Maybe you are capable but the job market is much less welcoming in your 50s compared to being in your 20s especially if you are trying to get into something new. You certainly can learn new things though. No doubt.
I stopped being employable somewhere in my early 20's and I still think that is the best thing that happened to me. It made me think of life not in terms of jobs but in terms of capabilities. You can learn new things and you can pick up new marketable skills and change careers. I did it when I was 42, I see no reason why it could not be done at 50 or older. In fact I know a couple of nice examples of people older than 50 that made radical (and lucrative) career changes.
It's really up to you, your appetite for risk and how much energy you can muster. At 50+ you probably have an advantage over 20 year olds trying to do the same except for the energy factor.
There were many other options to choose from this one I had a bit of a taste from by accident and I decided to see where it would lead. In the meantime I'm firing off all kinds of crazy projects whenever I have some spare time (less so every year due to the service company doubling in size year over year for the last 5 years or so).
It makes good money too, and the customers I have are a lot more appreciative than any of the start-ups (b2c) customers that I had. Also there is enough time left over for a life rather than to be in the rat race all the time. All in all it suits me well, I should have probably done it earlier but apparently I had to run into the wall first before I got the message. I still code, but only when it suits me and I have fun doing it.
--A fellow techie that has done a wide variety of freelancing and consulting the past decade or so; your transition comment caught my eye...
There are two articles on the blog regarding this:
https://jacquesmattheij.com/due-diligence-survival-guide
https://jacquesmattheij.com/due-diligence-survival-guide-par...
Those are already more than 6 years old but they aged quite well.
>Know your business (from a legal, technical and financial point of view)
>If there is bad news get it out of the way as soon as possible, well before the due diligence process starts
>Be truthful and honest
>Don’t fall into the trap of ‘dressing up’ the company, it will come back to bite you during due diligence
>Make sure that those that talk to the people doing due diligence know their stuff to avoid miscommunication
It's surprising to me how few projects - even ones going well - can meet these criteria with a high degree of fidelity.
I've never had a problem getting a job in tech. Last time I was hired was in my late 40s; I'm now early 50s.
I don't work the 50, 60 hour weeks that I used to when I was younger. So if that is what someone is looking for in a candidate I can see why an older person might get passed over.
But I accomplish more in 20 hours now than I did in 60 hours when I was 25.
The kind of jobs I would want, would not hesitate to hire a 50 year old. At least in my experience.
So looking for a job is harder, but when I finally get one, it's funny to work with those young people, who usually have no idea of many things. Example from this week: when you connect to 127.0.0.1 from your machine, it's not connecting you to the testing server.
I think that if you are "old" and you are looking for a job, just don't give up, and ignore all those "young" companies.
Btw, I was always wondering what they will do in 10 years, when all those "young" people will be "too old for them to hire". Will they fire them?
Seems like long term employees are burden. They get old, sick, know their rights. Maybe even start having demands and don't just leave when those are not met making them grumpy.
Which tells you about how well the code is maintained, at the very least.
I can understand hiring simply smarter people though in lieu of experience. It’s just that so many things I’ve lost efficiency on would not have been improved with mere smarts, so only raw, direct experience could ever get past it.
And don't get started on how 'agile' fuels this! In a constant panic mode, there's only ever sprints for small fixes and isolated features. Never time to address what's really wrong in a systematic way. So the flames burn higher...
The current hiring preferences out there are a perfect fit for the industry’s insane “ship crap as fast as possible” product preferences.
The result has worked out really well. Managers have quit hassling me about time and I get given the more complex and interesting work. People know I work hard and care about what I produce, if they have to wait they have to wait. I don't ask permission to write the tests I want, or spend a couple of days refactoring if that needs done.
Basically I am the professional coder, not the project managers, so I don't let them dictate how the software gets made. You just need to make sure you don't take it too far and too gratuitous refactoring work. Your reputation is critical for this approach to work.