4 ms·
I think it might be due to the incentives - the costs are borne by the company (thus irrelevant to the employee), however putting new cool technologies on their
by adrianmsmith 4y ago
I think it might be due to the incentives - the costs are borne by the company (thus irrelevant to the employee), however putting new cool technologies on their CV is very relevant to the employee.
- bell-cot 4y ago> ...company...employee... Yes - but stupid yearnings to "do what all the cool kids are doing now" are at least as strong in those who would normally be referred to as "managers", vs. "employees".
- adrianmsmith 4y agoGood point - and in the case of managers there's also the "nobody got fired for buying IBM" effect: outcome A) huge microservices/cloud spend goes wrong, well at least you were following best practices, these things happen, what can you do. outcome B) you went with a Hetzner server and something went wrong, well you are a fool and should have gone with microservices, enjoy looking for a new job. Thus encouraging managers to choose microservices/cloud. It might not be the right decision for the company, but it's the right decision for the manager, and it's the manager making the decision.
- rr888 4y agoAgreed. I love our physical in house servers, but not knowing AWS in depth really hurt my last job search.
- adrianmsmith 4y agoYeah that's the problem. It's not just a "devs are idiots, they should think of their company and not be obsessed with their CV" - not having worked with the latest trendy tech has a very real cost for developers. (As does being a consultant wanting an extension and writing software that works, as I found out the hard way.)