4 ms·
I can draw a parallel to this in software development. Some product features that require development "from scratch", where you can get down to the original cod
by capdeck 6y ago
I can draw a parallel to this in software development. Some product features that require development "from scratch", where you can get down to the original code and logic - this is where "taking time to think" really pays off.
But when you are basically composing a final product from components, libraries and features - this is where figuring something out may take really long time and a lot of effort. It today's world many libraries are open source, so you actually can get to the bottom of many issues. But the time and effort cost of that is almost never acceptable.
My conclusion is - if you are a "slow" thinker, prefer getting to the bottom and figuring stuff out - try and choose the "fundamental" type of work. Where you are "done is better than perfect" kinda person - you'll thrive in the upper layers of development stack where shipping stuff out is of utmost importance. Focus on your strengths.
- karpierz 6y agoWhere do you find this "fundamental" kind of work? How do you select for it?
- capdeck 6y agoOne example would be analytics libraries that require precise calculations and background in math as opposed to the UI that displays the bar chart with results. The former is what I consider to be "fundamental" where the latter is much higher level and close to the end user (UI). Other examples: audio / video codecs vs. media player app; game engine vs. intro screen and menu stuff, etc...