[HN Gopher] How many software developers work in non-tech compan...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How many software developers work in non-tech companies?
        
       Author : tslmy
       Score  : 35 points
       Date   : 2023-12-24 21:40 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (lmy.medium.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (lmy.medium.com)
        
       | mkoubaa wrote:
       | "tech" is becoming a meaningless category
        
         | henry2023 wrote:
         | Technology as in "applied science" applies to every industry
        
           | uoaei wrote:
           | Definitely, but then, call it what it is. "Tech" companies
           | are those who provide "tech" products, such as cloud hosting,
           | software for managing tech stacks, etc. It's not merely
           | "anything that requires software to run".
        
       | verbify wrote:
       | > I chose to not use the category of "Computer and Electronic
       | Product Manufacturing", because it would include manufacturers of
       | navigation systems (Garmin, etc.), which aren't really what would
       | come into my mind when I think of "tech companies".
       | 
       | I very much think of Garmin as a tech company.
        
         | AnimalMuppet wrote:
         | People don't think of the embedded systems category as "tech",
         | but they should. When your car has 100 CPUs in it, it's in the
         | tech category at least as much as in the auto category.
        
         | badpun wrote:
         | Exactly. Making of a navigation system seems much more
         | technical than making a web-based shop (amazon.com).
        
         | CharlesW wrote:
         | I understand that we quickly take this stuff for granted, but I
         | can't imagine categorizing a company building digital
         | navigation systems and devices, which depend on a constellation
         | of satellites encircling the earth, as "not a tech company".
        
         | jeremyjh wrote:
         | Yes, I stopped reading here.
        
           | dasil003 wrote:
           | Spoiler alert, there's only one more sentence after this, and
           | it's of the "please like and subscribe" ilk, not any sort of
           | conclusion.
        
         | mikestew wrote:
         | Thanks for saving me a click. Yeah, a product whose algorithm
         | has to account for the general theory of relativity is no
         | technical match for hooking up the Shopify API to my web store.
         | Yes, I'm being dismissive, but come...on.
        
           | dan-robertson wrote:
           | Do you think the average engineer at Garmin is spending their
           | time thinking about the algorithms to interpret GPS signals?
        
             | mikestew wrote:
             | What difference would that make to the question at hand? Do
             | you think the average engineer at Microsoft gives a whole
             | lot of thought to Windows kernel development?
             | 
             | But to answer your question directly: I would have no idea.
             | Do you?
        
             | kettro wrote:
             | As a former Garmin employee, a surprising number actually
             | do.
        
             | code_runner wrote:
             | I think the point is about if they are a tech company...
             | and they are very literally a software and hardware
             | company. It's not a question of what the average engineers
             | day to day is.
        
           | NavinF wrote:
           | Which Garmin products require an engineer at Garmin to
           | account for general relativity? Lots of products have GPS,
           | but they use an off the shelf mixed signal IC that contains
           | all the hardware and software required to implement GPS. As
           | an engineer, you just feed augmentation data from a web API
           | and receive a text stream of NMEA messages from the IC. It's
           | literally glue code. The required skill set is the same one
           | required to hook up the Shopify API to a web store (ie.
           | "Software Engineer")
        
           | golergka wrote:
           | Would you consider a shop that sells GPS trackers a tech
           | company too?
        
           | mulmen wrote:
           | To be fair ecommerce companies have to handle time zones and
           | DST which is not easy. For the purpose of GPS general
           | relativity is solved. Time zones are an unending problem.
        
         | tslmy wrote:
         | Make sense. Maybe I am just not very familiar with their lines
         | of products. Let me come up with a more niche example.
        
       | bdcravens wrote:
       | This is why doom and gloom among the biggest "tech" companies
       | (layoffs etc) doesn't necessarily translate to our industry as a
       | whole. (though the particular mix of tech may be different)
        
         | solardev wrote:
         | Speaking from the other side though, many of my non tech
         | colleagues are having a really hard time competing with laid
         | off FAANGers who are flooding the labor market all at once. It
         | doesn't just affect tech companies proper, but also everyone
         | else working in the same roles elsewhere.
        
       | im_down_w_otp wrote:
       | Wait... if Garmin isn't a tech company... what is? I'm so
       | confused.
        
         | temp0826 wrote:
         | Maybe the logic is, they're a GIS company that happens to use a
         | lot of tech. (This is sort of how I thought of it when I worked
         | at a LA media company- we have hundreds of transcoders, gobs of
         | storage, distribution via satellite and other means, but the
         | software wasn't much more than hacked-together glue with fancy
         | buzzword names that sales spouted to prospective clients. We
         | were a media company that happened to need a lot of tech).
        
           | im_down_w_otp wrote:
           | Sure, I can get behind that. However, it's the other side of
           | the coin that I still don't get. What would count as a tech
           | company?
           | 
           | Even AWS is just a rental company or private utility when you
           | strip away, "happens to need a lot of tech".
        
         | the__alchemist wrote:
         | There's a 4-example definition of the article, which aligns
         | with the context it's used in on HN often: VC-funded SAAS or
         | web-service-hosting. I thought about this one and did a dive a
         | few weeks ago when someone I met at a coffee shop asked me if I
         | work in tech.
        
         | oh_my_goodness wrote:
         | This is the new definition of "tech," which basically means
         | storefronts and social media.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | Some companies are more equal than other companies
        
       | TrackerFF wrote:
       | I think it is more fair to say that traditional companies are
       | evolving into tech companies. Every "non-tech" company I've
       | worked for in the past 10 years have had a big push to get more
       | digital, which has meant hiring software developers, IT people,
       | setting up dedicated divisions to various IT tasks.
        
         | uoaei wrote:
         | That doesn't make them tech companies so much as it dilutes
         | what "tech" means.
        
         | j45 wrote:
         | Nearly every business uses software on phones or computers.
         | 
         | In that way every business is a software business and if
         | they're serious about their business they will find ways to be
         | a software and tech business to get things how they want or
         | need for their competitive advantage.
        
       | solardev wrote:
       | I feel seen! I've spent my entire career as a web dev (15+ years)
       | almost exclusively working for non tech companies: solar
       | companies, nonprofits, museums, sustainability funds, etc.
       | 
       | I loved it! The pay was much lower (50 to 100k), but generally
       | livable, and the people were awesome -- folks from all walks of
       | life, not all tech bros, a lot of women, etc. Good work life
       | balance (I've worked a total of maybe 6-7 hours of overtime in my
       | whole career), no weekends or holidays, no crunch. No bonuses or
       | equity either, but that didn't bother me.
       | 
       | But more than anything, I got to work in interesting verticals,
       | whether it's alongside energy engineers, battery experts, world-
       | renowned conservation scientists, archeologists, etc. People who
       | love what they work on, making small but meaningful contributions
       | to the real world (as opposed to like enshittified ad tech or
       | crypto pyramids).
       | 
       | Would strongly recommend, if you can get over the lower pay (like
       | you don't have a family or mortgage yet) and the lack of prestige
       | (you're just another minion in the machine, not a privileged
       | SWE). It's a lot of fun, though you also lose the opportunity to
       | work with experts in your field (who are usually at proper tech
       | companies), exchanging depth for breadth. It's not for everyone,
       | but I wouldn't have had it any other way.
        
         | ioblomov wrote:
         | My pre-startup career was in advertising (before the dominance
         | of social networks) where salaries were quite competitive and
         | the creative atmosphere made you forget the ad biz was still
         | corporate America. Another huge benefit was complete technical
         | autonomy: so long as you met deadlines, they didn't micromanage
         | (because they lacked the domain expertise). I imagine corporate
         | lawyers outside of law firms have a similar experience. All in
         | all, trading the prestige for autonomy, greater work/life
         | balance, and slightly less pay was well worth it.
        
       | magic_man wrote:
       | Those usually don't pay as well as tech company jobs.
        
       | jbjbjbjb wrote:
       | I'd rather not be treated as a cost centre and have non-tech
       | business people second-guess everything.
        
       | TradingPlaces wrote:
       | Walmart has 1400 job openings with the word "software" in the
       | title
       | https://careers.walmart.com/results?q=software&page=1&sort=r...
        
         | pram wrote:
         | Yeah I'm currently doing data work at a retail company. It's
         | not bad at all. They've thrown money at seemingly every product
         | that can be purchased with a support contract: Databricks,
         | snowflake, Kafka, presto, rstudio, tableau, tibco, informatica,
         | and so on lol.
         | 
         | It's not "prestigious" but my resume has certainly accreted
         | some fairly lucrative buzzwords.
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | I spent about 15 years doing SaaS and tech startups, then
       | switched to working for a scientific non-profit. The first
       | difference I noticed on my first week here was that, while they
       | do produce software (thus me being employed) they do not have
       | anything like a delivery process in place. There aren't product
       | managers, nor really project managers as I recognize them either.
       | Consequently, things which would have taken a month at the YC
       | startup I came here from take six months to a year instead--no
       | exaggeration. This has both pluses and minuses, as it can be
       | frustrating just not making progress due to completely
       | preventable holdups, but on the other hand I now have one of
       | those jobs people talk about where they can work for an hour a
       | day and still make all the deadlines with time to spare. I'm
       | certainly not complaining, I've done years of crunch and I prefer
       | this to the marginal salary I gave up.
       | 
       | The second difference I noticed is that people actually
       | understand what my company does, because I can say "we research
       | [disease X]" rather than "we're building a best-in-class, b2b
       | SaaS product/platform ecosystem that augments existing teams, but
       | to be honest, we're just trying to demonstrate product-market fit
       | for investors so we can get our second round, and ultimately get
       | acquired by one of the big players".
        
       | atomicnumber3 wrote:
       | I think the big difference is not "tech vs non tech" but
       | "software vs non-software".
       | 
       | Software companies have beautiful margins. Their incremental cost
       | is practically zero, their biggest expense is headcount for R&D,
       | etc.
       | 
       | Non-software companies have to deal with gross things like
       | inventory, lead times, logistics, shipping, RMA, etc etc... You
       | know, the dirty details of not having the luxury of literally
       | just selling information/bits.
       | 
       | Software companies great margins mean that employees can capture
       | a larger share of that (because they create so much value).
       | Lower-margin businesses can't, so the pay isn't as good.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-12-24 23:02 UTC)