>It's not a tool that makes a developer competent. It's a competent developer that makes a tool worth using.
>
>>>We have a 3 man team ( used to be 4 ) and the company thought they'd bring in 5 ( 2 of which were C# guru's ) new folks and re-write the whole thing in .net in 1 year while we kept the revenue string alive and basically got screwed and eventually phased out. We told them to plan on 2 years minimum so we were moved out of an actual coding position to a "consulting" status.
>>>
>>>The new young guns made it very clear they were not interested in listening to us so we were removed from project all together.
>>>
>>>After 14 months and lots of cash the project was 20% complete with nothing but mocked up UI forms and crappy data integration. That team is gone and the original 3 guys are back taking the iterative process of switching to Sql over a year, then after that moving UI and middle to .Net over 18 months.
>>>
>>>I held my tongue and prepared my resume. When the other project was scrapped I went to a couple of the young guns and smuggly whispered don't screw with seasoned problems solvers they beat code slingers everyday.
>>
>>
>>I don't care what the languages were, the new guys were bozos if that's all they accomplished in 14 months. The only lesson I draw from that is a person can be lousy (or great) using any tool.


But the tool can make the developer way more proficient.