Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Last Voyager engineer retires, NASA needs Fortran/Algol pros Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:32:24 +1100 Lines: 34 Message-ID: References: <1d1e2b9e-8b9d-4409-8a23-24a2b14b277d@googlegroups.com> <4a2f3161-197b-49ca-9153-d881d47e99ea@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net REUNqwAFDhMsPi+I+LZUSQ9aea//e2YfAGRT6TlnBpit3XMj4= Cancel-Lock: sha1:KXAjs1s3n5gcab2Q/gEsQNb06IU= In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 Xref: csiph.com alt.folklore.computers:153760 "gareth" wrote in message news:n168h0$p6r$1@dont-email.me... > wrote in message > news:4a2f3161-197b-49ca-9153-d881d47e99ea@googlegroups.com... >> >> However, I do know years ago they were very fussy. For instance, >> years ago many IBM shops would not consider someone with non-IBM >> (e.g. Univac, GE, etc) experience. Indeed, many IBM 360-OS shops >> would not consider someone with 360-DOS experience. Other >> installations demanded only applicants experienced in their particular >> industry (manufacturing seemed to be very picky.) > > Which is interesting because in the early 1970s, if you knew one end of a > computer from > the other, then anybody would take you on for any computing job, Because the industry was very short of those at that time. > but, as you say, nowadays you've to have an exact match of language, > operating system and application to even be considered. Because they have a lot more applicants to chose from and use that to weed out the number of applicants to sensible numbers. > Perhaps it is an indication of the poor level of training these days, in > that very few > people know the low-level stuff (the real computer) and you're stymied by > the > restricted knowledge of the interviewer? Nope, its just due to the number of applicants they get now.