Outsourcing is all too real and will only intensify in the near future.

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: whitecloak

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Outsourcing sucks, if for no other reason than the time differential. I worked with an outside vendor who's programmers were entirely outsourced. Caused problem to no end, because I had to wait a minimum of 2 days for even the most minor code change. An in-house programmer would have probably enabled us to finish the project 1-2 months sooner. There were also the communication problems, and the fact that the entire database had a non-standard collation; I can only assume this is because they didn't have english set-up as the default on their servers.

this shows your ignorance of the Indian software industry. Dude, English is the language which is most commonly spoken out here. And, definitely, all databases will be set up to use english rather than hindi or anything else.

Did I say it was India? No, because it wasn't. It was Russia. This shows your ignorance of what happens when you assume.

 

[tec699]

Maybe in Indiana but try to buy a house in NJ on $8.25 an hour. The average price of a house in NJ is at least $250,000 and you can double that the further north you go.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: torpid
Cliff notes: until our education system stops sucking and we stop sucking as programmers, it won't change. but there's hope - lots of new theories slowly being integrated.

I think people who don't work in the field are more scared of this than those of us who do. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems to me that eventually outsourcing will get to the point where in order to compete with outsourcing, we have to increase the quality of product. My quality of product is pretty good but still has a long way to go before I'd be comfortable calling myself a great programmer.

The real problem is that a vast majority of programmers suck. In my opinion this is largely due to the way we are educated, but obviously there are plenty of people who just can't cut it too. I think the can't-cut-its are slowly dwindling away as the myth that if you go into programming you'll make money no matter what dies. Now we have to focus on achieving the kind of quality that cannot possibly be attained with outsourcing...

Right now there's already a noticeable difference, but in the eyes of management the difference in quality is significantly less than the difference in cost. Anyone who has read a technical manual written by someone with minimal english skills or had to work with a program that had cryptic errors with extremely questionable english would know what I mean.

I also agree with the creativity point above. It's hard to constantly innovate, and I think almost by definition when you outsource, you are only leveraging existing ideas/technology.

My final point is this... we already have a lot of innovation in software that programmers are still trying to catch up with. Design patterns, design methodologies, "advancted" programming paradigms, etc. I think that american and european software architects/programmers are catching on to some of these things pretty quickly, but I'm not sure that management cares about them.

If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

 

[tec699]

Originally posted by: Pocatello

Originally posted by: tec699

Originally posted by: welst10

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: RKS
Get into a career path that can't be outsourced eg; sanitation engineer, doctor, lawyer, etc.

Or program something very specialized.

or retail salesman

Wallmart? How can people survive on $8 an hour? Well I guess they don't own anything.

Which mean the demand for products like mac&cheese and ramen noodles will increase significantly

Hey mac and cheese and ramen noodles rock!

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: BD2003
If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

Why?

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: torpid
Cliff notes: until our education system stops sucking and we stop sucking as programmers, it won't change. but there's hope - lots of new theories slowly being integrated.

I think people who don't work in the field are more scared of this than those of us who do. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems to me that eventually outsourcing will get to the point where in order to compete with outsourcing, we have to increase the quality of product. My quality of product is pretty good but still has a long way to go before I'd be comfortable calling myself a great programmer.

The real problem is that a vast majority of programmers suck. In my opinion this is largely due to the way we are educated, but obviously there are plenty of people who just can't cut it too. I think the can't-cut-its are slowly dwindling away as the myth that if you go into programming you'll make money no matter what dies. Now we have to focus on achieving the kind of quality that cannot possibly be attained with outsourcing...

Right now there's already a noticeable difference, but in the eyes of management the difference in quality is significantly less than the difference in cost. Anyone who has read a technical manual written by someone with minimal english skills or had to work with a program that had cryptic errors with extremely questionable english would know what I mean.

I also agree with the creativity point above. It's hard to constantly innovate, and I think almost by definition when you outsource, you are only leveraging existing ideas/technology.

My final point is this... we already have a lot of innovation in software that programmers are still trying to catch up with. Design patterns, design methodologies, "advancted" programming paradigms, etc. I think that american and european software architects/programmers are catching on to some of these things pretty quickly, but I'm not sure that management cares about them.

If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

I wouldn't generally, but it does depend on the application. If I'm developing something from scratch and can get 16 good programmers or 4 amazing programmers, I'd choose the 4. If it's just updating something that's already there, or working with a proven architecture, I'd maybe choose the 16.

 

[Whitecloak]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: whitecloak

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Outsourcing sucks, if for no other reason than the time differential. I worked with an outside vendor who's programmers were entirely outsourced. Caused problem to no end, because I had to wait a minimum of 2 days for even the most minor code change. An in-house programmer would have probably enabled us to finish the project 1-2 months sooner. There were also the communication problems, and the fact that the entire database had a non-standard collation; I can only assume this is because they didn't have english set-up as the default on their servers.

this shows your ignorance of the Indian software industry. Dude, English is the language which is most commonly spoken out here. And, definitely, all databases will be set up to use english rather than hindi or anything else.

Did I say it was India? No, because it wasn't. It was Russia. This shows your ignorance of what happens when you assume.

you pwned me. my mistake. sorry.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003
If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

Why?

Because youre underestimating the indian's skills. Plain and simple, they woiuld get far more done than the single american could ever hope to. As good as he might be, when youve got a team exchanging ideas with 4 times the work capacity, its just a better investment.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: torpid
Cliff notes: until our education system stops sucking and we stop sucking as programmers, it won't change. but there's hope - lots of new theories slowly being integrated.

I think people who don't work in the field are more scared of this than those of us who do. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems to me that eventually outsourcing will get to the point where in order to compete with outsourcing, we have to increase the quality of product. My quality of product is pretty good but still has a long way to go before I'd be comfortable calling myself a great programmer.

The real problem is that a vast majority of programmers suck. In my opinion this is largely due to the way we are educated, but obviously there are plenty of people who just can't cut it too. I think the can't-cut-its are slowly dwindling away as the myth that if you go into programming you'll make money no matter what dies. Now we have to focus on achieving the kind of quality that cannot possibly be attained with outsourcing...

Right now there's already a noticeable difference, but in the eyes of management the difference in quality is significantly less than the difference in cost. Anyone who has read a technical manual written by someone with minimal english skills or had to work with a program that had cryptic errors with extremely questionable english would know what I mean.

I also agree with the creativity point above. It's hard to constantly innovate, and I think almost by definition when you outsource, you are only leveraging existing ideas/technology.

My final point is this... we already have a lot of innovation in software that programmers are still trying to catch up with. Design patterns, design methodologies, "advancted" programming paradigms, etc. I think that american and european software architects/programmers are catching on to some of these things pretty quickly, but I'm not sure that management cares about them.

If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

You'd just shown precisely why most businessmen have no business in software.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: torpid
Cliff notes: until our education system stops sucking and we stop sucking as programmers, it won't change. but there's hope - lots of new theories slowly being integrated.

I think people who don't work in the field are more scared of this than those of us who do. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems to me that eventually outsourcing will get to the point where in order to compete with outsourcing, we have to increase the quality of product. My quality of product is pretty good but still has a long way to go before I'd be comfortable calling myself a great programmer.

The real problem is that a vast majority of programmers suck. In my opinion this is largely due to the way we are educated, but obviously there are plenty of people who just can't cut it too. I think the can't-cut-its are slowly dwindling away as the myth that if you go into programming you'll make money no matter what dies. Now we have to focus on achieving the kind of quality that cannot possibly be attained with outsourcing...

Right now there's already a noticeable difference, but in the eyes of management the difference in quality is significantly less than the difference in cost. Anyone who has read a technical manual written by someone with minimal english skills or had to work with a program that had cryptic errors with extremely questionable english would know what I mean.

I also agree with the creativity point above. It's hard to constantly innovate, and I think almost by definition when you outsource, you are only leveraging existing ideas/technology.

My final point is this... we already have a lot of innovation in software that programmers are still trying to catch up with. Design patterns, design methodologies, "advancted" programming paradigms, etc. I think that american and european software architects/programmers are catching on to some of these things pretty quickly, but I'm not sure that management cares about them.

If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

You'd just shown precisely why most businessmen have no business in software.

And you've shown precisely why most software programmers have no business in business.

 

[SagaLore]

Myths and Realities: The False Crisis of Outsourcing

There are currently 6.4 million jobs in the U.S. in which the employer is a foreign company. The rate at which these ?insourced? jobs are growing is faster that the rate at which jobs in general are being lost. According to the Organisation for International Investment (OFII), ?Over the last 15 years, manufacturing ?insourced? jobs grew by 82%?at an annual rate of 5.5%; and manufacturing ?outsourced? jobs grew by 23 percent?at an annual rate of 1.5%.?[18]

Moreover, insourced jobs are often higher paying than those that are outsourced?e.g., the 4,300 workers at the BMW factory in South Carolina and the more than 14,000 employed at Honda plants in Ohio. Senator Mitch McConnell (R?KY) brought these facts to the Senate floor on March 4, citing data from the OFII and pointing out that every state has thousands of insourced workers. Michigan has 244,200. Ohio has 242,200. Even Idaho has 13,900 insourced jobs.[19]

Indeed, the nature of economic development means that while some lower-paying jobs may move overseas, higher-paying jobs move in. A study by the Institute for International Economics (IIE) found that:

[O]f the 12 IT occupations that earned more than $50,000 in 2002, 75 percent increased their employment from 1999 to 2002. IT jobs earning more than $50,000 expanded by 184,000 from 1999 to 2002, of which computer software engineers earning approximately $75,000 per year accounted for 115,000 jobs.[20]

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003
If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

Why?

Because youre underestimating the indian's skills. Plain and simple, they woiuld get far more done than the single american could ever hope to. As good as he might be, when youve got a team exchanging ideas with 4 times the work capacity, its just a better investment.

Plain and simple, huh? Any given Indian out performs an American, right? Do you even work in the industry, or are you just trying to say stupid things?

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003
If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

Why?

Because youre underestimating the indian's skills. Plain and simple, they woiuld get far more done than the single american could ever hope to. As good as he might be, when youve got a team exchanging ideas with 4 times the work capacity, its just a better investment.

I'm underestimating them? How, by asking why you'd choose 3-4 good programmers over 1 amazing programmer?
Good programmers are plentiful. Amazing programmers are not. Regardless of whether they're indian, american, russian, or martian.
Writing code is not like building a house; you can't always get it done faster just by adding more people.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003
If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

Why?

Because youre underestimating the indian's skills. Plain and simple, they woiuld get far more done than the single american could ever hope to. As good as he might be, when youve got a team exchanging ideas with 4 times the work capacity, its just a better investment.

Plain and simple, huh? Any given Indian out performs an American, right? Do you even work in the industry, or are you just trying to say stupid things?

I dont currently work in the industry, although I have in the past, and I have directly interacted with the mystical indian programmers that everyone treats like the boogeyman. They were excellent at their work. They are not some retards from a smelly shack in bangladesh, they had degrees like the rest of us, and certainly knew what they were doing.

Not every indian outperforms every american obviously. I'd take 4 good programmers over 1 excellent for the same price no matter how you slice it, or where they come from.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003
If you can afford 3-4 good indian programmers vs 1 amazing american programmer, as a businessman, Id STILL choose the indians.

Why?

Because youre underestimating the indian's skills. Plain and simple, they woiuld get far more done than the single american could ever hope to. As good as he might be, when youve got a team exchanging ideas with 4 times the work capacity, its just a better investment.

I'm underestimating them? How, by asking why you'd choose 3-4 good programmers over 1 amazing programmer?
Good programmers are plentiful. Amazing programmers are not. Regardless of whether they're indian, american, russian, or martian.
Writing code is not like building a house; you can't always get it done faster just by adding more people.

Then I could always hire the "amazing american programmer" to supervise the indian programmers, which is exactly what happens in reality.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Then I could always hire the "amazing american programmer" to supervise the indian programmers, which is exactly what happens in reality.

Which is foolish, because it's a complete waste of an amazing programmer's abilities. Any shmuck can supervise.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003

Then I could always hire the "amazing american programmer" to supervise the indian programmers, which is exactly what happens in reality.

Which is foolish, because it's a complete waste of an amazing programmer's abilities. Any shmuck can supervise.

Then I suppose we dont need him at all then, eh?

 

[Rainsford]

There are many jobs you can't outsource. Computer security, my field, won't be outsourced any time soon. Companies may want their call center in India, but they aren't going to be trusting a bunch of foreigners they have never met with protecting their secrets. There are many other examples of jobs that can't be moved, at least in the near future.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003

Then I could always hire the "amazing american programmer" to supervise the indian programmers, which is exactly what happens in reality.

Which is foolish, because it's a complete waste of an amazing programmer's abilities. Any shmuck can supervise.

Then I suppose we dont need him at all then, eh?

It depends on whether or not the project needs 3-4 good programmers or 1 amazing programmer, now doesn't it?

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: BD2003

Then I could always hire the "amazing american programmer" to supervise the indian programmers, which is exactly what happens in reality.

Which is foolish, because it's a complete waste of an amazing programmer's abilities. Any shmuck can supervise.

Then I suppose we dont need him at all then, eh?

It depends on whether or not the project needs 3-4 good programmers or 1 amazing programmer, now doesn't it?

I suppose, but I'd say the majority are better done with 4 people as opposed to one, and its not as if the indians can't learn new tricks.

 

[torpid]

Yep, you definitely don't understand what differentiates good programmers from great ones. And it's not surprising; as I said neither does management, generaly. It's kind of hard to speak in such generalities, too. I mean, is a good outsource programmer good because he's got good technical skills and is a quick learner? Are we including communication skills in this? An outsourced programmer needs to have significantly better communication skills than a non-outsourced one, because it's such a limitation to be halfway across the world on a different schedule.

And that's just the beginning. 16 good programmers will do enough to make the program work as specified. That sounds like enough, doesn't it? Well it isn't. There's a lot more to it than just making it work as specified. How extensible is it? How portable to other sites and/or platforms? Is it well documented? How hard is it to tweak? How secure is it? Will it perform well under stress? How usable is it? Has it been tested for usability purposes? Is it accessible? Does it comply with standards?

Also, I would guess that you don't really ever want to hire by the number of people. If I were to consider outsourcing and were a business person, I'd want a homogenous team with proven skills to be hired. 16 random good programmers will almost never be better than 5 or 6 good programmers who excel at working with each other and have done so countless times.

Don't underestimate the amount of effort and money that is wasted on micromanagement either. 4 amazing programmers will need little micromanagement. 16 good programmers who work in another country will need LOTS of micromanagement.

 

[tec699]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
Myths and Realities: The False Crisis of Outsourcing

There are currently 6.4 million jobs in the U.S. in which the employer is a foreign company. The rate at which these ?insourced? jobs are growing is faster that the rate at which jobs in general are being lost. According to the Organisation for International Investment (OFII), ?Over the last 15 years, manufacturing ?insourced? jobs grew by 82%?at an annual rate of 5.5%; and manufacturing ?outsourced? jobs grew by 23 percent?at an annual rate of 1.5%.?[18]

Moreover, insourced jobs are often higher paying than those that are outsourced?e.g., the 4,300 workers at the BMW factory in South Carolina and the more than 14,000 employed at Honda plants in Ohio. Senator Mitch McConnell (R?KY) brought these facts to the Senate floor on March 4, citing data from the OFII and pointing out that every state has thousands of insourced workers. Michigan has 244,200. Ohio has 242,200. Even Idaho has 13,900 insourced jobs.[19]

Indeed, the nature of economic development means that while some lower-paying jobs may move overseas, higher-paying jobs move in. A study by the Institute for International Economics (IIE) found that:

[O]f the 12 IT occupations that earned more than $50,000 in 2002, 75 percent increased their employment from 1999 to 2002. IT jobs earning more than $50,000 expanded by 184,000 from 1999 to 2002, of which computer software engineers earning approximately $75,000 per year accounted for 115,000 jobs.[20]

I'll counter that with...

For Michael Melvin and his 23-year-old son, Stephen, working with computers had long seemed the pathway to a more prosperous future, a haven of security in a rapidly changing world. This year, they discovered how wrong they were.

Pineau and other workers who have seen their jobs take flight feel their hands are tied. Thanks to the Internet, tumbling telecommunications costs and more open societies in some developing countries, employers can tap into cheap labor markets around the world.

When Humphreys & Partners Architects needs 3-D, computer-generated drawings of its projects, it turns to a network of firms in Russia, India, Argentina and Uruguay.

The Dallas architectural firm pays a fraction of the $4,000 to $8,000 it would cost to do the drawings in the United States, says chief executive Mark Humphreys. And the process couldn't be any easier. Humphreys employees e-mail their instructions, photos and hand sketches. The information speeds across the ocean in seconds, and the overseas firms can return renderings in three days vs. the minimum of a week in the United States.

And especially this:

This globalizing of the world's work force - still in its early stages - has allowed American employers to drastically lower labor costs, giving them more flexibility and choices in hiring. Feeling the pain are American workers, who face a much more brutally competitive job market, stagnant or declining pay in many cases and widening income inequality, experts say. For now, the number of lost U.S. jobs represents a fraction of the overall labor force - about 2.5 percent. But many labor experts predict that offshoring will grow rapidly, becoming a permanent way for companies to do business.

With an expanding array of jobs vulnerable to being moved offshore, many Americans will migrate to such fields as health care and education, which require face-to-face contact, the experts predict.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: RKS
Get into a career path that can't be outsourced eg; sanitation engineer, doctor, lawyer, etc.

All of those can be outsourced and/or replaced.


1. S.Engineer: There are trash trucks that only need a driver as they have arms that put the trash into the truck

2. Doctor: A lot of doctors are being replaced with RN's (Think HMO's) and a lot of X-Rays are being sent to india for review now

3. Laywer: Again a lot of contcats are being done over seas, online lawyers, etc...


If you think ANY job is safe, look again.


Also I Grad. in May 2003 and only Make $8.60 as I can;t find a REAL job either.

 

[preslove]

Aren't there non-outsourceable IT jobs? What about Network Administration?

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
Myths and Realities: The False Crisis of Outsourcing

I'd take that with a grain of salt, the source is a self proclaimed conservative think tank.