Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 5th Feb 2008 01:37 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 299373
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
If I can dare make some gross generalizations, I would say the two types of developers correspond to the IT and engineering departments. From the article and comments here, I think everyone else is talking about the IT department. I am talking about engineering department. During the dot.bomb, many startups made the mistake of hiring IT programmers to produce their product. Even if your product is a website, it it needs a different perspective than the typical IT member would give it. This isn't meant to diss IT programmers, rather to recognize that different departments have different needs and emphases.




Member since:
2006-08-27
I gotta disagree with some of these criteria. I know a lot of great programmers, but only know C/C++ and bourne shell as languages. I know other programmers who who a dozen different languages, but are dumber than a pile of bricks. I know awesome kernel developers who can write device drivers in their sleep, but wouldn't know XML if it bit them in the ass. I also know developers who can rant on and on about a several dozen new technologies, but still need a GUI IDE and an example to write a hello world program.
In short, I think the article places way too much emphasis on varietal bleeding edge knowledge, and way too little on in depth focused knowledge. There are two broad categories of great developers, and depending on your company's needs, one may be better for you than the other. One kind of developer is like the article, who has great breadth of knowledge and intense curiosity about new stuff. The other kind has great depth of knowledge and has an intense desire to provide a high quality product. Broad but shallow, or narrow and deep?