Software Engineering bootcamps are probably the best cost/benefits ratio programs that exist. There is a reason why that is, this isn't a walk in the park.
Should you be paid equal to someone coming out of uni? I don't think so, the ramp-up will be hard and longer for the bootcamps guys, but this will change as you gain experience, after 5 years the difference in pay should be negligible if you properly ramp up!
What I don't like about this kind of articles is the one-sided way they explain things. I would have like he investigate how the tech lead role could also be improved.
I think you voiced the deadlock issue pretty well.
Of course you can do that but you enter another level of negotiation because you are quitting and it might not even count toward the budget at this point. I would not recommend doing that every year as a negotiation tactic either.
I tend to agree with Redwards, and unless you are working in a small company if you do your job correctly it becomes more a political game than anything else.
I'm surprised so many people only send to 1 Email Service. These services sometimes go down, sometimes slow down, having 2 active account and having an easy way to switch in between (read even automatic) should be an applied best practice.
I'm surprised OP is not aware that's the kind of sending that can raise a lot of red flags, before doing something like this on a new account I would have contacted support to make them aware of this situation.
Specially on smaller senders, reputation is everything.
I think delivering messages 3 times a day is the wrong approach. There is a need for synchronous communications, it just should not be chat channels you are connected to all day long.
Our issue was price. Boss did the math for our use case, around a million hits/sec 24/7, and it worked out to billions of dollars. We're building a solution (on aws) for a little less than that.
There's the performance issue on startup, then there's the cost issue with the typical case. With the "round up to the nearest 100ms" pricing, your example ends up overpaying 20-50% for the _typical_ case. If you have any serious use of your app, you are better off with DIY on EC2 or using Heroku.
I think it is also a question of ressources, I built a pretty good backbone app with cordova, I would say that you can get 90% there (https://www.cakemail.com/mobile).
The question is also what can you afford. Can you afford to have 2 ios & 2 android devs? Can you afford to build 2 times all the UI features, etc.
For a small company, small budgets, if you have strong front-end devs & designers you are probably going to get a good cordova app & you can move your company much faster.
You have big bugdets? Hire the native devs, get the 100% performance & experience from native.
For basic application there's no need for very deep knowledge of the platform, so you can find people who know iOS and Android equally well and just write two different apps. As Cordova might introduce more problems than advantages, writing two identical apps might actually be faster, if app is not that huge.
And native fast responsive app with smooth animations might earn you more, than HTML container.
I wrote a simple game using cordova and I won't do it again. HTML+CSS+JS just not suited for mobile app development (I didn't try react native, those guys might change the game). Either you use frameworks and everything is just bad or use vanilla JS and everything might work, but you have to write a lots of spaghetti-code and device support might be limited.
The real unmatched benefit of using cordova (or any other webview) is the ability to deliver updates for your app without bothering with App Store moderation.
You seems to only think about consumer apps, there is a lot of companies doing b2b. I agree that for games cordova is a very poor choice.
Unfortunately I can't agree that you can easily find easily good IOS & Android devs, I'm sure that some that can do it out there, but generally one platform always suffers more.
Has for Cordova issues, from my experience, nothing was so atrocious that writing 2 apps would have been faster.
"Either you use frameworks and everything is just bad or use vanilla JS and everything might work"
I think you might be thinking about games saying that, again I can't agree, if you don't understand what your framework does in your back that's another thing, but you can easily write optimized code when you control your render.
For example Ionic is a very good mobile UI framework for angular. It however wont save you if you start adding random things to the DOM while doing an animation.
I've found loading QML-based interfaces to be slow on low to mid range android phones. It feels sluggish to start the app. I wonder if the alternate (QWidgets on an OpenGLContext) is still better than random DOM hacks?
I hope Angular never become the "futur" of front-end. I pride myself making reusable, simple, opmised, clean code for entreprisey apps. Some frameworks fit well in this mentality.
Angular does not. It's an awkward black box.
I can open the source code of backbone & understand everything it's doing. Using a simpler stack makes the code more timeless, any competent js dev is able to continue my work. Pretty sure you can't say the same with your angular app.
Should you be paid equal to someone coming out of uni? I don't think so, the ramp-up will be hard and longer for the bootcamps guys, but this will change as you gain experience, after 5 years the difference in pay should be negligible if you properly ramp up!