Lack of qualified engineers to build MVPs or product

MaGIC Team 4 years ago • updated by Muz 4 years ago 16
We don't have enough good engineers in current programming languages eg RoR, Python or node.js. Most php, .net, and front-end developers are not keeping abreast with the latest framework or best practices (eg. github, etc) and are not keeping up with the evolving technologies.
Average and below engineers ended up working for MNCs. 
Good engineers migrated else where.
Great engineers started their own start up and left wonder why no engineers around to be hired.
Fished one from MNC. Boring enviroment quoted. 
Local start-ups are greedy and don't want to pay well in terms of salary or equity. I've encountered situations where engineers are expected to match the business founder in terms of cash in order to get significant equity. Their mindset is wrong. A techie's investment is his/her ability to build the product and that itself is an investment starting from RM 30K to RM 100K+ depending on how long he/she has to code and how broad his/her skills are - back-end, front-end, iOS app, Android app, etc.
Seriously? RoR is terrible.

"Most php, .net, and front-end developers are not keeping abreast with the latest framework or best practices" is also a false statement. Whoever said this is hanging out with the wrong crowd.
The only good programming language is what gets the job done. Once a company gets their millions of cash, they can start building something in a 'proper' language for the long term. Until then, what's important is getting a prototype/MVP done ASAP.
Don't care about the programming,  as long as it keep project/services going, I am still using the Good old Java.
@phantomic, can you elaborate on "RoR is terrible."?
Like back in the great industrial revolution between the 18th and 19th centuries, engineers played a pivotal role in inventing steam engines and telephones. I'd like to think that we are now in phase 2 of this industrial revolution where global connectivity via the internet will lead the way in innovation.

Nothing's changed by very much in the past 200 years or so. We still need great engineers / programmers to create great products. But from my limited observation of start-up events here in Malaysia, we tend to get 90% hustlers and 10% techies. Either that or I have been attending the wrong events. Personally, I think a 50:50 mix would be ideal as hustlers are still key to the equation to bring a product to market and sell it. 
I think you mean in the information age, we need software engineers / programmers to thrive, definitely not phase 2 of an the industrial revolution.

Nevertheless, I agree that the events are currently 90:10 or 80:20 on ratio of idea owners to coders. Not a healthy mix. Probably Cheryl should address that. 
Sounds about right. I've worked with a lot of startups and 90% of them are hustlers. We're almost raised to think that only businesspeople can start companies and techies are supposed to work under businessmen. Look at the Forbes 400 or any major startup and you'll find the backbone or even the heads of those organizations are highly skilled technicians and engineers.
Ha! Reminded me of industrial revolution. James Watt isn't the first to build the steam machines, but is the first to find someone to sell it. Richard Arkwright isn't the original inventor of spinning frame, but is the one who builds factories. So much for engineers and industrial revolution. 
Wong Wei Loon, engineers are the core.. business-savvy engineers made it hit critical mass. But pure business person, I doubt many can do such feat. They're probably like you spending a lot of time posting around to show off his superiority lol! :)
Probably I should not reply craps. I prefer benchmarking things on the superiority. Others prefer benchmark things on stupidity. This is called this the law of creepiness.

The sole reason to reply is to make the ecosystem better. Doesn't seems useful at all. Continuing chatting with people possess these types of mentality really sucks.

Wong Wei Loon, you obviously demonstrated no capacity for a healthy debate. You deviate from answering other people's response and attack them personally and talk in condescending tones. You talk fluff as if your high concepts mean a thing to the specific topic. You get defensive when others have valid points which you are too proud to agree with.

If you want proof that it takes an engineer's heart/vision to revolutionize industries, just look at what Elon Musk did:
- http://www.wired.com/2014/06/tesla-patents/

A Warren Buffet type of capitalist/businessman would not have the capacity to do so. It is not always about the money.

So don't look down on engineers, stupid.
This really reminds me what critical thinking is. Don't we realise that this conversation would not be beneficial if you can't really understand the words behind it? When we talk about industrial revolution, we have engineers, great engineers. They function not merely as a people who think only as functions, but also get to the whole picture and see how it works. The first engineer for workable Steam Machine is not James Watt, but he is the first one who get the whole picture. Getting the whole picture is important, and bear with me the importance of critical thinking. Yes, I am indirectly criticizing you, but what I hope is that you guys can counter argument with an understanding of history and a bit philosophy. This is exactly what I hope I can get by having conversations that are beneficial not only you but also me. Unfortunately, people just want input, more inputs.

And if I need to correct you, you are dead wrong. Warren Buffet, so called capitalist/businessman is the utmost respected figure in US, even more than Elon Musk (although I too respect him). Do you know why? I bet you don't and I have to answer this question again. He enables enterprise like Cola, GEICO, Washington Post, etc to grow and diverse by letting managers or management to do their own things. If you be a little bit of sensitive, you might notice he is also the one who leads the pledge to distribute his wealth. He has the utmost capacity to make sure every business run as they should if you were to sell. Just give him a call if you do have a good business to sell and wish to retire early. If he would have revolutionise something, we will call it "Investment". I bet you know nothing, and this is first time I personally attack you, stupid.

I don't look down on engineers, I look down on people without critical thinking, sorry.

And don't try to be stupid by picking the investment topic of telling people "A Warren Buffet type of capitalist/businessman would not have the capacity to do so. It is not always about the money.". It will make a good joke and laughter for people to refer. Investment is also an art, money isn't the whole part. Plus, you never been to the financial. If you got a chance, see it yourself and get out of your chair! Stop be an arm chair general!

By the way, why Tesla? Why Elon Musk name it Tesla? Do anyone here know how Tesla died? Of course, broken man. Larry Page and Elon Musk take this very seriously, they didn't want to repeat the same mistake. They are the guys who see the vision and big picture. The fake Engineer? Might forgotten to put the meter.