问有经验的同学一个关于J２EE consultant的问题

笨鼠.

petiteway是不是 P 老大的马甲啊...呵呵

petiteway.

不是不是.不知道谁是P老大

Kingfisher.

P老大 =PeterWay

zzgirl.

i thought it's PeterWay as well
if you can learn lots different projects & environment, why not? they are experiences. then you can do the second type of consultants. More chance, learn more.

petiteway.

换不同的项目和环境没有问题，但是要是不停的换技术的话，可就把人毁了，在国内已经深受其害了，呵呵。
今天又受到让我去第２轮面试的通知，而且还要有第３轮，就当去锻炼面试能力把。。。。

zzgirl.

其实我很疑惑Architect的.除了新的系统需要一开始花很多时间设计,维护项目的时候,不都是改一点点的嘛?
而且,我现在在的Agile team, 我觉得,设计的部分很少,或者说,是花的时间很少.常常被人嘲笑是一堆烂货,可是,客户能很快用起来,就会很开心.设计得再好,更新换代那么快,有时候又不值得.
唉......

greanbean.

agree! :)
原帖由 MaxChan 于 2007-5-16 09:14 发表
在我印象里consultant是和经验相关的，行业经验或者技术功底要非常深厚（两者兼备那就是奇才了），而且还能侃得出来，头头是道的那种，不但能呼悠客户还能呼悠程序员。
如果是派到客户那去直接做开发的就是偏技术 ...

greanbean.

I think as a consultant, you're supposed to have a deep undertsanding of almost eveything and also have gained some in-depth experience in those aspects as well.
But you'll not be expected to work in a specific area for long, but instead you will have to be very adaptive and be ready to jump onto different aspects according to the current needs.
In one word, you're supposed to be able to do a good job in whatever areas if needed, i.e. client-facing and requirements gathering, conceptual design, detail deisgn, development, testing and deployment and whatever coudl be an issue in the project for you to resolve.
Just don't be expected to be very focused on ONE single technology or aspect!

petiteway.

To: zzgirl:
1.Agile并不意味着撩草的设计,相反，敏捷开发需要更强的对设计和用户需求的把握能力，也许前期设计是很快，但是不断的叠代过程也是必不可少的，全算下来，不能说在设计上花的时间不多。你说的你们那种开发方式有点象cowboy coding了，敏捷开发先进于cowboy coding的方面是它是严格遵循预先定义好的处理规范的。
2."设计得再好,更新换代那么快" ---- 无语。。。。
3.Architect并不是一般意义上的设计人员，其实从知识层面上和技术层面上，Consultant和Architect很类似，只专一个技术的不可能成为合格的Architect，在开发结构上Architect是在设计人员上层的。

zzgirl.

How many companies need Architect? my previous company used to have Architect but for me he more like a coach. yes, he started a project for the build script for our system. and it's quite fun for developers, but i am not sure whether customer will happy with that. you know those change cannot deliever any value for customer directly. Well, it is really help to reduce dev time in the future. I don't think most company would support this kind of project.
The point i try to make is that we have to find a balance......good quality code and value for customer......
Also, you talked something about Refacting. As a tester, i am really worried about it. Unit test doesn't work all the time. in lots of cases refacting will break the system. and refacting is suppose not to involve testers, just existing automation test scripts. What a ideal world.....