There's a huge difference between interns and juniors. For one thing, junior engineers are full time employees with full benefits and regular expectations. For the most part, intern expectations are very low as far as any actual work goes, because they aren't there for long enough to really contribute to anything meaningfully. It's mostly a social thing and a game being played on both sides about whether or not to hook up after graduation. Companies don't actually expect to get any work product out of interns at all, that isn't the purpose of the programs, but junior engineers definitely will have real deliverables to take care of.
It's an odd article, and the premise is also extremely odd. It sounds an awful lot like rushing a frat, which I'm not sure would have been all that helpful for me as a junior engineer.
Real men don't write Pascal either, we write all our programs in Fortran.
In all seriousness, it's a valid opinion. All the best programmers I know had relatively bare bones setups. I've found when I get in the habit of using IDEs are things like ChatGPT, I start to get sloppy. If the language server or whatever is tracking the logic of the code to tell you whether it will parse correctly, then you aren't using your brain as much to do it.
This is what I tell people that ask if it's possible to break into the field without a degree as well, which basically amounts to "what do you mean by self taught".
There are all different kinds of self taught. The highest performers in any discipline are naturally going to tend to be self taught (for a variety of reasons, and not exclusively, many have formal education or training as well, and without exception they will have had some form of mentorship). But so are the lowest.There is a huge range of skill level among the self taught, including a lot of people that are so far ahead academically that they would get nothing out of doing the typical university education thing.
I'm also increasingly sick of the Linux eco-sphere these days. I think there is something to be said in favor of Linux ditching POSIX and other standards and that this inclination has definitely had some positives and pushed us forward further than we may have gone otherwise in some areas.
But I don't think a total lack of a standard was what should have replaced Unix standardization efforts.
I think my real issue with Linux is that it is increasingly complicated (both the kernel and most distributions). It doesn't feel as "open source" as some of the not even quite open source Unix's, because you need to be a domain expert in a particular area for you to be able to modify it correctly. When you've got a team of people responsible for the whole OS as a single package, there is some incentive to keep your area maintainable. You never know who is going to be switching teams or knocking on your door. With Linux the incentive structure is to make a name for yourself as "the <particular subsystem or utility program> guy", which opens up a lot of potential for feature creep and overengineering.
As someone moving back and forth between BSDs and Linux over the years. I think I can relate to this feeling.
On Linux you inarguably have more options in terms of software, higher performance, better device driver support, etc. But even when you participate on the level of a distribution you still have the feeling that many components are at times poorly understood by your fellow developers (do not get me wrong though, I have plenty of respect for them) and that the direction for many parts that are essential to you is made elsewhere.
On the contrary, on the BSDs you get a spectrum of pragmatism, idealism, goals, etc. under a single roof. As I was younger I also found it hard to understand how limited the scope of say OpenBSD was in that they would not care about certain use cases: "You want to play the latest games? Why not get a Windows desktop or a console?! Now let me get back to try to figure out how to handle the insanity of locales, while keeping the code complexity from not going through the roof!". Perhaps it was some sort of "replace Windows with a single solution" drive inside of me? Not that "Linux users use Linux because they hate Windows. BSD users use BSD because they love Unix." is necessarily always true, but as I grow older I believe I can see better what it is hinting at.
I do not think I can say that one is better than the other in some sort of absolute truth sense. However, I can say that personally I tend to enjoy the BSD world much more as a user and (limited) contributor. I am willing to make the sacrifices and rethink my software dependencies and what hardware I can use, not because it makes me better than others, but because I enjoy the understanding of the software I rely on and tight community that comes with it.
Unrelated, andomdeazzz662, we seem to have vouched you back into the world of mortals. But do note the comment I made earlier [1].
