| Because time and time again people with a formal education in computer science have turned out to be useless in the commercial arena. Let's face facts most programming is not rocket science and could easily be automated. The reason it has not been automated is that programmers by and large are Luddites. They can admire new gadgets but not seismic changes in their work environment. Anybody who has had the where with all to study for a BSc/MSc/PhD then most work in a commercial setting is going to be far far beneath their intellectual capabilities. In short Compu Sci is best for a research role and commercial dev experience is best for producing a product. The two are widely different beasts. Personally, I have BSc in CompuSci and work in the commercial sector. I think both Academia and Commercial use of computers is abysmal. The last big step forward was in the 1960s for Academia and 1980s for business. Since then it's all been downhill. I have recent compu sci grads who cannot design a simple 8 bit cpu, what's an ALU. This is just plain wrong. I also have witnessed commercial developers who don't know how to treat clients. In both cases why are these people even bothering to work in computing? Most devs still think inheritance is more important than interface. Just how far forward can we move with these fools slowing us down. I think what it will take to move forward is a company saying if we do IT better we can rule the market. Then finding some devs and ops with long experience and fresh ideas. When a billion dollar company shows it can run it's IT with 20 people then we have progressed. Not when some dweeb says he has a new programming language that goes to 11. |
Well, billion dollar seems a little excessive. Let's say $100m.
In which case, 37signals is, imho, the closest thing today.