3 ms·

I think in this context he's using "creative" in the sense that it's used in the advertising industry. A creative is someone who actually works on developing a

by minimax 14y ago

I think in this context he's using "creative" in the sense that it's used in the advertising industry. A creative is someone who actually works on developing an advertisement, rather than, say, someone buying up airtime. The companies on the list are almost all advertising agencies. It's just the industry nomenclature and I don't think he meant to say that programmers in the non-advertising world aren't creative.

timtadh 14y ago
That may be true but I find the term denigrating towards programmers. This isn't the advertising industry and their nomenclature isn't appropriate here. It implies a "non-creative" type of programmer. It also implies most programmers are of a "non-creative" type. Furthermore, the implication is those programmers, since they are by definition non-creative, don't do their own thinking. The term may not technically mean the above however the implication is there.
- notatoad 14y ago
  >It implies a "non-creative" type of programmer. It also implies most programmers are of a "non-creative" type. i don't think that's an unfair implication. There is plenty of programming that has no creative aspect, and i'd say the majority of programmers are not creatives. It's a term with a well-accepted industry definition, and if you start defining it as broadly as you want to you could probably apply it to just about any job, anywhere in the world. The guy wiring up power poles outside my office does his own thinking, does that make his job creative?
  - dljsjr 14y ago
    It has nothing to do with the job title and everything to do with the person. And yes, I am saying that the label of creative can be applied to any job in the world. Watch the video.
  - timtadh 14y ago
    > i don't think that's an unfair implication. we will have to disagree there. which is fine. > if you start defining it as broadly as you want to you could probably apply it to just about any job, anywhere in the world. The guy wiring up power poles outside my office does his own thinking, does that make his job creative? Which is my point. I am not saying all programmers to should be called "creative." However, calling a portion of them creative is inaccurate. It also doesn't really get at what OP wanted to get at which is: A programmer with visual arts training/skills.
- jianshen 14y ago
  I don't think 'creative' denigrates regular coders precisely because the term IS from the Advertising industry where there is a clear delineation between "creative", "sales" and "business". [1] Ad Agencies/VFX Companies/Design Firms tend to have a "Creative Director" [2] where a Creative Coder would report to and up until recently, their roles would not exist in traditional consumer/enterprise web companies. Put another way, it's still blurry if someone in such a role would report to an Engineering Director or a Creative Director at a company that had both groups. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=ad+agency+org+structure https://www.google.com/search?q=ad+agency+org+structure [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_director http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_director
  - timtadh 14y ago
    Respectfully most programmers don't work in advertising. It may be suitable in Advertising where the term is well understood. However, I don't think it should be a widely applied term outside of that field. The "plain sense" of the term is not the technical definition the "plain sense" is as I described it above.
dljsjr 14y ago
I'd argue, though, that the word "creative" being used in this sense is directly related to how they go about solving their problem (producing effective advertising given the constraints) and not related to the fact that they are generating visuals or copy. And these thinking techniques can very easily be applied to programming. If you haven't watched the John Cleese lecture I linked to, then I would highly recommend it.
bhntr3 14y ago
The term "creative" is misleading though and its use should be discouraged. I worked at a consulting company that started doing agency work, hired designers, promoted creative directors, built a creative department, added a creative area with a creative room and so on and so forth. This was always a point of contention for the developers. It's especially silly when this article ostensibly promotes crossover coders who do both design and development. Why does it have to be the "creative" department and not the "design" department? And in an intelligent organization that encourages multi-talented people and "interdisciplinary" work, why are departments and labels like that even necessary? The pedigree of the term creative makes sense in the advertising world. At first creatives did visual and textual work and there were no engineers. Then developers became a part of advertising agencies and became a different department from "creative." Now the walls are being broken down and we're evangelizing "creative coders" Instead of perpetuating this silly distinction, let's do away with it and stop implying that just because someone isn't A "creative" that they aren't creative. Bad naming is bad naming.
- sly010 14y ago
  Re: "Boo, unfair! I am creative too!" Fine, probably you are. But creative coders in the context of this article do slightly different tasks and their job requires a different mindset, than conventional software engineering. I know, I do both. I also find it funny when people start arguing on the meanings of the word "hacker". Obviously it has to mean what I do, (otherwise I would loose my cool). Except when a potential investor is comparing a "Software Architect" to "just a hacker", in which case I am obviously the first one. Stop being jealous, and define yourself with acts, instead of words. No one will argue with that.
  - bhntr3 14y ago
    The company I work at now doesn't make the distinction and has plenty of coders who "do both." I also do both. "Creative" is still a bad name. When your application evolves and the names of your services no longer match their business purposes, it's a good practice to update the naming to increase clarity. The same should be true of your departments and job descriptions. Keeping a name even though it doesn't make sense just because it's traditional and an industry standard is pretty lame. I doubt you'd find much support for that kind of thinking here.
msutherl 14y ago
Indeed, "creative" in this context refers to special attention paid to creating new concepts. A "creative programmer" is somebody who's occupation is to come up with new ideas in code. This contrasts with "non-creative" programmers, who typically apply sound techniques to known problems. When programming websites, for instance, the scope of the problem is well defined and the programmer's task is to select from an array of known solutions and integrate them into a system that is robust, secure, responsive, scalable, elegant, etc. This is an inherently "creative" task – every programmer solves the problem in a new way – but the emphasis is on robustness, elegance, etc. and not on the idea. On the flip side, creative programmers are not expected to create especially robust software. They often write software for a single event (often just a demo) on a single platform and poor software quality is regularly tolerated. All that said, I think the term "experimental" is infinitely more appropriate. Unfortunately "creative" has become an industry term and we'll have to wait a generation for it to go way.

by minimax 14y ago

timtadh 14y ago

That may be true but I find the term denigrating towards programmers. This isn't the advertising industry and their nomenclature isn't appropriate here. It implies a "non-creative" type of programmer. It also implies most programmers are of a "non-creative" type. Furthermore, the implication is those programmers, since they are by definition non-creative, don't do their own thinking. The term may not technically mean the above however the implication is there.

notatoad 14y ago
>It implies a "non-creative" type of programmer. It also implies most programmers are of a "non-creative" type. i don't think that's an unfair implication. There is plenty of programming that has no creative aspect, and i'd say the majority of programmers are not creatives. It's a term with a well-accepted industry definition, and if you start defining it as broadly as you want to you could probably apply it to just about any job, anywhere in the world. The guy wiring up power poles outside my office does his own thinking, does that make his job creative?
- dljsjr 14y ago
  It has nothing to do with the job title and everything to do with the person. And yes, I am saying that the label of creative can be applied to any job in the world. Watch the video.
- timtadh 14y ago
  > i don't think that's an unfair implication. we will have to disagree there. which is fine. > if you start defining it as broadly as you want to you could probably apply it to just about any job, anywhere in the world. The guy wiring up power poles outside my office does his own thinking, does that make his job creative? Which is my point. I am not saying all programmers to should be called "creative." However, calling a portion of them creative is inaccurate. It also doesn't really get at what OP wanted to get at which is: A programmer with visual arts training/skills.
jianshen 14y ago
I don't think 'creative' denigrates regular coders precisely because the term IS from the Advertising industry where there is a clear delineation between "creative", "sales" and "business". [1] Ad Agencies/VFX Companies/Design Firms tend to have a "Creative Director" [2] where a Creative Coder would report to and up until recently, their roles would not exist in traditional consumer/enterprise web companies. Put another way, it's still blurry if someone in such a role would report to an Engineering Director or a Creative Director at a company that had both groups. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=ad+agency+org+structure https://www.google.com/search?q=ad+agency+org+structure [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_director http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_director
- timtadh 14y ago
  Respectfully most programmers don't work in advertising. It may be suitable in Advertising where the term is well understood. However, I don't think it should be a widely applied term outside of that field. The "plain sense" of the term is not the technical definition the "plain sense" is as I described it above.

dljsjr 14y ago

I'd argue, though, that the word "creative" being used in this sense is directly related to how they go about solving their problem (producing effective advertising given the constraints) and not related to the fact that they are generating visuals or copy. And these thinking techniques can very easily be applied to programming. If you haven't watched the John Cleese lecture I linked to, then I would highly recommend it.

bhntr3 14y ago

The term "creative" is misleading though and its use should be discouraged. I worked at a consulting company that started doing agency work, hired designers, promoted creative directors, built a creative department, added a creative area with a creative room and so on and so forth. This was always a point of contention for the developers. It's especially silly when this article ostensibly promotes crossover coders who do both design and development. Why does it have to be the "creative" department and not the "design" department? And in an intelligent organization that encourages multi-talented people and "interdisciplinary" work, why are departments and labels like that even necessary? The pedigree of the term creative makes sense in the advertising world. At first creatives did visual and textual work and there were no engineers. Then developers became a part of advertising agencies and became a different department from "creative." Now the walls are being broken down and we're evangelizing "creative coders" Instead of perpetuating this silly distinction, let's do away with it and stop implying that just because someone isn't A "creative" that they aren't creative. Bad naming is bad naming.

sly010 14y ago
Re: "Boo, unfair! I am creative too!" Fine, probably you are. But creative coders in the context of this article do slightly different tasks and their job requires a different mindset, than conventional software engineering. I know, I do both. I also find it funny when people start arguing on the meanings of the word "hacker". Obviously it has to mean what I do, (otherwise I would loose my cool). Except when a potential investor is comparing a "Software Architect" to "just a hacker", in which case I am obviously the first one. Stop being jealous, and define yourself with acts, instead of words. No one will argue with that.
- bhntr3 14y ago
  The company I work at now doesn't make the distinction and has plenty of coders who "do both." I also do both. "Creative" is still a bad name. When your application evolves and the names of your services no longer match their business purposes, it's a good practice to update the naming to increase clarity. The same should be true of your departments and job descriptions. Keeping a name even though it doesn't make sense just because it's traditional and an industry standard is pretty lame. I doubt you'd find much support for that kind of thinking here.

msutherl 14y ago

Indeed, "creative" in this context refers to special attention paid to creating new concepts. A "creative programmer" is somebody who's occupation is to come up with new ideas in code. This contrasts with "non-creative" programmers, who typically apply sound techniques to known problems. When programming websites, for instance, the scope of the problem is well defined and the programmer's task is to select from an array of known solutions and integrate them into a system that is robust, secure, responsive, scalable, elegant, etc. This is an inherently "creative" task – every programmer solves the problem in a new way – but the emphasis is on robustness, elegance, etc. and not on the idea. On the flip side, creative programmers are not expected to create especially robust software. They often write software for a single event (often just a demo) on a single platform and poor software quality is regularly tolerated. All that said, I think the term "experimental" is infinitely more appropriate. Unfortunately "creative" has become an industry term and we'll have to wait a generation for it to go way.