[filoleg]

Yeah, but in real life scenarios, the difference in actual numbers, as opposed to percentages, matters.

Let's imagine that the split for all software shops is 80/20, with 80% being crappy, and 20% being decent. If there are 10 embedded software shops out there, it means there are only 2 decent embedded shops out there that an engineer can work at. Meanwhile, if there are 1000 non-embedded software shops, it means that there are 200 decent shops an engineer can work at.

This creates a wild disparity, even if the ratio of crappy to decent is exactly the same for all software shops in general.

[gridspy]

To build on your argument:

The 20% decent shops are retaining their engineers and only growing at a sustainable rate. Available new jobs are filled with a referral since every employee is constantly bragging to their friends. So they post few / no new jobs online.

The 80% crappy shops are shedding employees (turnover) and also poorly managed so they fire everyone and rehire later. Only the worst employees decide to remain during such a purge. So most new posted jobs (more than 80%) are for such companies.

Then the 80% crappy companies talk about their issues finding staff and you get articles complaining how hard it is to find XYZ employees (interns, C++, even supermarket staff). But the real problem is the company in question, not the industry as a whole.

[trap_goes_hot]

In real-life, engineers aren't just cogs in a wheel that are interchangeable, who can seek work in any organization. There is also a smaller number of people who can/want to do systems level/embedded programming.

[filoleg]

Yes, I agree with you. Which is why I explained that despite the overall ratio of crappy/decent shops might be the same for all software work areas, embedded devs are the ones who get the short straw.

[trap_goes_hot]

Not really, there are a small number of embedded devs competing for a small number of positions, so it all works out.