Mati, Hear. Hear. After lurking on the thread - it's time to put in my 2c.. on the topics of age, compensation, roles and responsibilities and platforms.
1. There IS age discrimination in programming, especially in Israel, but not only. It has to do with many factors but one of the big ones is compensation - since young programmers are cheaper (at least cheaper while they are writing code, not cheaper in the product life cycle). There is an excellent article in business week called Youth Matters that touches on this topic in a non-emotional way - http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2008/tc20080115_576235.htm 2.What about roles and responsibilities? a. A young startup (whether staffed by 3 young programmers or 3 old programmers) needs some minimal division of roles. We need to think about managerial roles in a software development startup in terms of the difference between a CTO and a VP R&D. The CTO will have the product ideas, he will in many cases write the original core code, he can pull an all-nighter to write a prototype even at age 60, but he is always a terrible manager. The VP R&D has not written code for at least 5 years, he doesn't have new ideas and can't do an all nighter to hack a prototype, but he delivers the goods on-time. The best VP R&D's are people persons, excellent all around managers and very detail and results oriented. The third person in our 3 man startup needs to know how to sell. NOTE - i am talking ROLES not TITLES. Until you hit headcount of 50 - there shouldn't be titles on business cards and titles should NEVER be a replacement for compensation. 3. What about platforms? I detect a note of bigotry in the thread regarding IDF grads - but at the end of the day, for a Web 2.0 startup you can choose .NET or Linux + PHP and if you are professional programmers they will both do the job. I.e - Web app Although programmers may switch allegiance (from ACS to ROR, from ROR to PHP, from Perl to JSP etc...) it's a rare company that switches platforms on a working product. BOTTOM Line - platform decisions don't really matter, once they're taken it's a done deal. Good luck in your startup - wr Danny On 1/14/08, Matitiahu Allouche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am always impressed by people who can draw a wide fresco of general > subjects, like the evolution of the computer industry. I am somewhat less > impressed when I happen to know some of the details, and they are wrongly > pictured. It saps my naive faith in things which are expressed so > authoritatively. What Geoffrey writes about IBM is at best his own > interpretation of the facts. > > Shalom (Regards), Mati > Bidi Architect > Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts > IBM Israel > Phone: +972 2 5888802 Fax: +972 2 5870333 Mobile: +972 52 > 2554160 > > > > > "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 13/01/2008 18:04 > Please respond to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To > "Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc > aviv sher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il > Subject > Re: [Job Offer and a byte more] PHP programmer and CTO > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 05:31:04PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > > > Actually, your example proves you wrong! Do you think that Google would > have > > grown to the size they are if they kept the same technology they had 10 > years > > ago? In those 10 years, Google adopted completely new technologies that > they > > didn't have before - they devised new ways to manage clusters (which > they > > didn't need when their cluster was just 50 machines), new filesystems, > new > > ways to show interactive pages ("ajax"), new concepts for email (like > the > > whopping 1 GB mail quota), new ideas and software for advertising, and > much > > much more. Someobody had to direct the company to go in that direction, > and > > not - say - to the Orace/IIS direction you mentioned. > > Thank you, you just made my point. :-) Google succeded because they chose > a technology that could be expanded to do what they want. If they had > chosen > Windows NT server, or VMS clusters they would have failed miserably. > > If they had a second rate CTO, or were stuck in another technology, they > would never have grown to the size they are. How many "new idea" email > programs and companies have failed in the last 30 yeas? > > > So it's silly to think that a company only decides technology issues > when > > it is formed. Maybe what you are thinking about are these "dot com" > startups, > > which were formed with some technology and indeed never lived long > enough to > > switch or update their technlogy. > > Lots of them were much older too, for example, IBM which nearly died when > they > tried to drop their mainframe computers and get everyone to buy an AS400. > DEC when they tried to push the Alpha over the VAX. Silicon Graphics when > they tried to switch to Windows NT over UNIX, and Apple which joined with > IBM and switched to the PPC chip. > > IBM had enough business to keep going and eventually recovered and a third > procduct, the RS/6000 took over while they still sell mainframes (Z/390) > and the AS400 is long gone. > > DEC lost the battle of the MIPS. Silicon Graphics just faded and Apple > eventually became bankrupt and the board gave the company to Steve Jobs > and Next, before they crashed, and so on. > > > > > Both are certainly capble of doing the job with as much tailoring as > Google > > > had to apply to what they do use, but when did Google reach the point > they > > > could not have switched? > > > > Never. If Google were convinced today that Oracle/IIS had some clear > benefits > > to them, they could switch to them, at least in new installations (which > in > > an exponentially growing business, is almost the same as switching > everything). > > Obviously, they didn't find Oracle or IIS of any benefit to them, > because > > they could do the same - or more - with free software without having to > pay > > royalties (paying royalties for hundreds of thousands of copies for a > piece > > of software is damn expensive). > > Again proves my point. > > > > I work in a company that has existed for over a hundred years. It still > > hasn't reached that point. We are still always on the lookout on how to > > change, what are the new technology trends, and how we can leverage new > > technlogy to become more efficient, before all our competition does it. > > If a company stops doing this, it will go out of business quickly. > > What company is that? > > > > How much equity are your really willing to give this stranger (i.e. > > > not a founder) to be CTO? 5%? 10%? any more and you risk diluting > > > your control and making your seed investor nervous. > > > > > > When the company gets to a "short exit", i.e. buyout in 2-3 years or > > > IPO, the 10% will be about 2%. If you go for the long term exit, which > > > someone is espousing in an article in Friday's Jerusalem Post > (presented > > > as an op-ed, but really a free ad for his "late stage" investment > fund), > > > that will be down to less than 1%. > > > > In 1999, when I was looking for a job, the "jive" from prospective > employers > > I interviewed ( :-) ) was always the same - I would get a percentage of > the > > company (usually at the order of 1%), and since it is public knowledge > that > > every IPO is at least 1 billion dollars, even after dilution I was > sitting > > on several million dollars, almost guranteed. Yeah, right... > > Yes, I keep telling people who ask for business advice NOT to include a > stock option plan as anything but a speculative gift. People will no > longer > fall for that "jive" as you put it. > > Geoff. > > -- > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel [EMAIL PROTECTED] N3OWJ/4X1GM > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 > Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ > > > ================================================================= > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Danny Lieberman "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one." Occam's razor -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.software.co.il/ - Optimize your risk www.software.co.il/blog - Israeli software, music and mountain biking -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tel Aviv + 972 3 610-9750 US + 1-301-841-7122 Cell + 972 54 447-1114
