How hard it is to convince your boss to use new technologies
Discussion
Got an offer from a big well known company, i like the company and the people i will be working with, but i don't like the technologies they are currently using.
Their main system is written in a old technology 'asp classic' with sql server database. There is no source control in place , no form of testing.
I am not sure how keen they are to move into new development languages. I have been told that i would have to convince my boss that why should we migrate the current system to newer technology and what will be the benefits of doing it for company.
There system is up and running without any issues and have over 2k users.
I have been using .Net and SQL Server for over 8 years and i am not very keen on using asp classic.
Can anyone pls advise.
Their main system is written in a old technology 'asp classic' with sql server database. There is no source control in place , no form of testing.
I am not sure how keen they are to move into new development languages. I have been told that i would have to convince my boss that why should we migrate the current system to newer technology and what will be the benefits of doing it for company.
There system is up and running without any issues and have over 2k users.
I have been using .Net and SQL Server for over 8 years and i am not very keen on using asp classic.
Can anyone pls advise.
I wouldn't tolerate classic ASP for more than a couple of months, or if really necessary then as a small (10%) part of my job for support purposes.
Even if you like the company, it's as good as a hole in your CV.
However...
If there are any new projects in the pipeline, try your best to convince your boss that .Net is the way to go - even if it has to run alongside the old software rather than be part of the same solution.
Otherwise I think I'd look for an exit.
Even if you like the company, it's as good as a hole in your CV.
However...
sdyson31 said:
why should we migrate the current system to newer technology and what will be the benefits of doing it for company.
...
There system is up and running without any issues and have over 2k users.
If it works for them and doesn't limit their customers, why would they want to migrate to .Net? If it ain't broke don't fix it!...
There system is up and running without any issues and have over 2k users.
If there are any new projects in the pipeline, try your best to convince your boss that .Net is the way to go - even if it has to run alongside the old software rather than be part of the same solution.
Otherwise I think I'd look for an exit.
sdyson31 said:
I am not sure how keen they are to move into new development languages. I have been told that i would have to convince my boss that why should we migrate the current system to newer technology and what will be the benefits of doing it for company.
There system is up and running without any issues and have over 2k users.
They won't budge easily on the word of the new guy with that size\stability already there.There system is up and running without any issues and have over 2k users.
There's also the small issue that your new cow-orkers may not like you very much if you breeze in and insist that they're doing it wrong, and they HAVE TO upgrade, landing them with possibly years of additional work over the feeding\watering they do now.
Proceed with caution. If using the latest tech is of prime importance to you, need to find a job that offers that upfront.
Aside from you liking new technologies, ask yourself why should the company do it? What be benefits will there be? How much will it cost? Can this be recouped? Will it actually save money long term? Will it mean needing fewer headcount resources? Will it increase efficiency? All these types of questions and more help form a business case. Bosses and companies do not invest in something or change something for nothing. An IT department is no different to any other in this regard.
It sounds like whilst you may be technically proficient you need to expand your knowledge base to business processes. The higher up the food chain you get the more and more important this is. That is why people get paid more to make decisions, organise, plan and analyse rather than do or make things operationally.
It sounds like whilst you may be technically proficient you need to expand your knowledge base to business processes. The higher up the food chain you get the more and more important this is. That is why people get paid more to make decisions, organise, plan and analyse rather than do or make things operationally.
trickywoo said:
I had the opposite problem in convincing an antiquated IT department to move forward.
I was desperate for a new approach, which in the end was achieved and proved hugely beneficial, but it was a battle.
They may well go for your ideas.
One other issue is , the other developer (my boss) only knows asp classic and he has been working with this for a long time , i don't think he wants to move. Having said that, we can't just migrate everything in one day, new stuff can be done in .Net. But asp classic will stay for another 2-3 years which is not good for my cv.I was desperate for a new approach, which in the end was achieved and proved hugely beneficial, but it was a battle.
They may well go for your ideas.
sdyson31 said:
One other issue is , the other developer (my boss) only knows asp classic and he has been working with this for a long time , i don't think he wants to move. Having said that, we can't just migrate everything in one day, new stuff can be done in .Net. But asp classic will stay for another 2-3 years which is not good for my cv.
No chance, frankly. If the boss is the one that coded the original, part of the reason it's still in an obsolete language will be to protect the boss' employment - business critical, difficult to find people who can work with it, and too expensive to renew. Unless it breaks it won't be replaced IMO.Ynox said:
As a time served developer, the lack of proper source control scares the crap out of me.
I'd run a mile from the role.
That. I could live without Test Driven Development but no Source Control is f8g retarded! I would 'offer' to set it up for them i.e. get paid for it OR decline the project.I'd run a mile from the role.
fido said:
That. I could live without Test Driven Development but no Source Control is f8g retarded! I would 'offer' to set it up for them i.e. get paid for it OR decline the project.
I did offer them during my interview but my boss reply was 'we don't overlap'. This clearly shows they are not keen on moving forward. On the other hand, they are telling me that we are offering you good package only because you have right skills to take this project to next level. I can't sit and do asp classic for 2 yrs before they decide to do something with it.
Its really shame , really like the company, i wish they were already using new technologies.
Source control is an issue of basic competence, not even best practice. I would be laying down the law regarding best practice
and insisting on all technical decision within existing budget are yours and then approach increases on individual business justifications.
The response received would be my bell-weather regarding if this could be made to work.
If they are going to reject something like GitHub at these pricing levels then you are already on a hiding to nothing.
https://github.com/pricing
Transformation to modern development approaches is a very exciting and taking an team/organisation through this successfully is worth spades on your CV.
and insisting on all technical decision within existing budget are yours and then approach increases on individual business justifications.
The response received would be my bell-weather regarding if this could be made to work.
If they are going to reject something like GitHub at these pricing levels then you are already on a hiding to nothing.
https://github.com/pricing
Transformation to modern development approaches is a very exciting and taking an team/organisation through this successfully is worth spades on your CV.
4x4Tyke said:
Source control is an issue of basic competence, not even best practice. I would be laying down the law regarding best practice
and insisting on all technical decision within existing budget are yours and then approach increases on individual business justifications.
The response received would be my bell-weather regarding if this could be made to work.
If they are going to reject something like GitHub at these pricing levels then you are already on a hiding to nothing.
https://github.com/pricing
Transformation to modern development approaches is a very exciting and taking an team/organisation through this successfully is worth spades on your CV.
Its a a big well known company and they already have access to msdn enterprise edition, they could have used this in last 5 yrs but i think they don't have a drive and wants to keep things simple.and insisting on all technical decision within existing budget are yours and then approach increases on individual business justifications.
The response received would be my bell-weather regarding if this could be made to work.
If they are going to reject something like GitHub at these pricing levels then you are already on a hiding to nothing.
https://github.com/pricing
Transformation to modern development approaches is a very exciting and taking an team/organisation through this successfully is worth spades on your CV.
They have mentioned to me quite a few times that i will have the scope to influence future development, ensuring i utilise and develop my skills, whilst improving the way and means by which company provides solutions to the business.
Edited by sdyson31 on Friday 23 December 11:14
Run a mile. ASP Classic was dead and buried over a decade and a half ago. I had the misfortune to be around from those days and into the .net era. While you can "migrate piecemeal" it's not fun (e.g. creating a mezzanine using a hidden form to forward session variables from the Classic ASP to the .net component, yuck). I even had to use some tools which promised to compile ASP to .net assemblies - they mostly worked, except for lovely obscure bugs which with the elongated toolchain became an endless death march.
There are next to no jobs in Classic ASP now so you will be trapped once you start there, if there was the slightest, tiniest, interest in moving it would have happened in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 ... you take my point?
I've been in the situation of going in, as the boss, and having to clean house after an "architect" flounced. Breaking a culture where people don't test, don't manage their source and use a language which positively encourages "hacking" (no compile-time errors, 'cos it's not compiled) is nigh-on impossible. Particularly with an installed base, people will always retreat back to where they are comfortable - "if this was Classic ASP I could just open the file in notepad and resave it directly on the server, job done". Especially if you cannot show a good strong benefit to moving (and that will be hard since they clearly can't grasp the benefit of source control or testing ... or a type-safe language ... I'd lay odds they don't even have separation of logic/presentation etc.)
Have you even considered yet what their build and deployment process is likely to be, given everything else you have heard?
There are next to no jobs in Classic ASP now so you will be trapped once you start there, if there was the slightest, tiniest, interest in moving it would have happened in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 ... you take my point?
I've been in the situation of going in, as the boss, and having to clean house after an "architect" flounced. Breaking a culture where people don't test, don't manage their source and use a language which positively encourages "hacking" (no compile-time errors, 'cos it's not compiled) is nigh-on impossible. Particularly with an installed base, people will always retreat back to where they are comfortable - "if this was Classic ASP I could just open the file in notepad and resave it directly on the server, job done". Especially if you cannot show a good strong benefit to moving (and that will be hard since they clearly can't grasp the benefit of source control or testing ... or a type-safe language ... I'd lay odds they don't even have separation of logic/presentation etc.)
Have you even considered yet what their build and deployment process is likely to be, given everything else you have heard?
Flooble said:
I'd lay odds they don't even have separation of logic/presentation etc.)
Have you even considered yet what their build and deployment process is likely to be, given everything else you have heard?
No i don't think their web portal has been designed on layer architecture.Have you even considered yet what their build and deployment process is likely to be, given everything else you have heard?
I think Head of that department has no clue what is going on, he just reply on one guy who will be my boss and he loves asp classic. I will come on board as Solution Architect and i will have to convince my boss for using new technologies. They are well aware of that i don't use asp classic and my background is in .Net and SQL.
I personally think its a big risk and won't jump ship just for money.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff