亞洲志遠科技股份有限公司

...

It’s a company that criticizes former employees, and conflicts may arise when you leave.

Some people continue helping to handle matters for one or two months after leaving, in order to receive a review.

If you don’t mind, perhaps this place may be suitable for you.

There is onboarding training, and because the new-hire training is conducted together, it is easy to find future teammates and good colleagues with whom to share the joys and sorrows of handling projects.

My personal conclusion is that it is very suitable as a backup option for newcomers who need an entry ticket to the industry but cannot get into the companies they ideally want to join. However, I recommend leaving once you have completed one year.

1. The boss claims to offer “the most reasonable salary in the industry,” but it is actually below the industry standard, and even after your salary adjustment one year later, you will still be below the industry standard.

2. The company atmosphere is poor, as if it were shrouded in high atmospheric pressure. You can only pray that enough people from your training cohort are there to help everyone adapt to the pressure.

3. There are no SPECs, and after one year you will have to go directly to clients and negotiate with them. This may be a good opportunity to hone your requirements-interviewing skills, but according to point 1 above, you will realize that it is still best not to spend too much time here—unless you want to learn earlier and add to your résumé.

4. There are no standard industry SA/SD roles; everything depends on the PM. You may even be asked to produce a major feature about one or two weeks before acceptance testing. Because there are no SPECs, during my employment, one project was handed over as a mess from another vendor that had supposedly been involved in joint development. Not only did it arrive one or two months late, but there were also no basic documents or requirements for me to review. I was told to look at the screens and code, fix the defects, and determine what needed to be completed from the issue list and client requirements—none of which existed. To meet the launch deadline, I was asked to complete it within three months. During subsequent meetings, they showed little regard for my workload, yet one meeting produced a request to modify an ASP.NET feature and described it as extremely difficult.

I was required, within three months, to bring a product from only 10% functional to an acceptance-ready state without any SPECs or issue-list documentation, while being paid only the general manager’s self-proclaimed “most reasonable salary in the industry.” After the previous four companies had spent nearly nine months leaving the project unfinished, I was given only the remaining three months, and had to work independently without support.

5. One company supervisor questioned what was so good about the new front-end framework (REACT), believing it was no better than ASP.NET for development and quick profits. Yet they never considered that while they might retire in 10–20 years, we still have to live in this society and work hard. Pursuing new technology is not only about progress; it is also about basic future planning and survival.

6. The company does not encourage “working overtime at the company,” but implies that it hopes you will “work overtime outside the company,” because the general manager thinks you are wasting costs.

7. Overtime must be approved by a supervisor. If you work overtime on your own, it does not count as overtime, and even if your overtime is approved, whether you can take compensatory leave is still up to the company.

Training engineers with no experience—you’ll be taught from scratch.

Those with experience, don’t bother applying.

There’s no overtime pay, since hardship is supposedly its own reward.

Your year-end bonus depends on how well you perform—case closed.

Training is provided

They offer 27K and will ask you again if you want it. Great job.