4 ms·

The author mentions Michael Jordan (and LeBron James) but fails to mention how rare "Jordans" are (the buildup highlights the skill differences, not the scarcit

The author mentions Michael Jordan (and LeBron James) but fails to mention how rare "Jordans" are (the buildup highlights the skill differences, not the scarcity). Truly elite software developers are as rare as Jordans, i.e. one every 20 years or so. John Carmack would probably fall into the elite category, Dennis Ritchie was probably his generation's "Jordan" - but if you're defining elite in Jordan/LeBron terms we wouldn't expect to see many elite developers.

dsymonds 12y ago
That's true. It still means there's hundreds of folk who qualified for the NBA at all, and thousands in the next level down, and all those are much much better than the local sports club players.
ericsink 12y ago
Indeed. If software truly mirrors sports in this regard, we might want to think of elites as a once-per-generation thing. But it is also interesting to consider the possibility that because we don't have a measuring system like sports, there is a Michael Jordan of software on the planet right now but nobody has ever heard of him/her.
ufmace 12y ago
What is it that would make John Carmack an elite programmer, though? I'm not saying he is or isn't, I just don't know what he did that well. I think I remember reading one source claiming that his real gift was being able to develop graphics engines at just the right level of sophistication to just barely run well on the latest desktop computers that would be available when the engine was ready, even though the development project was started years before. If that's his main talent, it's definitely a gift, but does it make him an elite developer? Or is he more of an elite marketer/market analyst?
- coldtea 12y ago
  >but does it make him an elite developer? Or is he more of an elite marketer/market analyst? The part were he also CREATED those engines (instead of just predicting the arrival or relevant desktop systems capable of running them) makes him a developer, not a marketer/analyst. It also seems you didn't fully realize what you quoted. Being able to "develop graphics engines at just the right level of sophistication to just barely run well on the latest desktop computers that would be available when the engine was ready" means that he could program at the cutting edge of what's possible for the available desktop hardware everytime... Not many people can do that, and do it consistently and well, and in a field as difficult as 3D games (most of us people on HN for comparison, Rails/JS guys etc, are glorified CRUD developers).
  - ufmace 12y ago
    I realize that his engine development abilities alone qualify him as an excellent developer, probably at least top 1% of all developers. What I think the article is talking about is the true handful-in-a-generation elite, who are quantifiably orders of magnitude better than the top 1%, and have the money and fame to go along with it. Are his development abilities alone that much better than even the average top 1% developer, or is it more other things to go along with that? Or maybe it's more accurate to say that you can't really separate pure development skill from being able to develop the right program for the right market at the right time. Take Mark Zuckerberg for example. He's probably a really good developer, but he didn't become a famous billionaire on development skill alone. He is where he is because he had the right idea at the right time, and executed it aggressively and intelligently. Is that a separate skill from pure development, or is it part of being an elite developer?

dsymonds 12y ago

That's true. It still means there's hundreds of folk who qualified for the NBA at all, and thousands in the next level down, and all those are much much better than the local sports club players.

ericsink 12y ago

Indeed. If software truly mirrors sports in this regard, we might want to think of elites as a once-per-generation thing. But it is also interesting to consider the possibility that because we don't have a measuring system like sports, there is a Michael Jordan of software on the planet right now but nobody has ever heard of him/her.

ufmace 12y ago

What is it that would make John Carmack an elite programmer, though? I'm not saying he is or isn't, I just don't know what he did that well. I think I remember reading one source claiming that his real gift was being able to develop graphics engines at just the right level of sophistication to just barely run well on the latest desktop computers that would be available when the engine was ready, even though the development project was started years before. If that's his main talent, it's definitely a gift, but does it make him an elite developer? Or is he more of an elite marketer/market analyst?

coldtea 12y ago
>but does it make him an elite developer? Or is he more of an elite marketer/market analyst? The part were he also CREATED those engines (instead of just predicting the arrival or relevant desktop systems capable of running them) makes him a developer, not a marketer/analyst. It also seems you didn't fully realize what you quoted. Being able to "develop graphics engines at just the right level of sophistication to just barely run well on the latest desktop computers that would be available when the engine was ready" means that he could program at the cutting edge of what's possible for the available desktop hardware everytime... Not many people can do that, and do it consistently and well, and in a field as difficult as 3D games (most of us people on HN for comparison, Rails/JS guys etc, are glorified CRUD developers).
- ufmace 12y ago
  I realize that his engine development abilities alone qualify him as an excellent developer, probably at least top 1% of all developers. What I think the article is talking about is the true handful-in-a-generation elite, who are quantifiably orders of magnitude better than the top 1%, and have the money and fame to go along with it. Are his development abilities alone that much better than even the average top 1% developer, or is it more other things to go along with that? Or maybe it's more accurate to say that you can't really separate pure development skill from being able to develop the right program for the right market at the right time. Take Mark Zuckerberg for example. He's probably a really good developer, but he didn't become a famous billionaire on development skill alone. He is where he is because he had the right idea at the right time, and executed it aggressively and intelligently. Is that a separate skill from pure development, or is it part of being an elite developer?