2 ms·

I don't even think that this is even a case of that. The writer is obviously not a programmer (he even uses the "Some of my best friends are x" line where x is

• pessimizer 13y ago
  You're probably right. I may have been making the mistake of thinking that he was representative of a some large contingent of programmers just because of the "we." Marketing works:)
• yetanotherphd 13y ago
  yeah it's weird, we are one the one hand said to be an underclass of social rejects, and on the other hand said to be immensely privileged. And on top of that, somehow being losers makes us more privileged, since it keeps normal people who don't want to be losers out of the profession. Go figure.
• pandler 13y ago
  > What bothers me most about this is the idea that programmers are some kind of underclass that just doesn't get "normal" people. The truth is that we're people too who have a lot of the same needs as "normal" people. I think the author was simply trying to articulate a rift that sometimes occurs between a party with a (perceived or actual) problem and the party with solutions for that problem. According to his barbershop example, that problem/solution rift is the result of a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem statement. If I could abstract the article in one sentence, I would say, "If you are trying to solve a problem that you yourself do not have, make sure you actually understand the problem from the perspective of the party you are solving it for before you go building things." The author may have gone a bit far in generalizing programmers/engineers, but would you agree it is fair to say that it is easy enough for _anyone_ to fall into the aforementioned trap if they are not conscious of it? An occurring theme I have noticed while speaking with people (not just engineers and/or programmers) is that we have a tendency to project ourselves on other people. I don't think that is a bad thing in moderation (that's a different matter of discourse), but I have had at least two different conversations with entrepreneurs where they simply could not for the life of them understand why someone would rather "just get a job working for someone else" than start their own company. It simply does not register in their world view that someone does not share their way of thinking. My anecdote is tangential at best, but my point is that the object of the article is not to diminish programmers. Rather, it is to elevate the perspective of those subject to a certain myopia that they would otherwise not think to confront.
  • sqrt17 13y ago
    Successful product management is exactly closing that rift. Product management is distinct from either programming (making things) or sales (selling things to people). The argument made in the article is "you are a programmer. Therefore you don't get product management techniques nor sales. Therefore you should buy my book." It's a typical sales technique: Creating a sense of inadequacy in your target and right away offering a solution. If you're cynical, you will notice that there's no guarantee of any kind that the solution you're being sold on actually helps. Because, people good at sales are more likely to be good at selling you random things than to be effective teachers of the knowledge they're claiming for themselves. patio11 did a lot of good in actually teaching people to look at a market that's not themselves, but there are a lot of people following him who primarily want to make money with e-books because that is their most effective way of monetizing their skills in the absence of any ability to build products.