A Software Engineer, who's struggled a good chunk of his career with poor engineering and management teams, developing applications with Microsoft technologies, learns new technologies known to be used by the type of engineers he'd been longing to work with: Ruby on Rails development on Mac OS X, among others. After a 3-year journey, he finally finds and accepts a Director position at a company that embraces his passions.
Read the story here: Strange new worlds, and programming languages...: Good bye Microsoft; Pete has now left the building!
Despite the juicy and passionately controversial platform angle, the lesson i personally take from his story is more human, than technological. It shows me that it's at least as critically important for a passionate software engineer to thoroughly interview a prospective employer, especially a lesser-known one, as it is to interview them. Gauging a company's "mentality" and engineering practices can be difficult, at times an occult art. Add to that the reality and pressure of varying personal circumstances, posturing from interviewers throwing the big "marketplace leadership, cutting-edge blah blah" marketese speak, and one can see how easy it can be for a driven employee to step into some less than desirable work environments.
Had Peter had the benefit of his current experience earlier in his career, he might very-well have recognized poor companies, poor teams. He might for example have stayed away from any company that didn't throw engineers at his interview, grilling him on challenging and exciting problems, and soliciting questions back. This by far transcends technology and development platforms.
There are great developers, building great applications that do involve Microsoft technologies. Joel Spolsky's got a few at Fog Creek Software.
But the noise is obviously high. Great companies are few, and either hard to find or extremely hard to get into. And since nobody ever got fired for building a .Net or a Java application, there are a lot of "shops" out there, that are just that ... "shops", that crank out code, and attract "the Day Coders" Peter denounces.
But in the end, Peter's strategy strikes many of us who share his ideals as one reasonable approach among others: Exploring less common, less popular technologies exposes us to passionate communities of early adopters, out to question the status-quo, driven to research better, more efficient ways to build great software.
This strategy seems to have worked well for him.