front end development - whether using a framework is “better” or not is irrelevant if you need a paycheck. If the market demands knowing AngularReactWASMJs and you’re a front end developer, you have to have it on your resume.
I’ve been working for 20+ years, dozens of successful interviews and the last time I had anything approaching knowing “algorithms and computer concepts” is over 20 years ago writing low level cross platform C.
Most software developers are “dark matter developers” doing “enterprise applications” that will never see the light of day outside of the company or yet another SASS CRUD app.
Most of those hiring managers could care less if you know anything about pointers and algorithms.
Your experience is not all experiences. Plenty of us have never written a crud app and never will. Sounds boring, and it’s not like it pays better than working on systems or algorithms.
I’m not saying it “pays better”. What I am saying is that statistically that’s where most of the jobs are.
I don’t go to work not to be bored. After dealing with computers for over 30 years there is nothing that excites me about computers. It’s a way to fund my lifestyle and to pay for outside interests.
It depends on what you're going for. There's some risk with projects, but also more reward.
Being marketable requires staying up to date, but it's a hamster wheel: You stay fit, but you aren't moving.
With projects, you can always pivot. Nothing is truly wasted unless you throw in the towel on being an entrepreneur.
For me, I started a system integration platform 5 years ago. It's made 5 figures over the years. Nothing spectacular, and I'm 30 now, so even if it does take off, I'm not going to be the early success story many people like. But it's taught me lessons that are priceless. I have hands-on experience with sales, development, and marketing. I have sales contacts. I have code that can be repurposed into new products.
If it doesn't reach $x within y months, I may start a new business with a new model. But that's the beauty of it: You can do that. You don't have that option with lottery tickets.
Is there really more risk adjusted reward? If you’re young, smart and unencumbered, you could easily move to the west coast, work for BigTech for a few years and make more money guaranteed than you could as an entrepreneur unless you get really lucky.
Heck, I am none of those - young, unencumbered or willing to move to the west coast and I’m looking to work for one of the big three cloud providers (well two, I would never hitch my horse to GCP) as a consultant since they hire from any major city as long as you are willing to travel (I’m not right now).
There's quite a long term. POSIX and Unix knowledge? Decades. Win32 API? Also decades at this point. SQL databases and relational modelling. Expressing things in procedural programming, in functional programming, in logic programming. Concurrent programming. Most of that stuff applies in whatever syntax the language of the day has overlaid. At this point when I had to pick up Ruby I basically went "so it's a single dispatch, class based imperative language and the surface syntax for the things I need is blah. Right, we're good." And C and variants of Pascal have been around for decades, too.
It's very easy to pick up details that aren't longterm skills, but with a little care you can make much of your skillset last a long time.
Anyone can pick up the syntax of the language. The ecosystem surrounding the language is a different story. I might be able to pick up Swift in as little as two weeks that doesn’t mean I could be a competent iOS or Mac developer. The same applies to Java and Java + iOS.
The number of shops that still care about native desktop software has been dwindling weekly.
Why would someone hire a developer who has no history of the ecosystem that the company is targeting over one that has the same experience and knows the ecosystem?
> The ecosystem surrounding the language is a different story.
Is it? If you're being hired to worked in a particular setting, the choices from that ecosystem have probably been made. If there are really new abstractions that's one thing, but that's rarely the case. If you're being asked to make choices in a new ecosystem, that's different. But I think you also over estimate the depth of these ecosystems.
> Why would someone hire a developer who has no history of the ecosystem that the company is targeting over one that has the same experience and knows the ecosystem?
Lots of reasons. Social/emotional intelligence? Salary requirements? Proximity? And that's all assuming that you can find someone with the same experience that knows the ecosystem.
I did C for the first part of my career - 12 years. There weren’t that many decent paying C jobs in most of the US compared to more “enterprisey languages”.
There is no “long term” in technology. The best way on average to stay competitive is by keeping up with what the market wants. Sure it’s possible to start a project that is profitable or that you can get someone to acquire but statistically that’s like buying lottery tickets as a retirement plan.