I've seen what they study in school these days, and I think it's bordering on fraud to call anything in a computer science curriculum perfect. Often times, the code written for these courses is deeply flawed, written by people who have no real world experience at all. There's a big difference between studying a platform in a vacuum, and working on the same platform in practice. Is it any wonder that kids straight out of school are totally lost when they hit the production floor?
And then he goes on and on about things he knows nothing about. Sighting examples that other people have come up with. And then he has the audacity to talk about people being poorly trained when he can't even understand what the code in his own system is doing? Come on now.
Look, I get it. Programmers are an awful lot like mechanics, in that you'll never see one admire the work of another unless both of them have the same idea of what perfect is. That's okay. I also understand that we as programmers do this kind of thing to justify our own existence. I've done it. You've done it. Just the way it goes. But I think it's telling, that this guy is doing it in a way that his own technical shortcomings are readily apparent in the article itself. I hope he's using a pseudonym.
