6 ms·

Kudos to Apple for not budging on this. A senior dev once shared a bit of wisdom with me. That developers don't typically hold all the power, but the point of l

Kudos to Apple for not budging on this. A senior dev once shared a bit of wisdom with me. That developers don't typically hold all the power, but the point of leverage we do have is that in the end we are the ones who actually are going to build it. Disagree with PM on a feature? If you feel strongly enough, you build it your way until they remove you from the project. YMMV. Skate at your own risk. Anyway, that's essentially what Apple seems to have done here. Strong move, and one they should be rewarded for.

bobsil1 7y ago
That works until the technical PM has checkin permissions
- dvtrn 7y ago
  Check in what? If dev refuses to write it PM has nothing to check in.
  - wcoenen 7y ago
    Checkin = commit changes into version control system
    - darkerside 7y ago
      Unless the PM is going to write the entire feature themselves, check-in perms aren't going to do much.
woutr_be 7y ago
> Disagree with PM on a feature? If you feel strongly enough, you build it your way until they remove you from the project. This really only works in certain companies tho. I’ve seen some of our best developers removed from our project because they refused to build features that didn’t make sense. Word just goes up to senior management, and all of the sudden you’re to blame for project delays, and eventually pushed to another project.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  Ah, the features we’ve built only to find half a year or a year later that yes, my initial advice was correct. Alas, that’s not how the world works.
  - woutr_be 7y ago
    > Alas, that’s not how the world works. Sadly not, although I wish it was. In my current team, developers are only there to agree with POs, and to build whatever they want. Any resistance from a developer is seen as bad. Of course if we build a feature according to POs requirements, and the requirements were wrong, then developers are also blamed, since we should've highlighted this up front.
    - CaptArmchair 7y ago
      I have walked away from gigs over this in the past. It's not that I haven an issue with not having a final say in how things are build. If a PO comes with a seemingly unreasonable demand, I've come to understand that that's often the net result of politics and compromises from which developers are shielded. It's something I've come accept as a part of the job and I've even learned a great deal from. But it also implies that in some cases my professional responsibility doesn't extend beyond what I do in my terminal or my IDE. I do have an issue being treated like a character in a badly organized DnD game. And I have had no qualms in the past making it clear that I don't tolerate being blamed for bad planning or shoddy requirements gathering. Good PO's are sensible about this and own up to their responsibility. Talking about it works. That's why people skills are just as every bit as important for developers as well. If a team isn't willing to discuss this elephant in the room, then it says a lot about the dynamics, and you have to question whether it's worth your valuable time to work in a context that isn't enjoyable in the first place. After all, life's too short to deal with other people's drama.
      - woutr_be 7y ago
        > I do have an issue being treated like a character in a badly organized DnD game. And I have had no qualms in the past making it clear that I don't tolerate being blamed for bad planning or shoddy requirements gathering. I have found myself in this situation for the past two years, I've voiced my opinion more than once. But at the end of the day, in a non-tech financial company, developers just aren't important enough to be listened too. The business side holds all the powers, managers on the tech side know this, and thus let them treat us like code monkeys. There have been numerous reshuffles in our team to "try and fix the problem", however without accountability, it will be difficult to fix a problem without understanding the root cause. I've lost all respect for people who operate as the middleman between the development team and the business side, mostly because when it comes down to choosing a side, they'll side with the business, and play their politics game. After all, developers can't get them fired / moved away from a project. I know I should just walk away, and I've told myself this for over a year. Yet this job is oddly comfortable (in terms of benefits), so I just let it happen. I still have moments where I care enough to speak up, but they're quickly shut down my managers.
dimator 7y ago
That works if it's a bottom up organization. Decisions like this at apple are very much top down. Luckily, the PMs there make the right calls, when it comes to privacy, since it's one of their key differentiators.
realchucknorris 7y ago
> Disagree with PM on a feature? If you feel strongly enough, you build it your way until they remove you from the project. there is the other side as well, PM : build me a bike. Dev: here is a spaceship. PM: but i wanted a bike. Dev: bike make no sense if u can travel using a spaceship.
- brianglick 7y ago
  > there is the other side as well, PM : build me a bike. Dev: here is a spaceship. PM: but i wanted a bike. Dev: bike make no sense if u can travel using a spaceship. At the risk of being overly nitpicky (because I understand and agree with the general point you're getting at): That spaceship _is_ super awesome and far superior to a bike if you need a solution that'll get you a far distance in a short amount of time. But what if the need is something that's safe, cheap, and doesn't require complicated infrastructure to support? A bike might be a better solution. Blame the PM if they're not making those priorities and needs clear, though.
  - Seb-C 7y ago
    The other side is that sometimes you answer the PM to actually go in a bike shop, but the company does not have the budget. Sometimes you know that they ask a bike but will change the specifications later, so you try to prevent the mess. Trust me, I have a lot of experience in building 3-wheeled space-bikes ;D .
bshoemaker 7y ago
That's a really passive aggressive way to build what you think is right... Have some backbone and learn to defend your perspective directly.
- levosmetalo 7y ago
  Passive aggressive way is sometimes the only possible way when the imbalance of power is so overwhelming that you don't even get the possibility to express your perspective, let alone defend it directly.
  - darkerside 7y ago
    You always have the power to express your perspective. Although sometimes it can take some skill to express it well without getting yourself in trouble.
    - wizzwizz4 7y ago
      That's simply not true. Sure, a place where you can't isn't going to be around for long, but if it's part of a larger, fairly-sane company then it might struggle along for a while before the entire company finally folds.
    - rstuart4133 7y ago
      Yeah, but your perspective can be just ignored. A story: I was asked to write an invoicing system. I know a _lot_ about invoicing systems. The owners who employ me were very explicit: all figures this invoicing system displays must exclude gst/vat. That made sense to them, because gst/vat just confuses their profit figures. However, the whole point point of an invoice is to communicate to the customer what they will be paying and why. The customers in this case are retail. They are interested in only one figure: what comes out of their bank account. That figure includes gst/vat of course. As part of this I asked to see what they were doing now. The old system they were using did adhere to their edict: everything was ex gst/vat. As a consequence every person who customer facing (ie, the the vast majority of the employees) carried a calculator to convert the figures to what the customer wanted as they spoke with them. It looked difficult to me, but evidently madly stabbing calculator buttons while maintaining a smooth flow of conversation must be a skill most people can acquire. This was insanity of course: we could save the bulk of the organisation time and considerable fustraton by just giving these people the figures they needed. So I very explicitly ignored their direct instructions. Note: I had to ignore it, as I had already lost the argument. In due course it was rolled out for testing. I went down a month or two later. The calculators were gone, people were expressing their gratitude. Not a word was said by my managers, and I duly been rewarded every year with raises. I am an professional. I am hired very explicitly because I know far more about computer systems than the people who hire me. Like a doctor who refuses to prescribe opioid's, I view as my duty to steer them them in the right direction even when they don't want to be steered. If that requires putting my balls on the line and refusing to budge, so be it. They can always fire me if I've made a grave error.
quietbritishjim 7y ago
That might work on how a particular feature works (e.g. does the word count include symbols that have spaces either side of them?). If you're talking about the fundamentally changing the architecture and user interface of a program that takes a multi-person team to build, never mind one that the government want run by millions of people, you'd usually end up with less leeway.
cja 7y ago
In the current situation (and possibly in others) if a democratically elected government think it should be a certain way, then they could be excused for forcing Apple to make it that way.
- darkerside 7y ago
  > they could be excused I'm not sure what this means. Excused by whom? I don't blame governments for wanting this. Stability helps them keep power, even in a democracy. But I applaud those who are willing to push back.
  - cja 7y ago
    Excused by the people who would normally be upset by a government trying to tell a company how to do something, especially when privacy is involved.
ulfw 7y ago
I got to be honest and please downvote me all you like, but I wouldn't want to work with someone like you on a team. Just build whatever and ignore your PM isn't a recipe for team success.
- darkerside 7y ago
  Ha! You know very little about me. What I described isn't something I do, but it's an interesting power dynamic that plays out on a very small scale all the time. Knowing that it's happening is important, even if you're not abusing it. Thanks for taking my nuanced statement and building that straw man.

bobsil1 7y ago

That works until the technical PM has checkin permissions

dvtrn 7y ago
Check in what? If dev refuses to write it PM has nothing to check in.
- wcoenen 7y ago
  Checkin = commit changes into version control system
  - darkerside 7y ago
    Unless the PM is going to write the entire feature themselves, check-in perms aren't going to do much.

woutr_be 7y ago

> Disagree with PM on a feature? If you feel strongly enough, you build it your way until they remove you from the project. This really only works in certain companies tho. I’ve seen some of our best developers removed from our project because they refused to build features that didn’t make sense. Word just goes up to senior management, and all of the sudden you’re to blame for project delays, and eventually pushed to another project.

Aeolun 7y ago
Ah, the features we’ve built only to find half a year or a year later that yes, my initial advice was correct. Alas, that’s not how the world works.
- woutr_be 7y ago
  > Alas, that’s not how the world works. Sadly not, although I wish it was. In my current team, developers are only there to agree with POs, and to build whatever they want. Any resistance from a developer is seen as bad. Of course if we build a feature according to POs requirements, and the requirements were wrong, then developers are also blamed, since we should've highlighted this up front.
  - CaptArmchair 7y ago
    I have walked away from gigs over this in the past. It's not that I haven an issue with not having a final say in how things are build. If a PO comes with a seemingly unreasonable demand, I've come to understand that that's often the net result of politics and compromises from which developers are shielded. It's something I've come accept as a part of the job and I've even learned a great deal from. But it also implies that in some cases my professional responsibility doesn't extend beyond what I do in my terminal or my IDE. I do have an issue being treated like a character in a badly organized DnD game. And I have had no qualms in the past making it clear that I don't tolerate being blamed for bad planning or shoddy requirements gathering. Good PO's are sensible about this and own up to their responsibility. Talking about it works. That's why people skills are just as every bit as important for developers as well. If a team isn't willing to discuss this elephant in the room, then it says a lot about the dynamics, and you have to question whether it's worth your valuable time to work in a context that isn't enjoyable in the first place. After all, life's too short to deal with other people's drama.
    - woutr_be 7y ago
      > I do have an issue being treated like a character in a badly organized DnD game. And I have had no qualms in the past making it clear that I don't tolerate being blamed for bad planning or shoddy requirements gathering. I have found myself in this situation for the past two years, I've voiced my opinion more than once. But at the end of the day, in a non-tech financial company, developers just aren't important enough to be listened too. The business side holds all the powers, managers on the tech side know this, and thus let them treat us like code monkeys. There have been numerous reshuffles in our team to "try and fix the problem", however without accountability, it will be difficult to fix a problem without understanding the root cause. I've lost all respect for people who operate as the middleman between the development team and the business side, mostly because when it comes down to choosing a side, they'll side with the business, and play their politics game. After all, developers can't get them fired / moved away from a project. I know I should just walk away, and I've told myself this for over a year. Yet this job is oddly comfortable (in terms of benefits), so I just let it happen. I still have moments where I care enough to speak up, but they're quickly shut down my managers.

dimator 7y ago

That works if it's a bottom up organization. Decisions like this at apple are very much top down. Luckily, the PMs there make the right calls, when it comes to privacy, since it's one of their key differentiators.

realchucknorris 7y ago

> Disagree with PM on a feature? If you feel strongly enough, you build it your way until they remove you from the project. there is the other side as well, PM : build me a bike. Dev: here is a spaceship. PM: but i wanted a bike. Dev: bike make no sense if u can travel using a spaceship.

brianglick 7y ago
> there is the other side as well, PM : build me a bike. Dev: here is a spaceship. PM: but i wanted a bike. Dev: bike make no sense if u can travel using a spaceship. At the risk of being overly nitpicky (because I understand and agree with the general point you're getting at): That spaceship _is_ super awesome and far superior to a bike if you need a solution that'll get you a far distance in a short amount of time. But what if the need is something that's safe, cheap, and doesn't require complicated infrastructure to support? A bike might be a better solution. Blame the PM if they're not making those priorities and needs clear, though.
- Seb-C 7y ago
  The other side is that sometimes you answer the PM to actually go in a bike shop, but the company does not have the budget. Sometimes you know that they ask a bike but will change the specifications later, so you try to prevent the mess. Trust me, I have a lot of experience in building 3-wheeled space-bikes ;D .

bshoemaker 7y ago

That's a really passive aggressive way to build what you think is right... Have some backbone and learn to defend your perspective directly.

levosmetalo 7y ago
Passive aggressive way is sometimes the only possible way when the imbalance of power is so overwhelming that you don't even get the possibility to express your perspective, let alone defend it directly.
- darkerside 7y ago
  You always have the power to express your perspective. Although sometimes it can take some skill to express it well without getting yourself in trouble.
  - wizzwizz4 7y ago
    That's simply not true. Sure, a place where you can't isn't going to be around for long, but if it's part of a larger, fairly-sane company then it might struggle along for a while before the entire company finally folds.
  - rstuart4133 7y ago
    Yeah, but your perspective can be just ignored. A story: I was asked to write an invoicing system. I know a _lot_ about invoicing systems. The owners who employ me were very explicit: all figures this invoicing system displays must exclude gst/vat. That made sense to them, because gst/vat just confuses their profit figures. However, the whole point point of an invoice is to communicate to the customer what they will be paying and why. The customers in this case are retail. They are interested in only one figure: what comes out of their bank account. That figure includes gst/vat of course. As part of this I asked to see what they were doing now. The old system they were using did adhere to their edict: everything was ex gst/vat. As a consequence every person who customer facing (ie, the the vast majority of the employees) carried a calculator to convert the figures to what the customer wanted as they spoke with them. It looked difficult to me, but evidently madly stabbing calculator buttons while maintaining a smooth flow of conversation must be a skill most people can acquire. This was insanity of course: we could save the bulk of the organisation time and considerable fustraton by just giving these people the figures they needed. So I very explicitly ignored their direct instructions. Note: I had to ignore it, as I had already lost the argument. In due course it was rolled out for testing. I went down a month or two later. The calculators were gone, people were expressing their gratitude. Not a word was said by my managers, and I duly been rewarded every year with raises. I am an professional. I am hired very explicitly because I know far more about computer systems than the people who hire me. Like a doctor who refuses to prescribe opioid's, I view as my duty to steer them them in the right direction even when they don't want to be steered. If that requires putting my balls on the line and refusing to budge, so be it. They can always fire me if I've made a grave error.

quietbritishjim 7y ago

That might work on how a particular feature works (e.g. does the word count include symbols that have spaces either side of them?). If you're talking about the fundamentally changing the architecture and user interface of a program that takes a multi-person team to build, never mind one that the government want run by millions of people, you'd usually end up with less leeway.

cja 7y ago

In the current situation (and possibly in others) if a democratically elected government think it should be a certain way, then they could be excused for forcing Apple to make it that way.

darkerside 7y ago
> they could be excused I'm not sure what this means. Excused by whom? I don't blame governments for wanting this. Stability helps them keep power, even in a democracy. But I applaud those who are willing to push back.
- cja 7y ago
  Excused by the people who would normally be upset by a government trying to tell a company how to do something, especially when privacy is involved.

ulfw 7y ago

I got to be honest and please downvote me all you like, but I wouldn't want to work with someone like you on a team. Just build whatever and ignore your PM isn't a recipe for team success.

darkerside 7y ago
Ha! You know very little about me. What I described isn't something I do, but it's an interesting power dynamic that plays out on a very small scale all the time. Knowing that it's happening is important, even if you're not abusing it. Thanks for taking my nuanced statement and building that straw man.