>But given two applicants, one that has 20 years of experience during work time and none that he cares to report about during the interview outside of work time

>But given two applicants, one that has 20 years of experience during work time and none that he cares to report about during the interview outside of work time and one that has 10, 5 years working in his spare time and 5 years during employment which one would you pick ? The one that has completed projects on his own. If neither one of them could demonstrate such a thing, the one that seemed more intelligent. Also, the difference between 10 years and 20 years of experience, I think, is less than the difference between, say, 5 years and 10 years... I think the wage curve would imply most people agree with me here. In the case of someone with 2.5 years of personal experience and 2.5 years of professional experience, vs. 5 years of professional experience, if all else were equal (which is to say, either neither has completed a project they can show me, or they both have, and they seem about as smart, and they are willing to work for the same wage) it's pretty much a toss-up in my mind. If the guy with 5 years work seems more professional, I might go with him, just 'cause I lack professionalism, and it can be really useful sometimes. But, the thing is, it's usually not equal. the guy with 2.5 years paid experience and 2.5 years hobby experience, in my experience, is likely to work for only slightly more than someone with only 2.5 years of professional experience. So, given the choice between hiring the person with 5 years paid experience at market rate for a person with 5 years paid experience, and the person with 2.5 years paid experience and 2.5 years hobby experience at the market rate for someone with 2.5 years of experience, I'll easily take the latter. (at least in my experience, pay goes up /fast/ in the early parts of your career.)