Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
Where to find Linux jobs online
By Lee Schlesinger
on
December 10, 2003 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
You know Linux, and you believe in open source, but you still want someone to pay you to work for them. Where do you go online to find Linux jobs?
Start your search with the big jobs portals. Monster.com, CareerBuilder, HotJobs, Dice.com, and your local newspaper's help wanted page all have plenty of jobs that require Linux experience.
There are a few job boards specifically for Linux, including Mojolin, BestLinuxJobs.com, HotLinuxJobs.com, and LinuxWebJobs. OpenSourceJobs.org is another place to try. If you know embedded Linux, turn to the listings on LinuxDevices.com.
Some online job sites focus on Linux for specific countries. For instance, Germans can turn to DELinuxJobs.com, Italians to Linux Lavoro, and Australians to Linux Australia's job board.
Don't overlook your local LUG. Not all have job postings online, but they're an excellent place to start networking.
If your job search fails to bear fruit, don't despair. Keep your day job, but get involved with one of the thousands of projects on SourceForge. No, you won't get paid, but you'll gain valuable experience, make good contacts, and contribute something back to the open source community.
Have we missed your favorite Linux employment resource? Post it in a comment below.
Comments
on Where to find Linux jobs onlineNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
The truth is that extrememly few are being paid for making open source software and it will remain the case in the future. Having employees are not free and it's simply not defendable to pay people to do something that doesn't generate any revenue.
Like the post above said, many agancies posts the same jobs so most jobs are just a duplett of another job.
The reason why open source software is free is that the people making it doesn't get paid. Thats the point.
Just to avoid flaming: Yes, i know there are a handfull of exceptions but in most cases open source software is free labour.
Like the post above said, many agancies posts the same jobs so most jobs are just a duplett of another job.
The reason why open source software is free is that the people making it doesn't get paid. Thats the point.
Just to avoid flaming: Yes, i know there are a handfull of exceptions but in most cases open source software is free labour.
"is that the people making it doesn't get paid. Thats the point."
While I agree with what you've said, I disagree with that. More and more, people are getting hired by companies *because* they have developed or managed open source software. IBM and HP (now Sun, too) have been looking for people with Linux and Apache skills...even IBM's commercial product WebSphere uses Apache.
Just because software is opensource doesn't mean that companies won't pay you to develop it, or develop custom add-ons or plugins to it. To the contrary, opensource developers have probably a better chance of getting a job than someone who hasn't.
While I agree with what you've said, I disagree with that. More and more, people are getting hired by companies *because* they have developed or managed open source software. IBM and HP (now Sun, too) have been looking for people with Linux and Apache skills...even IBM's commercial product WebSphere uses Apache.
Just because software is opensource doesn't mean that companies won't pay you to develop it, or develop custom add-ons or plugins to it. To the contrary, opensource developers have probably a better chance of getting a job than someone who hasn't.
Not really, there are just a handfull of people at Redhat, IBM and HP who are actually developing open source software. IBM has a lot of propietary software that their employees work on, much of it runs on top of open source software built by free labour. Each employee is very expensive and must generate revenue, open source programmers don't do that.
"To the contrary, opensource developers have probably a better chance of getting a job than someone who hasn't. "
I think that depends on what job it is. I know that many commercial software companies do not hire open source programmers since there is a risk that they leave and clone the projects they work on and give away the result.
"To the contrary, opensource developers have probably a better chance of getting a job than someone who hasn't. "
I think that depends on what job it is. I know that many commercial software companies do not hire open source programmers since there is a risk that they leave and clone the projects they work on and give away the result.
"I think that depends on what job it is. I know that many commercial software companies do not hire open source programmers since there is a risk that they leave and clone the projects they work on and give away the result. "
That's retarded. Anybody could live and clone a project, opensource programmer or not. That would also probably be a violation of any non compete contract or illegal b/c of patent infringments etc.
That's retarded. Anybody could live and clone a project, opensource programmer or not. That would also probably be a violation of any non compete contract or illegal b/c of patent infringments etc.
The vast majority of development jobs are for software for internal use only, and the license doesn't matter as it is not distributed and allow internal use. Obviously Linux (and other free software) experience is relevant for many of these jobs, as the source availability, lack of EULA restrictions on internal use and low price makes it an attractive bsis for custom software.
The idea that most software develment is for shrink-wrapped end.user software come from people who aren't programmers, or students who haven't entered the job market yet. What most people see is mass-marketed end-user software, so that is what people expect most software is.
Also, given the widespread popularity of Linux and the BSD's, Apacha, Samba, sendmail and others, experience with free software is a huge plus for many sysadm positions.
Working on internal software or as sysadmin gives good opportunity to contribute improvements made to the free tools you use as part of your work back to the community.
The "handfull of exception" claim can only come from someone who doesn't follow free software development. Even only counting the small fraction of programmers working on software intended for wide distribution (more than 1000 users), the number is absurd low. On the few free software development project I follow, I know the names of more than 50 full-time paid developers. There are, of course, far more than that.
The number of free software developers working on non-internal programs with fewer user are much higher, but difficult to estimate. But just the number of people working on free academic research software must be much higher. Just estimate the number of such people working on the average university, and multiply that with the number of universities.
The idea that most software develment is for shrink-wrapped end.user software come from people who aren't programmers, or students who haven't entered the job market yet. What most people see is mass-marketed end-user software, so that is what people expect most software is.
Also, given the widespread popularity of Linux and the BSD's, Apacha, Samba, sendmail and others, experience with free software is a huge plus for many sysadm positions.
Working on internal software or as sysadmin gives good opportunity to contribute improvements made to the free tools you use as part of your work back to the community.
The "handfull of exception" claim can only come from someone who doesn't follow free software development. Even only counting the small fraction of programmers working on software intended for wide distribution (more than 1000 users), the number is absurd low. On the few free software development project I follow, I know the names of more than 50 full-time paid developers. There are, of course, far more than that.
The number of free software developers working on non-internal programs with fewer user are much higher, but difficult to estimate. But just the number of people working on free academic research software must be much higher. Just estimate the number of such people working on the average university, and multiply that with the number of universities.
The vast majority of development jobs are for software for internal use only, and the license doesn't matter as it is not distributed and allow internal use.
Obviously Linux (and other free software) experience is relevant for many of these jobs, as the source availability, lack of EULA restrictions on internal use and low price makes it an attractive bsis for custom software.
The idea that most software develment is for shrink-wrapped end.user software come from people who aren't programmers, or students who haven't entered the job market yet. What most people see is mass-marketed end-user software, so that is what people expect most software is.
Also, given the widespread popularity of Linux and the BSD's, Apacha, Samba, sendmail and others for servers, experience with free software is a huge plus for many sysadmin positions.
Working on internal software or as sysadmin gives good opportunity to contribute improvements made to the free tools you use as part of your work back to the community.
The "handfull of exception" claim can only come from someone who doesn't follow free software development. Even only counting the small fraction of programmers working on software intended for wide distribution (more than 1000 users), the number is absurd low. On the few free software development project I follow, I know the names of more than 50 full-time paid developers. There are, of course, far more than that.
The number of free software developers working on non-internal programs with fewer user are much higher, but difficult to estimate. But just the number of people working on free academic research software must be much higher. Just estimate the number of such people working on the average university, and multiply that with the number of universities.
Obviously Linux (and other free software) experience is relevant for many of these jobs, as the source availability, lack of EULA restrictions on internal use and low price makes it an attractive bsis for custom software.
The idea that most software develment is for shrink-wrapped end.user software come from people who aren't programmers, or students who haven't entered the job market yet. What most people see is mass-marketed end-user software, so that is what people expect most software is.
Also, given the widespread popularity of Linux and the BSD's, Apacha, Samba, sendmail and others for servers, experience with free software is a huge plus for many sysadmin positions.
Working on internal software or as sysadmin gives good opportunity to contribute improvements made to the free tools you use as part of your work back to the community.
The "handfull of exception" claim can only come from someone who doesn't follow free software development. Even only counting the small fraction of programmers working on software intended for wide distribution (more than 1000 users), the number is absurd low. On the few free software development project I follow, I know the names of more than 50 full-time paid developers. There are, of course, far more than that.
The number of free software developers working on non-internal programs with fewer user are much higher, but difficult to estimate. But just the number of people working on free academic research software must be much higher. Just estimate the number of such people working on the average university, and multiply that with the number of universities.
"The vast majority of development jobs are for software for internal use only, and the license doesn't matter as it is not distributed and allow internal use."
You don't spend a large amount of $$$ if that software is then given away. Yes, there is a theoretical possibility to not distribute because of 'internal use clause' but in practice there are lots of people in an organisation using it and spreading it if GPL'd. I have never seen any banking software that is GPL for example, or anything else that is internally used. There are no companies throwing money at people like that. That is simply not reality, not even in the middle of the crazy dot-bomb bubble was it reality. Ownership matter for internally used software, you can bet on it.
I certainly don't claim that most software is shrink-wrapped, it isn't and that’s not my point.
It's not the open source software itself that is destructive for the profession; it's the destruction of perceived value it creates that is. You don't spend $300 000 on developing some customized software that is almost the same as some free software.
We can take the stock market as an example. These days the stock market has become gambling but some mechanisms are still the same.
Lets say we have two companies, on selling rise in Japan and one selling potatoes in USA. The prices on each product will affect the other a lot, the most similar products the more it affects. The reason is that if the prise of rise goes down by 50%, potatoes suddenly seem to be very expensive and people will not pay that much for potatoes any more. Forcing the potato company to lower its prices.
Now, take for example microsoft and intel. You may have noticed that one share-price follows the other quite a bit. Bad news for Intel lowers the MS stock as well and vice verse. Say for example that PC hardware would drop dramatically making a complete PC selling for $100; it would make the OS and Office look very expensive and would make people stop paying that kind of money for it. The other way around is true as well. Say that the OS, office would cost $5 and a game would cost $5 each, who would pay $1000 just for the hardware then? You would get 200 games with endless fun for just one single PC. The hardware would look very expensive.
The fact that open source software is free makes consultants making customized software look extremely expensive. I mean, just to have a program working marginally different from something that is already there and free you have to fork out maybe $100 000.
This has halted company’s willingness to spend money on consultants. Consultant companies are going out of business like crazy these days since historically most of them have lived on services related to expensive hardware of software.
The lack of value in people working in the profession is the main problem.
Please see my reply to the post below yours as well.
I still claim that only a handful of people who are developing open source software are paid to do so, the majority is free labour.
You don't spend a large amount of $$$ if that software is then given away. Yes, there is a theoretical possibility to not distribute because of 'internal use clause' but in practice there are lots of people in an organisation using it and spreading it if GPL'd. I have never seen any banking software that is GPL for example, or anything else that is internally used. There are no companies throwing money at people like that. That is simply not reality, not even in the middle of the crazy dot-bomb bubble was it reality. Ownership matter for internally used software, you can bet on it.
I certainly don't claim that most software is shrink-wrapped, it isn't and that’s not my point.
It's not the open source software itself that is destructive for the profession; it's the destruction of perceived value it creates that is. You don't spend $300 000 on developing some customized software that is almost the same as some free software.
We can take the stock market as an example. These days the stock market has become gambling but some mechanisms are still the same.
Lets say we have two companies, on selling rise in Japan and one selling potatoes in USA. The prices on each product will affect the other a lot, the most similar products the more it affects. The reason is that if the prise of rise goes down by 50%, potatoes suddenly seem to be very expensive and people will not pay that much for potatoes any more. Forcing the potato company to lower its prices.
Now, take for example microsoft and intel. You may have noticed that one share-price follows the other quite a bit. Bad news for Intel lowers the MS stock as well and vice verse. Say for example that PC hardware would drop dramatically making a complete PC selling for $100; it would make the OS and Office look very expensive and would make people stop paying that kind of money for it. The other way around is true as well. Say that the OS, office would cost $5 and a game would cost $5 each, who would pay $1000 just for the hardware then? You would get 200 games with endless fun for just one single PC. The hardware would look very expensive.
The fact that open source software is free makes consultants making customized software look extremely expensive. I mean, just to have a program working marginally different from something that is already there and free you have to fork out maybe $100 000.
This has halted company’s willingness to spend money on consultants. Consultant companies are going out of business like crazy these days since historically most of them have lived on services related to expensive hardware of software.
The lack of value in people working in the profession is the main problem.
Please see my reply to the post below yours as well.
I still claim that only a handful of people who are developing open source software are paid to do so, the majority is free labour.
My future is bright, I use Open Source tools to create specialized applications. Consulting is a great way to go. You use all the open source technologies to design and build datasystems for others (Government, Corporations). Your view of programming seems extremley narrow, confined to creating off the shelf programs for sale. There are alot of oportunities to develop specialized applications for hire. I would bet there are alot more programmers working in this capacity. And open source helps keep costs low so you can bid competitively.
There is a reason why consultant companies are the ones going bankrupt most often now, the rate is extremely high. There is no value in the products they do consulting for any more, therefore people and companies are not willing to spend money on customizations or third-party support.
When you can get a DB for free over the internet no one pays premium for service-contracts any more. You simply don't pay $100 000 for a service contract if your son downloaded the stuff on the net, it's doesn't happen.
Also, then prices on hardware, software etc goes down businesses that people perceive as similar also goes down. You don't pay $5000 for a stereo for you Lada car, do you?
This has been a clear development for the last few years.
Most consultants has lived on consulting for expensive databases, enterprise OSes and highly customized specialized software.
Customized software, unfortunately, are on a heavy decline since companies are not willing to spend on IT any more, they require standard software. If you have to spend $50 000 on something that is going to be almost the same as something that’s free it’s simply impossible to defend the cost. The jobs that is still done are often outsourced, a trend that will continue I think.
Again, it's the consulting companies that are going out of business.
When you can get a DB for free over the internet no one pays premium for service-contracts any more. You simply don't pay $100 000 for a service contract if your son downloaded the stuff on the net, it's doesn't happen.
Also, then prices on hardware, software etc goes down businesses that people perceive as similar also goes down. You don't pay $5000 for a stereo for you Lada car, do you?
This has been a clear development for the last few years.
Most consultants has lived on consulting for expensive databases, enterprise OSes and highly customized specialized software.
Customized software, unfortunately, are on a heavy decline since companies are not willing to spend on IT any more, they require standard software. If you have to spend $50 000 on something that is going to be almost the same as something that’s free it’s simply impossible to defend the cost. The jobs that is still done are often outsourced, a trend that will continue I think.
Again, it's the consulting companies that are going out of business.
Consulting companies are too fat. They charge an insane price for below mediocre service. I'm talking about tier 1 brand name consulting companies.
I think what the guy you were replying to was talking about is something different. He's talking about one to three people teams that are agile and cheap to hire. I think the situation is probably better on that front.
I think what the guy you were replying to was talking about is something different. He's talking about one to three people teams that are agile and cheap to hire. I think the situation is probably better on that front.
Dice, Hotjobs, Monster, and CareerBuilder Suck
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 11, 2003 01:25 AM
I've tried all of these in the past. I've never even heard back from any of them. Except for a call from Kelly Temp service whom I highly suspect got my resume from Monster.com. I wasn't looking to be low paid temp. The best sources for me has always been job fairs and the daily classifieds. I presently am very happy developing software for, and administrating linux systems for nasa. This I found in the newspaper. I have worked for SAIC and Computer Sciences Corp. Every job that I've ever had since college was found through either newspapers or local job fairs advertised in the paper.
If your local tech company his hiring their own website is a much more direct place to go than these other sites.
Re:Dice, Hotjobs, Monster, and CareerBuilder Suck
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 13, 2003 12:58 PM
The big boards are totally dominated by recruiters and never give a handy
filter to let you ask for direct job adverts only so they are (at face value) quite useless.
But wait! There is a use for them, it is usually possible to get a list of all the companies that
advertise with the board (sorted by industry, etc), and in these lists it is easy to scan for real companies
(avoid the recruiters) and then you can start building your own list of companies that look interesting.
You can also easily collect links to the home pages of these companies and often those homepages
contain a list of genuine vacancies.
To be blunt, there is no substitute for doing your own research and actively keeping track of the industry.
filter to let you ask for direct job adverts only so they are (at face value) quite useless.
But wait! There is a use for them, it is usually possible to get a list of all the companies that
advertise with the board (sorted by industry, etc), and in these lists it is easy to scan for real companies
(avoid the recruiters) and then you can start building your own list of companies that look interesting.
You can also easily collect links to the home pages of these companies and often those homepages
contain a list of genuine vacancies.
To be blunt, there is no substitute for doing your own research and actively keeping track of the industry.
I was in this boat about 4 years ago. The very best thing I did was pick up "Job Hunting Online for Dummies".
This book was directly responsible for getting me a half-dozen interviews, one of which landed me in my current position. It's not Linux development per se, but I develop ON Linux, and the company plans to switch from Solaris to Linux during 2004.
Three big things from the book: NEVER post your resume on line (Monster and co. are specifically mentioned as a problem), there are THREE types of recruiters (legit recruiters have no problem telling you what company is hiring), and you'll need THREE resumes for effective job hunting.
This book has great advice, and explains the realities of job searching in these modern times.
Here's something I wrote on my website about finding a linux job:
<A HREF="http://www.hollenback.net/index.php/FindingAJob" TITLE="hollenback.net">Finding A Job</a hollenback.net>.
<A HREF="http://www.hollenback.net/index.php/FindingAJob" TITLE="hollenback.net">Finding A Job</a hollenback.net>.
Very nice piece, Philip. Any time you want to write an article for us<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
Lee Schlesinger
Lee Schlesinger
Thanks. Actually I originally submitted this idea to newsforge for an article, but I didn't hear back from you guys.
so I see that essentially, to help relieve the tension from trying to find a job in the Bay Area, you moved to NYC. interesting...would you say that the climate there is better than here in SF ?
The climate in NYC is better for me because I have a job here... I really don't know yet if it's better in general because I don't know many people in the computer industry yet. I do have two friends working at computer startups here, so maybe things are better.
One big change is that everything doesn't revolve around computers here the way it does in Silicon Valley. Instead, everything revolves around financial companies. That turns out to be pretty nice, because they have a lot more money than computer startups do!
you got a link for that ? a government job board ?
If you're in the San Francisco dot-bomb blast zone, <A HREF="http://www.craigslist.org/" TITLE="craigslist.org">Craigslist</a craigslist.org> remains one of the best sources of jobs, housing, personals, and, um, <A HREF="http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/" TITLE="craigslist.org">BoCL</a craigslist.org> resources anywhere. No guarantees, but it appears to be the preferred contact point for both lookers and seekers. A large portion of postings are direct-from-employer, rather than recruiter listings, a big plus over other boards.
Craigslist has expanded beyond SF -- it's pretty big in NYC and LA, less so in other area, but check out the <A HREF="http://www.craigslist.org/about/cities.html" TITLE="craigslist.org">regional Craigslists</a craigslist.org> as well. International too<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
No association on my part. Happy user, and <A HREF="http://www.cnewmark.com/" TITLE="cnewmark.com">Craig Newmark</a cnewmark.com> is an all-around cool dude. The site itself is very much community oriented, an exemplar of the best of the Web.
...and you've heard it a gazillion times: don't overlook good old-fashioned networking. Friends. Family. Past gigs. Getting out and about in your community. Get off your "good intentions" (as NPR calls 'em), paste a smile on your face, and meet people in real life.
I want to verify that craigslist is very big in New York. That's where I got my job. (see my posting from hollenback.net above).
Plenty of programming jobs in Bangalore and Shanghai
where? i'll be in shanghai, and am interested in any such.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)
I am suscribed to the local LUG mailing list in Singapore, and job postings do come about 1 per week. Granted its quite low, but the jobs seem much more interesting, and the postings are pretty open about the kind of work you are expected to do. Also, if you are a regular contributor to the list, there is a good chance someone in that list will offer you an interview directly.
<A HREF="http://pod.homelinux.net/" TITLE="homelinux.net">Gokul</a homelinux.net>
<A HREF="http://pod.homelinux.net/" TITLE="homelinux.net">Gokul</a homelinux.net>
not so great
Posted by: smitty45 on December 10, 2003 11:29 PMWhy is this bad ? Because recruiters very often decline to give the name of the company, and variations in the job description make it seem that two jobs are different, but in reality are for the same job, just thru a different recruiter.
What happens then is that if you apply to both, companies usually pass you by if you've been submitted twice by two different hiring agencies, for fear of getting into a pissin match as to who got you in first, whether you are qualified or not.
Hotlinuxjobs never has more than 10 or so very high level development positions, Mojolin never gets more than 5 jobs at any time in any area, and opensourcejobs.org is the same.
My personal experience is that a better way to find a job is to search out company's own website...I see more listings there that aren't on job boards.
p.s. anyone looking to hire a Senior Unix/Linux Sysadmin with 10 years experience in the Bay Area ?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
#