Harry Nyquist isn't exactly an unknown engineer who doesn't have his own achievements, though - not sure why people are saying he would be fired in a modern company!
I have heard of the Nyquist frequency, the nyquist limit, the nyquist sampling rate and the Shannon nyquist theorem.
As far as I know no other individual has had this many “things” named after him.
Note that the "Known for" section on his main page has 119 elements. But they're not all named after him.
"In an effort to avoid naming everything after Euler, some discoveries and theorems are attributed to the first person to have proved them _after_ Euler."
Engineering excellence is not a prerequisite to business success. Managers know this.
Why else many things any one of us could list from the computing business.
Woe is us. Five or ten years is not considered short term
> . I try to give more to the clients that pay more, or at least create something that I can reuse in the future, while making sure what I deliver is stable and not a big ball of spaghetti to make the next developer/engineer cry at night.
I am not sure about the "...who pay more". As I am currently woefully underpaid I am more sympathetic to that view than once I was, but, I still view myself as a professional, and I act with professional ethics.
Partly that means speaking up when I see a project going near the rocks. I do not make too much fuss, but I do say it out loud.
That has cost me plenty. Our industry is full of people who are very good at one thing or another, but do not know their limits.
Part of my "being professional" is knowing my own limits.
It is important to know what you can and can't get away with, and my clients don't pay the cost of the business I'm employed by making bad decisions. Where I am able to, I strive to provide a product that is better than the average, in the hopes that I've developed a solution that can possibly benefit the company or myself in the future in regards to software quality or speed (along with stability) of deployment.