Intel and Microsoft have projects that are in development 24 hours a day. I'd guess Google does too. It is stunning the resources these companies can bring to bare on projects. Just thought I'd throw that in.

I got word that I failed this phase of the technical tests, so no Jr DBA job for me. I'm pretty bumbed about this one. I really wanted a job like this and I think I was pretty close. I got like one piece of one question wrong, and that was enough to nuke my chances. I'm just a tad irritated because I spent way too much time on this. I'm also irritated because I honestly don't understand the justification, even after it was explained to me. The plus is that I got a neat exercise to check myself, but that's pretty minor in comparison.

The main issue with this approach is that, by definition, this software suffers from cookie-cutter solutions and feature creep. They also make a lot of wrong-headed assumptions about how businesses are ran.

I disagree that these are cheaper than in-house solutions. Not only are "cheap" solutions more expensive than three employee's salaries, a few missing features can cause the entire company to spend employee time to compensate. One missing feature can be absolutely devastating for the bottom-line.

Maybe there are some good solutions out there, but I imagine most of them are much more customizable, and thus far more expensive, than what the average company is able to afford.

Mind I am using blanket terms to describe an entire industry, but I've had the pleasure of evaluating a ton of products. There isn't much I found compelling.

You should consider that the justification given to you wasn't the true (or at least complete) justification. I've gotten much better at not sugar coating why I've rejected someone, but I'm still more likely to give an answer like "You got this question wrong" than to say something more subjective like I felt they wrote poor code, took too long, couldn't explain ideas/concepts very well, etc.

I'm definitely not saying this was the case here. And sometimes people just care about weird things. But probably worth thinking about a bit.

That could be part of it too. These weren't my proudest queries, but I was doing joins and subs across 6 tables with nearly no test data. I can see how the next test may have been the last fight at OK Corral.

Somehow admitting that makes me feel better, but that could be the alcohol talking.

this.

Or the guy doing the interview can be an idiot.

This. I'd go even further - it's entirely possible that they'd already filled the position before you went over to interview, but they were forced to interview people because of legal/compliance/corporate-policy/political/etc reasons. At that point, it's just their job to practice interviewing and come up with BS reasons for rejecting you regardless of how well you do.

I was once turned down because "you are too much of a business guy and we need real programmers" for a position that strongly emphasized business domain knowledge, after a "technical" interview that consisted of domain knowledge quizzes and C++ trivia, but no coding, which I passed with flying colors. Sometimes you just can't win.

I've had to do a few sham interviews where we already knew the candidate we wanted (usually from within) but had to show we at least considered X # of outside applicants. Brilliant use of my time.

Corporations are basically like neurotic, manic depressive, bipolar, insane people.

A big employer here does that. I have a friend that works in IT there and he said they haven't hired from outside for an IT position since 2007, except in very rare circumstances where an experienced person in something specific is needed. Yet, they post jobs all the time and waste people's time interviewing for them.

as a lurker of this forum and someone thinking about transitioning into programming, i'm kind of bummed as well. you seem like a smart guy and someone who genuinely enjoys programming for the right reasons; if you're having trouble getting a good job in the field you want, it makes me feel like i might be drawing dead.

Lets call a spade a spade though, there's some chance Dave may need to work on his "soft skills".

At least he's getting interviews which is somewhat a good sign.

Based only on his posting I'd say it's closer to a lock.

Fair enough. I'm pretty open about my inability to interview and stuff, but even a psychopath can talk for an hour without going off the rockers.

The issue, if I have to guess, is that I don't cone across as Mr Confident. Not mopey, but not someone who is proud either.

I wouldn't sweat it. The technically best could easily earn less, and have a more difficult time, than the novice.

There's more than one poster in this forum who got their first job within a year of starting. I've heard and read stories of quite a few people who did similar.

I have no idea how they did it, but I certainly don't dismiss their reasons, intelligence, or talent.

Got facial hair?

I'm as clean-shaven as I can get myself, sorry.

I heard a study found that bearded men either get 20% better pay in IT jobs, or are 20% more likely to get hired. Can't remember which.

Only because they are cast in movies!

I actually believe this garbage to be true.
I've seen some epic beards in my day; walking around in IT related jobs and the best ones are when they have the handle bar mustache to go with it.

It may only hold true in IT mechas like Silicon Valley, so uh, grower beware

Btw, are you still working with the db girl?

We work in the same building, but that's it.

I have a close friend who got sick of being treated like an inexperienced kid at work and grew a giant beard just to shut them up. Like Santa-levels of beard.