RIT-2008. My opinion

I come to RIT for the second time, as well as the first one - the impressions are contradictory. As a programmer, I was not very interested in the relevant sections. In this regard, I think it will be necessary to go to PHPConf.

If the first conference seemed more “technological”, then this time I was more interested in “Success Story” and “Agile Russia”.



From what was remembered:
')

• “Building a technical support service” by Dmitry Danilenko
  
  It seemed to me propiaril masterkhost. Maybe he did not set himself such a goal, but made it so that everyone enjoyed. Essentially said not a lot, just showed the "human face" of technical support, those who stand on the other side of the interface. If you lay out the presentation, you can see who answers your letters or in the phone, and if you want to "call the third left."
  
  In the subject of technical support and service: I recommend reading and rereading Seven steps to a wonderful customer service - I was inspired.
  
  
• I tried as much as possible to look at Agile. I was pleased with most of the reports that I could look at.
  
  It seemed to me that it was there that one could find the key to the motivation of programmers, which many managers unsuccessfully try to find.
  
  
• Unfortunately, I did not get to blitz reports. Maybe someone sums up.
  
  
• Very pleased and interested in the presentation of Dmitry Neyaglov "System layouts as a finite state machine"
  
  An interesting look at the way of designing and presenting information. Be sure to try.
  
  
• Of course, I went to Startap-Lynch - you never know, you need to look for an investor. However, probably, I didn’t think so alone — a full room was full.
  I looked at how the teams presented their projects. From the side you can see a lot. It seemed that people are trying to sell something - a lot of emotions, you can hardly understand what kind of service it is and what good is it. Therefore, the jury asked practical questions:
  - for whom you work,
  - why it will buy,
  - than you are better than competitors,
  - how will you earn,
  - what have you already done, which team,
  - how will you develop further?
  
  I imagined myself in the place of an investor that I need to choose who to give my money to. I quickly understood the validity of these questions and the absurdity of some speeches. Concluded - before you go to the investor, prove that you are worth something . Even better, already have a sale. Ie, if you go for the money, then clearly imagine for what, why and how much money is needed. And most importantly - how this money will bring even more money. For, as the representative of Finam rightly noted, one has to think not about how to receive, but about how to return.
  
  Therefore, deservedly, Megaplan and Qefir (similar to skilopedia.ru ) were given more attention. They already have something to show, there is a team, sales.
  
  The idea of RusTV seemed interesting to me (TV for IT people - to turn educational / informational videos, something for free, something for money), just a representative could not sensibly describe his service and its advantages and, to a greater extent, rolled into agitation. It seems that only one Maxim Spiridonov from Roiber was interested in this team. Or maybe not, my memory changes.
  
  
• As always, Igor Ashmanov gathers a full house - he talks about his experience , about real things that have value. This is exactly what I would like to see more at the conference.
  
  

To sum up - the reports were a bit weak (from what I was able to see, I ran between the 3rd and 4th halls). As always, I would like more concrete examples: how we did it, what difficulties we faced and how we overcame them. For knowledge of the theory usually does not help, and sometimes even vice versa.


Of course, you can scold or praise the quality and selection of reports.
But it seems to me that this is not the essence of the conference. Simply, this is the place where everyone will receive, exactly what he is “ready” to receive. At the conference there were enough people and information so that the interested person would not leave with anything.