I think you're still missing the point. No, just time isn't a magic ingredient. That time has to be well spent. But it still takes time. And it's not just abou

I think you're still missing the point. No, just time isn't a magic ingredient. That time has to be well spent. But it still takes time. And it's not just about having several projects under your belt. This is making the fundamental mistake that software development is a pretty intellectual pursuit, when in reality the social aspect is far more important. There is living through the cyclical zeitgeist. There is the experience that only comes from having been through things when there were new, and having done this several times. There is no way for a young person to know what it was like to start writing JavaScript when it was first invented, or to have made one of the earliest AJAX apps when XmlHTTPRequest was first invented. That's not an argument that the old ways are better than the new, it's an argument that we know deep down why the new ways are better than the old (and what lessons the new ones could learn, too). There is the super powers that come from having spent a long time in two or more completely different fields. There is domain knowledge that does not come cheaply, and to gain such expensive knowledge in more than one field is so rare. I don't think the author is at all arguing that all 40+ developers are great. He's arguing to stop universally dismissing older programmers.