-
OCPGrad, the rates are Canadian, but I think it is relative to the location (i.e. a dollar in Louisville Kentucky buys you a lot more then a dollar in NY).
A friend of mind was making big bucks in silicon valley, but the cost of housing was also big bucks (at the time it was 400,000 US$ for an average house a hour's drive from work).
Once he got married and the kids started to arrive, the big bucks weren't that big anymore. He moved to a small town outside of Boston making half his salary, but feels he is further ahead as they now have very nice home as well the time to enjoy it with his young family.
Gee
-
I have a lot of friends in NY, NJ, OH, CA, MA areas. I myself live in Toronto, Canada. What we figured out that the prices in Canadian dollars in Toronto are comparable to the same in NY City, Boston and other major large cities in teh States without converting them. Except for the houses in manhattan of course.
So, $95-100K in NYC will buy you the same or just a bit more in Toronto.
-
I've been working freelance for a few years now and one thing I've learnt is you're only worth as much as people are willing to pay at the time you're looking for work.
What's more, the day you sign a contract you will always be offered a more interesting or higher paying job.
For those who do not believe in God I submit these facts as proof that he exists and he has a sick sense of humour :-)
-
What's Oracle going to be in the next 5 to 10 yrs ???
I personally think that the demand is not going to be high anymore since the technology and Oracle make think easier day after day. More GUI and think getting easier.
So to all who are junior and dream to make a bug big, THINK TWICE !!!!!!
-
This subject was bought up at course I attended recently.
I have been Oracle DBA for nearly a year now and am worried about my career in the future, I have 40 working years left in me. As Oracle continues to try and make a DBA's life easier with OEM, and already some intelligent features in 9i, the demand and highly skilled stigma surrounding Oracle may disappear.
The bottom line is that Databases will always exist and someone will be needed to setup/maintain them, the question is which will be the most popular. If you have learnt Oracle, I wouldn't have thought that learning other RDBMS Solutions wouldn't be too difficult.
IT specialists have always had to be dynamic and have the ability to take on board and learn new technologies.
In UK the Ecommerce revolution has not taken place, this is mainly due to the telecommunications infrastructure, consumer awareness etc.
I believe that Ecommerce will kick off in time and when this happens the demand for Database back ends will multiply dramatically, again the question is which one will the consumer choose ?
At the moment, as a contingency, I am spending some time learning more about Unix Admin and MSSQLServer as something I can move towards, should the job market start swinging dramatically.
I am keeping my fingers crossed to stay in Oracle as I enjoy this the most. However the only thing I am really concerned with regarding my job or any job is the pay advice at the end of he month. I am not loyal to any technology as it will never be loyal to you.
-
The good news is that as DBs get easier to manage there will be an increasing need for people with a view of the bigger picture. People who are able to span disciplines and think in a more abstract manner.
The bad news is that the people best suited for these jobs are women since they have more connections between the left and right hand sides of the brain allowing their thought processes to cope with a deeper level of abstraction.
Funny, the physiological feature that makes them so annoying is also the one that will put you out of a job :)
PS. If Oracle takes as long as COBOL to die I'll encourage my grandchildren to take it up.
[Edited by TimHall on 02-27-2002 at 07:10 AM]
-
It's a very peculiar demand supply ratio.
The employer who I work for is not really(my opinion) conscientious as far as it comes to IT management or in simpler words it's just like you have everything on the computer that was installed on your desk to make it easier for you,but you still (it's sooo regressive) keep opening drawers and thick files.
It's something so many of the employers can't get rid off. Database management is a term which people use on almost daily basis but half of them have no idea how to make it work for them, until the home made program crashes and your data is lost. Your IT guy was long gone.
maybe in a few years he'll be a very potential customer for these solutions(probably when oracle would be selling it's stuff on a pure GUI format with women like tim said clicking on buttons , getting big pictures, giving big pictures) and me sitting on a senior position (If i stick around!!) clicking buttons and being a senior dba...sheeeeeeesssh.
I chose for oracle for what it is, it's intrigues me, bothers me. I like it,I'll keep liking it. Of course i wanna stay on my job.I hope that oracle stays better and not a sorry ass customised gui program which anyone can master(with 24hrs be a dba pocket books :p!!!!).
Tarry Singh
-
I agree with Tarrysingh and Tim. I have the same worries but it is clear that Oracle is going the way of making the DB less and less DBA-dependent. However, making all those new additions, they probably do not comprehend the fact that it will take more and more effords for beginners to learn Oracle. There might come a tuning command in Oracle 12i:
Code:
ALTER DATABASE GET BETTER;
but there will probably too many new issues with Oracle 12i that companies will still need a DBA.
On the other hand, I suggest, do not look or try to look too much into the future for all you might see is a granite stone with your name on in....
-
Hi, guys. This topic is very interesting, because Oracle DBAs can end up in the same situation as SQL Server DBAs. I found a great article about SQL Server DBA fate. Please, read it and tell me your opinion. Because it looks like Oracle is heading the same direction as Microsoft does.
The article:
"Most people agree that SQL Server is much easier to install and administer than its competitors. That's great news for SQL Server's long-term success, right? From many perspectives, it is. But SQL Server's ease of use also creates serious problems. SQL Server is so simple to set up that almost anyone with little or no training can install the software. Some DBAs who install SQL Server simply don't have the proper level of skill and experience to do so. As a result, SQL Server applications can perform poorly and seriously affect important business functions. More often than not, SQL Server gets blamed for this situation by managers who think they should have used "one of those incredibly expensive databases running on one of those four-letter OSs." They perceive SQL Server as inferior, and the software gets a bad rap when the real problem is human in nature. In contrast, UNIX-based database management systems (DBMSs) are rarely installed by untrained IT staff members because UNIX-based systems are more difficult to get up and running and require a higher level of skill and experience.
Because SQL Server has a reputation for being inexpensive and easy to use, some managers mistakenly think that SQL Server doesn't need the same level of care and feeding that its UNIX DBMS cousins require. I've seen the following scenario many times at customer sites: The database is managed by a team of experienced UNIX and database administrators who pull down six-figure salaries, while the SQL Server/Windows servers reside in a cubicle and are maintained part-time by someone who became a paper-tiger MCSE 6 months before. "
-
Where is the article from? Could you provide a link?
