| «« Popping What? | Code Check-in for AudioMan »» |
|
About
I'm Ryan Lowe, a Software Engineering graduate living in Ottawa, Canada. I like agile software development and Ruby on Rails.
I write this blog in Canadian English and don't use a spell checker. Typos happen.
Projects
» Full-time Ruby on Rails freelancer
» Full-time with Rails since May 2005 » Former committer for RadRails (now Aptana) » I also have a few Rails side-projects in development: 1. wheretogoinTO.com Toronto nightlife 2. Hey Heads Up! TODO list and sharing 3. Layered Genealogy family history research 4. foos for foosball scoring 5. fanconcert for music fans (on hold) Hiring Rails developers? I can telecommute by the hour from Ottawa, Canada »» Email: rails AT ryanlowe DOT ca
BulletBlog
Now hosted on Hey! Heads Up -- check it out!
Syndication
Pings
Recent
Derek Lowe's (Ryan's older brother) words at Ryan's funeral
blog@ryanlowe.ca no more Forging Email Headers: Good, Bad or Ugly? Sarcastic Dictionary (Part 1 of Many) Tags Hierarchies Twisting Rails is Risky Business Risky Business? My Take on Early Alphas Whoa, it's August 2007 Closing Comments A Postscript to "Growth at the grassroots" »» All Blog Posts
Linkage
del.icio.us/ryanlowe
technorati/ryanlowe.ca/blog Aurora Roy Jim Andrew Trasker Travis Kibbee Karen Dr. Unk Ayana Van Bloggers Joel Spolsky Robert Scoble Tim Bray Dave Winer Raymond Chen James Robertson Ruby/Rails Bloggers rubyonrails.org weblog David Heinemeier Hansson Dave Thomas James Duncan Davidson Mike Clark Jamis Buck Signal vs. Noise Tobias Luetke Amy Hoy: (24)slash7 Jeremy Voorhis Eclipse Bloggers Planet Eclipse EclipseZone Luis de la Rosa Eclipse Foundation Kim Horne Billy Biggs Ian Skerrett Mike Milinkovich Bjorn Freeman-Benson Denis Roy
Archives
|
Outsourcing Internationally
Outsourcing is a sticky issue lately and programmers are concerned their high-paying jobs will be going out the window. To be honest, they should be. However, us North Americans have a few advantages over our international brothers and sisters that may or may not bring you comfort. Here are a few: 1. The language of high tech is English. Bleeding edge work in technology is often in English and that gives us a (admittedly unfair) head start. Use this to your advantage. 2. No matter how cheap the labour, sending work offshore costs money. Communication overhead multiplies. Managers love it because now there needs to be more of them to facilitate that communication, in North America and in the other country. 3. Speaking of English and communication: there's nothing like speaking to a native (North American) English speaker, especially about technology. English spoken around the world has local differences, not only in the way it's spoken but also with local jargon, expressions, etc. When you have to process broken/different English before you can digest its contents, communication slows down. In the high-speed technology industry this costs businesses money. Some people are easier to understand than others depending on thickness of accent, and that goes for England, Scotland, Ireland and Australia not just India. 3b. ... and that communication is not just inside the company. Ask Dell how much their corporate customers liked tech support from India. Customers will demand they can speak to someone they understand, not just in management but also at the lower programming levels, so they can get their problems fixed as quickly as possible. If there are communication issues in engineering your customers will dump you because you're not responsive enough. Time is money to them and it should be to you too. Dell learned the hard way. 4. Time zones are a huge communication issue as well. Something that might take an hour to fix in Virginia could take a whole day to fix in India because your engineers aren't even awake yet and by the time they fix it you'll be at home watching Who's the Boss reruns on TV. So besides those points, software engineers have a distinct advantage over traditional computer scientists in that we often deal with software process rather than straight technology or implementation. CompSci's usually end up learning process on the job rather than in school. North American businesses might be able to outsource quality assurance or programming internationally but the head brass (C_Os) will probably feel less warm and fuzzy about exporting their process -- essentially their control over the software. The best we can do as software engineers and programmers is to be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of outsourcing. Don't ignore this issue because it ain't goin' away. Anyway, that's my personal take on it. If you have points to add or corrections please use my comments. I don't know much about this stuff either -- I'm learning just like you guys. Let's discuss it. Update 3:04PM Nice timing: the rumour mill says IBM is considering "offshoring" almost 5000 jobs to Asia. Posted at December 15, 2003 at 11:07 AM ESTLast updated December 15, 2003 at 11:07 AM EST Comments
To be honest, I blame opensource software. Its not the cause of outsourcing, but it ain't helping either. If there wasn't any opensource software then we (software engineers, programmers, IT personel etc...) would be having more jobs. Some idiots on IRC dismissed my view as lunacy. I'm not sure if they have a point or not. If the U.S.A. is suffering from this outsourcing problem, then Canada will too. If its their problem, its ours also. If you can't beat them, join them! We should start our own outsourcing companies. » Posted by: Alex at December 15, 2003 01:50 PMI think open source software actually allows for more opportunity for developers. They can learn good software development and coding style for free. Companies can invest in open source by paying developers to customize the software for a specific use. Then when these changes go back into the community everyone benefits. I wouldn't be surprised to see more developer positions customizing open source software in the future. Especially for enlightened organizations like governments, where open source software can save taxpayers money in the long run and allow for more customized, easier to maintain and truly open (to the public) solutions. » Posted by: Ryan at December 15, 2003 02:47 PMThere can only be so much customizing. Its the same argument as "there will be a lot of jobs for maintaning and developing robots that will replace many human jobs." Also, really few people actually read through open source code. See "Myths Open Source Developers Tell Ourselves" "Myth: New developers interested in the project will best learn the project by fixing bugs and reading the source code. Reality: Reading code is difficult. Fixing bugs is difficult and probably something you don't want to do anyway. While giving someone unglamorous work is a good way to test his dedication, it relies on unstructured learning by osmosis." "Myth: Publicly releasing open source code will attract flurries of patches and new contributors. Reality: You'll be lucky to hear from people merely using your code, much less those interested in modifying it." » Posted by: Alex at December 15, 2003 03:32 PMUsers aren't interested in code, developers are. You'll get orders of magnitude more users than developers on an open source project. Just because most people don't read the code doesn't mean that one person won't go into the code and find bugs for you. "There can only be so much customizing."? Huh? You can turn a browser into a car if you want ... that is the beauty of open source. If you release the car, you release the code because it's based on the browser code. Customization is only as limited as one's imagination. BTW, that essay you link to was interesting for sure but it's someone's opinion, not fact. » Posted by: Ryan at December 15, 2003 04:16 PMFrom slashdot: We actually did it to ourselves. First we made information networked and portable so that anyone is capable of working with it at any place. Then we actively promoted "free" software that we work on for no pay. We actively promoted others to use "free" software and to produce it themselves. Now we act surprised when others are capable of writing software in other countries and are willing to do it for low wages. Survival of the fitest in this case means we ACTIVELY WORKED at making our jobs less valuable and our presense less nessesary. I'm not saying this is a bad thing; we just reap what we sow. » Posted by: A.J. at December 19, 2003 11:18 AMSilence Or Compliance INTRODUCTION SILENCE/COMPLIANCE BEND THE TRUTH LIKE LIGHT THROUGH A PRISM THE TIME IS NOW |