4 ms·

> I would argue that you can be productive for more than 8 hours a day I agree with you, but not on a single task. If you want to hire someone who can program

> I would argue that you can be productive for more than 8 hours a day I agree with you, but not on a single task. If you want to hire someone who can program for a couple of hours, design your marketing material for a few more, work on your IT infrastructure for another couple of hours, and then maybe go off and do some sales work and meet with the rest of your team, you might have something that works. Of course, if you find someone who can do all those things well, they are probably off working on their own business and couldn't care less about what you are doing.

sejje 13y ago
Don't agree. At least, as a programmer, I know that having to switch into other modes really diminishes my ability to focus on the problem I'm solving (programming). Your day sounds like a way to turn a 40-hour programming project into a 80+ hour project.
- randomdata 13y ago
  Maybe I cannot speak for everyone, but two or three hours is really about all I can take before I need a break of some kind (to stretch, to eat, whatever), and at that point you end up switching contexts anyway, so you may as well jump into something completely different when you return. It is no more costly to "load up" something new than to "load up" what you were working on before once the switch has happened. Now in the real world, where people expect you to do just one thing, I often do multiple two, possibly three, hour stints, with context switches in between each. However, I feel a lot better on the days when I'm able to do different tasks on each switch rather than coming back to the same task each time. You, naturally, still have to give that task your undivided focus while you are working on it. Trying to manage everything at the exact same time will definitely lead to what you suggest. Of course there are no hard rules. If, for example, you're having a good programming day, maybe you'll put in four straight hours before you feel the need to stop. It is not like you have to put your metaphorical pencil down as soon as the clock strikes the two hour mark.
- jcannon98188 13y ago
  I interpreted it as saying the only way you can expect more than 8 hours of productivity constantly from programmers is if they do multiple tasks. And not saying that it would be ideal to have programmers do everything.

sejje 13y ago

Don't agree. At least, as a programmer, I know that having to switch into other modes really diminishes my ability to focus on the problem I'm solving (programming). Your day sounds like a way to turn a 40-hour programming project into a 80+ hour project.

randomdata 13y ago
Maybe I cannot speak for everyone, but two or three hours is really about all I can take before I need a break of some kind (to stretch, to eat, whatever), and at that point you end up switching contexts anyway, so you may as well jump into something completely different when you return. It is no more costly to "load up" something new than to "load up" what you were working on before once the switch has happened. Now in the real world, where people expect you to do just one thing, I often do multiple two, possibly three, hour stints, with context switches in between each. However, I feel a lot better on the days when I'm able to do different tasks on each switch rather than coming back to the same task each time. You, naturally, still have to give that task your undivided focus while you are working on it. Trying to manage everything at the exact same time will definitely lead to what you suggest. Of course there are no hard rules. If, for example, you're having a good programming day, maybe you'll put in four straight hours before you feel the need to stop. It is not like you have to put your metaphorical pencil down as soon as the clock strikes the two hour mark.
jcannon98188 13y ago
I interpreted it as saying the only way you can expect more than 8 hours of productivity constantly from programmers is if they do multiple tasks. And not saying that it would be ideal to have programmers do everything.