4 ms·

I appreciate the idea behind Joel's article--that developers need to have everything available to do their jobs and not be bothered by corporate minutia. The be

by Todd 18y ago

I appreciate the idea behind Joel's article--that developers need to have everything available to do their jobs and not be bothered by corporate minutia. The best software companies are organized this way. What I have always found dissatisfying by this sentiment is that it implicitly denigrates all of the other people in the "supporting roles" and it elevates the developers to prima donne. I found his introductory parable somewhat compelling, as it mirrors, somewhat, the lives of many of us here. I only wish he would have focused more on how that lone developer could have succeeded with more "marketing" instead of diverting to track B and talking about how to successfully structure a small to medium sized company (like his).

jimbokun 18y ago
But what's interesting is that Joel is pretty clearly making the point that he is the man responsible for making sure the "supporting roles" happen, allowing the programmers to assume allthe "prima donna" roles. In return, he gets to own the lion's share of the company and a commensurate share of the profits. "instead of diverting to track B and talking about how to successfully structure a small to medium sized company (like his)." Doesn't it make more sense for him to talk about the case of a small to medium sized company, which he actually knows something about? I think, though, it isn't too hard to extrapolate the lesson for startups: if you are a programmer who formerly worked for a small to medium sized company, you suddenly need to figure out on your own how to do the jobs of that other 80% of the people at your company were doing. In fact, elsewhere I think Joel has made exactly the point that when he started Fog Creek he and his co-founder were the ones doing all of those tasks, in addition to the coding.
billswift 18y ago
I understand that Joel's situation as a startup was pretty unusual in that he did the marketing first. Joel on Software was around for several years, and popular, before he decided to go into business rather than working for others, so he had a ready made market for the programmers' tools he started producing.

by Todd 18y ago

jimbokun 18y ago

But what's interesting is that Joel is pretty clearly making the point that he is the man responsible for making sure the "supporting roles" happen, allowing the programmers to assume allthe "prima donna" roles. In return, he gets to own the lion's share of the company and a commensurate share of the profits. "instead of diverting to track B and talking about how to successfully structure a small to medium sized company (like his)." Doesn't it make more sense for him to talk about the case of a small to medium sized company, which he actually knows something about? I think, though, it isn't too hard to extrapolate the lesson for startups: if you are a programmer who formerly worked for a small to medium sized company, you suddenly need to figure out on your own how to do the jobs of that other 80% of the people at your company were doing. In fact, elsewhere I think Joel has made exactly the point that when he started Fog Creek he and his co-founder were the ones doing all of those tasks, in addition to the coding.

billswift 18y ago

I understand that Joel's situation as a startup was pretty unusual in that he did the marketing first. Joel on Software was around for several years, and popular, before he decided to go into business rather than working for others, so he had a ready made market for the programmers' tools he started producing.