> Ads seeking backend software engineers were up 337% in the first half of 2022, compared to the same period the previous year.
I've predicted in the past that as the economy tightens up, front end roles will be seen as luxuries, with more emphasis on the backend.
Of course the list in the article that breaks things down by technology does list a few front-end related techs, like Typescript, CSS, and "Full stack". CSS is used even in static HTML sites and Typescript is a move away from the free and loose world of JS, with more regimented code (and can be used on the server). "Full stack" is always a loaded term: among developers it seems to imply front-end heavy with just enough backend to get by, whereas for hirers I think it implies very strong skills on the backend.
I've done both. Heavy front-ends really don't add much to a bottom line. They create a better experience for the user, but you can create a very functional application without needing the whole component-and-compilation circus.
I’ve worked at SaaS companies that invested in ui/ux and one of the common reasons we’d win deals is our app looked “nicer” than our competitors.
However, I do believe you can build a lasting saas business with a strong backend / weak frontend, but can’t do it with a weak backend / strong frontend.
Appearance is definitely important. Of course, you can generally have the same design whether the site is server-rendered or client-rendered, with the difference being interactivity more than visual appeal. Additionally, you can get very far with over-the-wire approaches like LiveView/Hotwire.
I work mostly on frontend and even I agree that you often "need" a good backend more than you need a good frontend. That doesn't mean it isn't valuable, see GP.
I'm actually impressed and surprised by how many frontend jobs DevQuarterly sees (https://devquarterly.com/insights/trends/). Big tech companies typically have many more backend developers than frontend developers. It depends on how many of those fullstack jobs are frontend heavy, but from what I've seen these job postings from smaller companies are often looking for frontend developers with some basic backend and cloud skills to build a product 0 to 1. Backend at that scale can be quite simple and is not out of the wheelhouse of a frontend developer that can actually code.
Doesn't look like many people have bought into Hotwire with Rails ;) The "component and compilation circus" is pretty easy these days and improves the potential for your site. People see the billion dollar SaaS companies with fancy websites built on React and follow them.
I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said. The original point is that when companies have to spend their money more judiciously, front end is low-hanging fruit. (especially when there are alternatives to accomplish the same business objectives)
You've been breaking the site guidelines so badly and so frequently that I've banned the account.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Frontend ain't exactly easy to hire for these days, either. We are lucky to be in the software business these days, seems there's no end to humanities thirst for more.
> We are lucky to be in the software business these days
If only. It is surprisingly hard to find a back-end position these days - the interview process is so, umgm, low.
You may have an hour to solve a non-trivial - at least supposedly - algorithmic problem, write a working solution, have a conversation about it along the way - the design, justifications, other options - debug it, improve and then have a requirements change. Interviewer will complain about slowness, even though in real life nobody solves such problem with anything close to that speed, and if you choose a simpler solution, he will complain about it being not optimal.
All of that is for a position where they request to primarily have good generalist skills, ability to work on multiple levels with both people and systems. They test for top coder skills for a run-of-the-mill position where those skills won't be utilized anywhere close to the artificial interview requirements. As a result it's mostly a gamble, and those thinking deeper than the first thought lose more often than not.
And after some weeks of unfortunate job search companies start wondering why you're not working for so long. And if you looking for a job while working, it's definitely like another job - often months-long process of finding something better than what you have. Agree on something too early - and you'll end up in an anemic company with arbitrary policies, and you'll be forced to look for a next job sooner than you were expecting.
If you're a good engineer with long experience, interview process is stacked against you. Prepare to spend years before finding a good place, where you can actually do engineering and not practicing coding, answering interview puzzles, or navigating office politics in places like CI/CD configuration.
This is probably a situation of a catch of middle-level experience. You're not good enough to have a name and stellar references - like, you didn't write a book - and you're not a junior from a college to put you to some tasks justified by your low pay. It's a pretty confusing, when you know your skills can be applied for many uses, yet have to play dice with strange interviews over and over. If you're in this situation, you don't feel like you're particularly lucky.
18 comments
[ 0.22 ms ] story [ 55.6 ms ] threadI've predicted in the past that as the economy tightens up, front end roles will be seen as luxuries, with more emphasis on the backend.
Of course the list in the article that breaks things down by technology does list a few front-end related techs, like Typescript, CSS, and "Full stack". CSS is used even in static HTML sites and Typescript is a move away from the free and loose world of JS, with more regimented code (and can be used on the server). "Full stack" is always a loaded term: among developers it seems to imply front-end heavy with just enough backend to get by, whereas for hirers I think it implies very strong skills on the backend.
However, I do believe you can build a lasting saas business with a strong backend / weak frontend, but can’t do it with a weak backend / strong frontend.
I'm actually impressed and surprised by how many frontend jobs DevQuarterly sees (https://devquarterly.com/insights/trends/). Big tech companies typically have many more backend developers than frontend developers. It depends on how many of those fullstack jobs are frontend heavy, but from what I've seen these job postings from smaller companies are often looking for frontend developers with some basic backend and cloud skills to build a product 0 to 1. Backend at that scale can be quite simple and is not out of the wheelhouse of a frontend developer that can actually code.
Doesn't look like many people have bought into Hotwire with Rails ;) The "component and compilation circus" is pretty easy these days and improves the potential for your site. People see the billion dollar SaaS companies with fancy websites built on React and follow them.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
If only. It is surprisingly hard to find a back-end position these days - the interview process is so, umgm, low.
You may have an hour to solve a non-trivial - at least supposedly - algorithmic problem, write a working solution, have a conversation about it along the way - the design, justifications, other options - debug it, improve and then have a requirements change. Interviewer will complain about slowness, even though in real life nobody solves such problem with anything close to that speed, and if you choose a simpler solution, he will complain about it being not optimal.
All of that is for a position where they request to primarily have good generalist skills, ability to work on multiple levels with both people and systems. They test for top coder skills for a run-of-the-mill position where those skills won't be utilized anywhere close to the artificial interview requirements. As a result it's mostly a gamble, and those thinking deeper than the first thought lose more often than not.
And after some weeks of unfortunate job search companies start wondering why you're not working for so long. And if you looking for a job while working, it's definitely like another job - often months-long process of finding something better than what you have. Agree on something too early - and you'll end up in an anemic company with arbitrary policies, and you'll be forced to look for a next job sooner than you were expecting.
If you're a good engineer with long experience, interview process is stacked against you. Prepare to spend years before finding a good place, where you can actually do engineering and not practicing coding, answering interview puzzles, or navigating office politics in places like CI/CD configuration.
This is probably a situation of a catch of middle-level experience. You're not good enough to have a name and stellar references - like, you didn't write a book - and you're not a junior from a college to put you to some tasks justified by your low pay. It's a pretty confusing, when you know your skills can be applied for many uses, yet have to play dice with strange interviews over and over. If you're in this situation, you don't feel like you're particularly lucky.