He implies that googling a problem will generally lead inexperienced developers to incorrect solutions. I think this is false.
He also assumes that Googling won't be the first thing junior developers do when they are given an unfamiliar task. Unfortunately, for too many, this is the case. The solution to that problem is to train junior developers to google. It sounds like the author of this article also has yet to learn the importance of googling first.
A lot of these problems are actually not new and are like the example of the picture. If you google 'how to hang a picture' you will find good explanations. You are unlikely to find a lot of people at the top of the search results who are telling you to cut the drywall.
When it comes down to SAX versus DOM, that's not really quite comparable to hanging a picture. In those types of cases, what you say to the junior developer is 'Google it and come back to me when you've found some example code that you are going to start with'. That way you can guide them if necessary before they get too far in. Or give them a starting direction, being as explicit as possible (point to code example).
If they are googling and coming back with really strange solutions (which, again, you tell them to go over the outline of the solution with you before they start implementing it), then maybe they don't have the intellectual capacity or experience for the tasks you are giving them.
On the second half of this post, he is also wrong. The timid and tentative developers will probably often get along fine with the more senior developers, because they are going to be happy to do things exactly the way they tell them and won't talk back. Part of the time they will be so clueless that they can't get anything done, and since they don't use Google they won't get anywhere but the others will be careful to follow the lead of the senior developers. So the traditional approaches will be passed on and everyone will be happy.
Anyway in the end he more or less gets to his conclusion which is reasonable enough, although stated in a way which I find to be somewhat arrogant. I think the entire basis for this was a fair amount of wasted time which was at least partly the fault of the more senior developer not providing initial guidance or checking in on the junior developer.
It IS definitely helpful when developers, whatever their experience level, are secure and modest enough to ask for other people's knowledge, opinions and help freely. I have found this to be rare. Too often asking questions is simply interpreted quite stupidly to mean that the other developer is ignorant. And also quite stupidly, not know literally everything is interpreted as ignorance.
To boil it down, the author sounds like a dick, should take some responsibility for the wasted development effort that he is trying to put all on the junior developer, should learn to Google himself, read my post, learn to ask questions himself, and work very hard at cloaking his arrogance when he speaks to the junior developer. And no I do not know who this person is and am not actually related to the situation. Article just pushes some of my buttons.
He also assumes that Googling won't be the first thing junior developers do when they are given an unfamiliar task. Unfortunately, for too many, this is the case. The solution to that problem is to train junior developers to google. It sounds like the author of this article also has yet to learn the importance of googling first.
A lot of these problems are actually not new and are like the example of the picture. If you google 'how to hang a picture' you will find good explanations. You are unlikely to find a lot of people at the top of the search results who are telling you to cut the drywall.
When it comes down to SAX versus DOM, that's not really quite comparable to hanging a picture. In those types of cases, what you say to the junior developer is 'Google it and come back to me when you've found some example code that you are going to start with'. That way you can guide them if necessary before they get too far in. Or give them a starting direction, being as explicit as possible (point to code example).
If they are googling and coming back with really strange solutions (which, again, you tell them to go over the outline of the solution with you before they start implementing it), then maybe they don't have the intellectual capacity or experience for the tasks you are giving them.
On the second half of this post, he is also wrong. The timid and tentative developers will probably often get along fine with the more senior developers, because they are going to be happy to do things exactly the way they tell them and won't talk back. Part of the time they will be so clueless that they can't get anything done, and since they don't use Google they won't get anywhere but the others will be careful to follow the lead of the senior developers. So the traditional approaches will be passed on and everyone will be happy.
Anyway in the end he more or less gets to his conclusion which is reasonable enough, although stated in a way which I find to be somewhat arrogant. I think the entire basis for this was a fair amount of wasted time which was at least partly the fault of the more senior developer not providing initial guidance or checking in on the junior developer.
It IS definitely helpful when developers, whatever their experience level, are secure and modest enough to ask for other people's knowledge, opinions and help freely. I have found this to be rare. Too often asking questions is simply interpreted quite stupidly to mean that the other developer is ignorant. And also quite stupidly, not know literally everything is interpreted as ignorance.
To boil it down, the author sounds like a dick, should take some responsibility for the wasted development effort that he is trying to put all on the junior developer, should learn to Google himself, read my post, learn to ask questions himself, and work very hard at cloaking his arrogance when he speaks to the junior developer. And no I do not know who this person is and am not actually related to the situation. Article just pushes some of my buttons.