There is some disagreement on why software developers are, for the first time in 12 years, having a more difficult time finding jobs. The new C’est la guerre is “it’s the economy”.

Not true for software programming jobs.

Lots of jobs have been lost in the last few months, yes. Even several software programming jobs. But there has always been a shortage of programmers in the enterprise and many of those programmers leaving small and medium sized companies are landing in larger companies, healthcare, and government.

Another reason put forth is the growing number of expert software programmers coming online overseas (India, China, Middle East, and the Eastern Bloc). Some believe that competition is growing as American companies move software development offshore.

Not true for American programming jobs.

Offshore development is notoriously difficult. Even ONshore development is difficult. But contrast the trials of writing software with a team of people whom you share language, culture, slang, TV commercials, and cartoon experiences with to writing software with a team with whom you share NONE of this. Yes, exactly. It’s super hard. Much offshore development devolves into programmers writing “exactly what they are told to write” and no more, just to get something right! Offshore development is getting better, so we always hear, but it is not all its cracked up to be. And software programming jobs are not moving overseas in droves.

The real culprit is Microsoft.

Microsoft is in the business of democratizing access to software technology. In other words, they are constantly looking for ways to get more software into more peoples’ hands. As such, they lower the bar to writing software, thus making software cheaper. And, by extension, making software programmers cheaper as well.

This is a good thing, by the way.

By lower access to better software Microsoft is constantly increasing productivity. Contrary to what some would have us believe, money doesn’t grow on printing presses. Money is an exchange medium for productivity. In other words, we create money by creating useful stuff. Great software helps us create useful stuff more quickly for less. The problem is that real income for software developers has not increased in 10 years. Instead, incomes have remained steady while productivity has increased.

Oh, you may say, “Microsoft isn’t the ONLY company making great software.” And you would be correct. But the Microsoft Difference is that they are democratizing software. They consistently take expensive software (operating systems, database servers, web servers, etc) and make them inexpensive and easy to own.

“Yeah? What about the Open Source software movement?”

Don’t you mean Linux? Without Linux there would be no Open Source software movement. And, in case you didn’t know, without IBM there would be no Linux movement. IBM used Linux to lower the cost of Non-Microsoft operating systems in a bid to sell IBM Services. It was a huge investment for IBM that worked like magic. Linux spread like wildfire while Linux enterprise services companies like Red Hat reaped the benefits. So, the Linux Movement wasn’t a movement at all. It was a corporate plan hatched by IBM to keep IBM growing and profitable.

Now, as a result, more software programmers are hitting the market, younger, and better prepared for the enterprise. They are also less knowledgeable than before because they don’t have to know the “deep things” of software programming (memory and pointer management, storage management, drivers) required by earlier software programmers. Thus productivity is increased keeping software programmers prices steady and helping to create a shortage of jobs.

So thank Microsoft for both a thriving economy (in the thriving days), and a shortage of programming jobs (in scarce days).

And they’re not done yet. What Microsoft is unleashing on the software industry right now will not only increase the number of truly great software programmers, but will also cause far more competition for programming jobs than we see even now.

But now Apple is in on it.

I’ll write about that later.