Mixing
Does changing domain often affect my career?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
I started as a C# Developer a year before. Then after 6 months, I got a chance to work in web technologies like Javascript, jQuery, HTML and CSS, along with a C# project. I really enjoyed working in those projects.
3 months ago, I was totally shifted to MongoDB admin due to a shortage. For 1 and a half months I was totally submerged into it, as it was interesting. Then I moved back to web technologies. Now they have asked me to work in hybrid mobile development, which I was interested in.
A few days before, while chatting with my colleague, he raised, "don't change your domain like that. After a year, what will you add as the position in your resume? What kind of developer are you?"
This question really hurts me a lot. I'm nowhere know. Am I in a wrong path by often changing the domain? Does changing domain affect my career?
software-industry career-development
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
I started as a C# Developer a year before. Then after 6 months, I got a chance to work in web technologies like Javascript, jQuery, HTML and CSS, along with a C# project. I really enjoyed working in those projects.
3 months ago, I was totally shifted to MongoDB admin due to a shortage. For 1 and a half months I was totally submerged into it, as it was interesting. Then I moved back to web technologies. Now they have asked me to work in hybrid mobile development, which I was interested in.
A few days before, while chatting with my colleague, he raised, "don't change your domain like that. After a year, what will you add as the position in your resume? What kind of developer are you?"
This question really hurts me a lot. I'm nowhere know. Am I in a wrong path by often changing the domain? Does changing domain affect my career?
software-industry career-development
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
I started as a C# Developer a year before. Then after 6 months, I got a chance to work in web technologies like Javascript, jQuery, HTML and CSS, along with a C# project. I really enjoyed working in those projects.
3 months ago, I was totally shifted to MongoDB admin due to a shortage. For 1 and a half months I was totally submerged into it, as it was interesting. Then I moved back to web technologies. Now they have asked me to work in hybrid mobile development, which I was interested in.
A few days before, while chatting with my colleague, he raised, "don't change your domain like that. After a year, what will you add as the position in your resume? What kind of developer are you?"
This question really hurts me a lot. I'm nowhere know. Am I in a wrong path by often changing the domain? Does changing domain affect my career?
software-industry career-development
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
I started as a C# Developer a year before. Then after 6 months, I got a chance to work in web technologies like Javascript, jQuery, HTML and CSS, along with a C# project. I really enjoyed working in those projects.
3 months ago, I was totally shifted to MongoDB admin due to a shortage. For 1 and a half months I was totally submerged into it, as it was interesting. Then I moved back to web technologies. Now they have asked me to work in hybrid mobile development, which I was interested in.
A few days before, while chatting with my colleague, he raised, "don't change your domain like that. After a year, what will you add as the position in your resume? What kind of developer are you?"
This question really hurts me a lot. I'm nowhere know. Am I in a wrong path by often changing the domain? Does changing domain affect my career?
software-industry career-development
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
edited Feb 1 '14 at 21:31
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
10.4k54376
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
asked Feb 1 '14 at 20:11
Gotcha
1661210
1661210
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
20
down vote
accepted
The answer to this really depends on your career goals. If you're planning to move into bigger, more established enterprise-level environments where everyone has a title and everyone's role fits neatly into a little box, then it's possible that having moved around may negatively affect your ability to land a position in one of those companies.
However, since you say you like learning new things and that you like moving around a lot, you may very well be building up a resume that would be more attractive to smaller, more agile companies and startups. If you work in a company like I do, one that has a smaller feel to it, they're likely going to want people who are smart, who can learn quickly, and who can do whatever is needed in order to get the job done. In smaller organizations, they can't always budget for a dedicated MongoDB admin and a "Java developer" who can only code Java and nothing else. In small companies where I've worked, the most valuable people are those who can do more than just one thing, and the work is interesting because there's always a new challenge to overcome.
With the skills you've listed, it sounds like you're a well rounded person capable of learning quickly and who can fit wherever there is a need. So talk to people in your country who have worked in smaller businesses and find out what they're looking for.
Lastly, consider why your current employer asked you to do all of these things. Ask yourself what would have happened to that employer if you weren't able to fit in where needed. Would they consider you valuable by being able to move around. Also, if the company ever needs to lay people off, are they going to fire the person who can only do 1 thing, or is it going to be the person who can be flexible and move into areas where there exists a need? In my experience, in places I've worked, the people who could do more than 1 job always seemed to have a place in the organization, while people who insisted on doing only 1 thing were the ones who were let go, thanked for their services, and walked out the door.
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
5
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
4
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
When I'm hiring or interviewing someone their former titles mean very, very little to me – titles mean different things in different companies. I would be far more interested in a candidate who had a wide range of skills no matter what his or her title(s) were. A candidate with actual experience using both “traditional†databases like MSSQL/Oracle/DB2/MySQL/etc. as well as newer technology like MongoDB is more attractive than someone who only knows how to interact with a single type of database.
As a matter of fact I often encourage people who are about to graduate from university to seriously consider working for smaller companies simply because they will likely be exposed to many more technologies than they will if they go to work for a very large company. I know people who have worked for large companies for years and they are responsible for a single program or even worse – for a part of a single program. They know their program (or their piece of a program) very, very well – but that's all they know.
Someone who has a wide range of experience not only brings all that experience to the table they also make it very apparent they are willing and interested in learning new technologies – a very attractive trait in a software developer.
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
20
down vote
accepted
The answer to this really depends on your career goals. If you're planning to move into bigger, more established enterprise-level environments where everyone has a title and everyone's role fits neatly into a little box, then it's possible that having moved around may negatively affect your ability to land a position in one of those companies.
However, since you say you like learning new things and that you like moving around a lot, you may very well be building up a resume that would be more attractive to smaller, more agile companies and startups. If you work in a company like I do, one that has a smaller feel to it, they're likely going to want people who are smart, who can learn quickly, and who can do whatever is needed in order to get the job done. In smaller organizations, they can't always budget for a dedicated MongoDB admin and a "Java developer" who can only code Java and nothing else. In small companies where I've worked, the most valuable people are those who can do more than just one thing, and the work is interesting because there's always a new challenge to overcome.
With the skills you've listed, it sounds like you're a well rounded person capable of learning quickly and who can fit wherever there is a need. So talk to people in your country who have worked in smaller businesses and find out what they're looking for.
Lastly, consider why your current employer asked you to do all of these things. Ask yourself what would have happened to that employer if you weren't able to fit in where needed. Would they consider you valuable by being able to move around. Also, if the company ever needs to lay people off, are they going to fire the person who can only do 1 thing, or is it going to be the person who can be flexible and move into areas where there exists a need? In my experience, in places I've worked, the people who could do more than 1 job always seemed to have a place in the organization, while people who insisted on doing only 1 thing were the ones who were let go, thanked for their services, and walked out the door.
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
5
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
4
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
20
down vote
accepted
The answer to this really depends on your career goals. If you're planning to move into bigger, more established enterprise-level environments where everyone has a title and everyone's role fits neatly into a little box, then it's possible that having moved around may negatively affect your ability to land a position in one of those companies.
However, since you say you like learning new things and that you like moving around a lot, you may very well be building up a resume that would be more attractive to smaller, more agile companies and startups. If you work in a company like I do, one that has a smaller feel to it, they're likely going to want people who are smart, who can learn quickly, and who can do whatever is needed in order to get the job done. In smaller organizations, they can't always budget for a dedicated MongoDB admin and a "Java developer" who can only code Java and nothing else. In small companies where I've worked, the most valuable people are those who can do more than just one thing, and the work is interesting because there's always a new challenge to overcome.
With the skills you've listed, it sounds like you're a well rounded person capable of learning quickly and who can fit wherever there is a need. So talk to people in your country who have worked in smaller businesses and find out what they're looking for.
Lastly, consider why your current employer asked you to do all of these things. Ask yourself what would have happened to that employer if you weren't able to fit in where needed. Would they consider you valuable by being able to move around. Also, if the company ever needs to lay people off, are they going to fire the person who can only do 1 thing, or is it going to be the person who can be flexible and move into areas where there exists a need? In my experience, in places I've worked, the people who could do more than 1 job always seemed to have a place in the organization, while people who insisted on doing only 1 thing were the ones who were let go, thanked for their services, and walked out the door.
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
5
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
4
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
20
down vote
accepted
up vote
20
down vote
accepted
The answer to this really depends on your career goals. If you're planning to move into bigger, more established enterprise-level environments where everyone has a title and everyone's role fits neatly into a little box, then it's possible that having moved around may negatively affect your ability to land a position in one of those companies.
However, since you say you like learning new things and that you like moving around a lot, you may very well be building up a resume that would be more attractive to smaller, more agile companies and startups. If you work in a company like I do, one that has a smaller feel to it, they're likely going to want people who are smart, who can learn quickly, and who can do whatever is needed in order to get the job done. In smaller organizations, they can't always budget for a dedicated MongoDB admin and a "Java developer" who can only code Java and nothing else. In small companies where I've worked, the most valuable people are those who can do more than just one thing, and the work is interesting because there's always a new challenge to overcome.
With the skills you've listed, it sounds like you're a well rounded person capable of learning quickly and who can fit wherever there is a need. So talk to people in your country who have worked in smaller businesses and find out what they're looking for.
Lastly, consider why your current employer asked you to do all of these things. Ask yourself what would have happened to that employer if you weren't able to fit in where needed. Would they consider you valuable by being able to move around. Also, if the company ever needs to lay people off, are they going to fire the person who can only do 1 thing, or is it going to be the person who can be flexible and move into areas where there exists a need? In my experience, in places I've worked, the people who could do more than 1 job always seemed to have a place in the organization, while people who insisted on doing only 1 thing were the ones who were let go, thanked for their services, and walked out the door.
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
The answer to this really depends on your career goals. If you're planning to move into bigger, more established enterprise-level environments where everyone has a title and everyone's role fits neatly into a little box, then it's possible that having moved around may negatively affect your ability to land a position in one of those companies.
However, since you say you like learning new things and that you like moving around a lot, you may very well be building up a resume that would be more attractive to smaller, more agile companies and startups. If you work in a company like I do, one that has a smaller feel to it, they're likely going to want people who are smart, who can learn quickly, and who can do whatever is needed in order to get the job done. In smaller organizations, they can't always budget for a dedicated MongoDB admin and a "Java developer" who can only code Java and nothing else. In small companies where I've worked, the most valuable people are those who can do more than just one thing, and the work is interesting because there's always a new challenge to overcome.
With the skills you've listed, it sounds like you're a well rounded person capable of learning quickly and who can fit wherever there is a need. So talk to people in your country who have worked in smaller businesses and find out what they're looking for.
Lastly, consider why your current employer asked you to do all of these things. Ask yourself what would have happened to that employer if you weren't able to fit in where needed. Would they consider you valuable by being able to move around. Also, if the company ever needs to lay people off, are they going to fire the person who can only do 1 thing, or is it going to be the person who can be flexible and move into areas where there exists a need? In my experience, in places I've worked, the people who could do more than 1 job always seemed to have a place in the organization, while people who insisted on doing only 1 thing were the ones who were let go, thanked for their services, and walked out the door.
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
answered Feb 1 '14 at 21:42
jmort253♦
10.4k54376
10.4k54376
5
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
4
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
add a comment |Â
5
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
4
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
5
5
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
Well put. Specialization can be good to point your career in the direction of large companies; generalization can be good to point your career in the direction of small companies. Both have good and bad points.
– Carson63000
Feb 1 '14 at 21:49
4
4
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
I mostly agree with this with 1 caveat. Don't learn just the basics in everything, get some depth in one thing (and perhaps more than one thing). Once you get some depth, you will learn things and apply the learning differently. The guy who is making the same beginner mistakes in everything is not as valuable as the guy who knows how to learn and understands something thoroughly enough to not be a beginnner. When that guy picks up something new, he often learns more about it that others who may have been working in the field for years because he knows advanced concepts are important.
– HLGEM
Feb 3 '14 at 16:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
When I'm hiring or interviewing someone their former titles mean very, very little to me – titles mean different things in different companies. I would be far more interested in a candidate who had a wide range of skills no matter what his or her title(s) were. A candidate with actual experience using both “traditional†databases like MSSQL/Oracle/DB2/MySQL/etc. as well as newer technology like MongoDB is more attractive than someone who only knows how to interact with a single type of database.
As a matter of fact I often encourage people who are about to graduate from university to seriously consider working for smaller companies simply because they will likely be exposed to many more technologies than they will if they go to work for a very large company. I know people who have worked for large companies for years and they are responsible for a single program or even worse – for a part of a single program. They know their program (or their piece of a program) very, very well – but that's all they know.
Someone who has a wide range of experience not only brings all that experience to the table they also make it very apparent they are willing and interested in learning new technologies – a very attractive trait in a software developer.
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
When I'm hiring or interviewing someone their former titles mean very, very little to me – titles mean different things in different companies. I would be far more interested in a candidate who had a wide range of skills no matter what his or her title(s) were. A candidate with actual experience using both “traditional†databases like MSSQL/Oracle/DB2/MySQL/etc. as well as newer technology like MongoDB is more attractive than someone who only knows how to interact with a single type of database.
As a matter of fact I often encourage people who are about to graduate from university to seriously consider working for smaller companies simply because they will likely be exposed to many more technologies than they will if they go to work for a very large company. I know people who have worked for large companies for years and they are responsible for a single program or even worse – for a part of a single program. They know their program (or their piece of a program) very, very well – but that's all they know.
Someone who has a wide range of experience not only brings all that experience to the table they also make it very apparent they are willing and interested in learning new technologies – a very attractive trait in a software developer.
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
When I'm hiring or interviewing someone their former titles mean very, very little to me – titles mean different things in different companies. I would be far more interested in a candidate who had a wide range of skills no matter what his or her title(s) were. A candidate with actual experience using both “traditional†databases like MSSQL/Oracle/DB2/MySQL/etc. as well as newer technology like MongoDB is more attractive than someone who only knows how to interact with a single type of database.
As a matter of fact I often encourage people who are about to graduate from university to seriously consider working for smaller companies simply because they will likely be exposed to many more technologies than they will if they go to work for a very large company. I know people who have worked for large companies for years and they are responsible for a single program or even worse – for a part of a single program. They know their program (or their piece of a program) very, very well – but that's all they know.
Someone who has a wide range of experience not only brings all that experience to the table they also make it very apparent they are willing and interested in learning new technologies – a very attractive trait in a software developer.
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
When I'm hiring or interviewing someone their former titles mean very, very little to me – titles mean different things in different companies. I would be far more interested in a candidate who had a wide range of skills no matter what his or her title(s) were. A candidate with actual experience using both “traditional†databases like MSSQL/Oracle/DB2/MySQL/etc. as well as newer technology like MongoDB is more attractive than someone who only knows how to interact with a single type of database.
As a matter of fact I often encourage people who are about to graduate from university to seriously consider working for smaller companies simply because they will likely be exposed to many more technologies than they will if they go to work for a very large company. I know people who have worked for large companies for years and they are responsible for a single program or even worse – for a part of a single program. They know their program (or their piece of a program) very, very well – but that's all they know.
Someone who has a wide range of experience not only brings all that experience to the table they also make it very apparent they are willing and interested in learning new technologies – a very attractive trait in a software developer.
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
answered Feb 2 '14 at 15:27
Benny Hill
11116
11116
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
add a comment |Â
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
Titles can be extremely misleading. I was promoted from "SW Engineer" to "SW Engineer Lead", which sounds like a very senior position. But in most companies, this progression would be called "Junior Software Engineer" to "Software Engineer", which I also feel would be more realistic in terms of titles.
– Juha Untinen
Feb 18 '15 at 10:57
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f18896%2fdoes-changing-domain-often-affect-my-career%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
