In my experience, companies that use years of experience as a candidate filter are not companies you would want to work for. Number of years of experience is easy to determine, but pretty much useless in determining someone's skill. What it really shows is that the people in charge of hiring are either lazy or incompetent. Neither speak well to the quality of people going into the company, so once again, why would you want to work for them?
>Number of years of experience is easy to determine
Only if defined in a naive way (i.e. ignore personal projects, work experience during middle school/high school/college, have some arbitrary way of interpreting what it means to have experience in a particular language.)
You can certainly make the number more or less meaningful by including a comparison against what the individual accomplished over that period. Regardless, the question was an individual's number wasn't high enough.
EITHER you made something great
OR you have nothing to show and then it's really personal
In the end, once you have something to show, noone cares about your resumé and they all want you on board because you have shown that you can deliver and are a low-risk, high-return investment.
