Seeking Technology Co-Founder (NYC)
49 comments
"I am not a programmer" - "I will divide equity equally"
Aren't these 2 statements a little inconsistent?
"I do have what I consider to be strong ideas"
Don't we all?
I have a feeling that you need to get used to the idea that a web startup is all about building the product (at least at this stage).
2 non-programmers = bad
1 non-programmer + 1 hacker = better
2 hackers = best
I really don't mean to pick and I certainly don't want to rain on your parade. Just a quick reality check from a seasoned hacker.
I hope your idea is fantastic and you find the perfect match. Good luck!
Aren't these 2 statements a little inconsistent?
"I do have what I consider to be strong ideas"
Don't we all?
I have a feeling that you need to get used to the idea that a web startup is all about building the product (at least at this stage).
2 non-programmers = bad
1 non-programmer + 1 hacker = better
2 hackers = best
I really don't mean to pick and I certainly don't want to rain on your parade. Just a quick reality check from a seasoned hacker.
I hope your idea is fantastic and you find the perfect match. Good luck!
I knew I would probably get attacked on this post in some way. I am not naive and I do realize my limitations. Additionally, in a business you are looking ideally for individuals who complement yourself in skills (i.e. one business person, one technology person).
What is wrong with 1 non-programmer + 1 hacker sharing equity equally? I realize product development is paramount. I do not expect to be twiddling my thumbs while my partner hacks away. As a user of the internet and sites like the one I would like to build, I have many ideas concrete ideas about features/functionality I would like on the site and would hope to function as a team in developing the product.
Beyond that, down the road much of the focus would be on user acquisition strategies (for a user generated content site such as the one I would like to do). I cannot imagine I would not be able to contribute equally to the overall process of building a sustainable company.
What is wrong with 1 non-programmer + 1 hacker sharing equity equally? I realize product development is paramount. I do not expect to be twiddling my thumbs while my partner hacks away. As a user of the internet and sites like the one I would like to build, I have many ideas concrete ideas about features/functionality I would like on the site and would hope to function as a team in developing the product.
Beyond that, down the road much of the focus would be on user acquisition strategies (for a user generated content site such as the one I would like to do). I cannot imagine I would not be able to contribute equally to the overall process of building a sustainable company.
I'm curious what you'd be doing for 40-60 hours a week while your partner(s) hack. I'm not being snippy. In fact, I am the least technical of 3 hackers on our team (currently YC08). I do all of the Photoshop work, html, css, JavaScript, light Rails, customer communication, copywriting, analytics, cooking (I'm serious), pitching, etc.
But if I took out the BUILDING stuff (design prototyping and front-end development), I wouldn't be a critical asset to the first 3-6 months of product development. I could certainly keep myself busy, but I wouldn't be critical.
If I were in your shoes, I'd focus on pitching why you are critical. Having ideas and being a user in your target market doesn't cut the mustard IMO. And an early stage team doesn't need a project manager, or detailed spec sheets, or other "manager-y" stuff.
That being said, there are startups that could really benefit from early sales/biz dev efforts. I know of at least one YC08 company that has a founder who is selling the hell out of their offering already (for real dollars). THAT has real value, but it really only applies to certain startups (a UGC site like I think you're after isn't one of 'em).
But if I took out the BUILDING stuff (design prototyping and front-end development), I wouldn't be a critical asset to the first 3-6 months of product development. I could certainly keep myself busy, but I wouldn't be critical.
If I were in your shoes, I'd focus on pitching why you are critical. Having ideas and being a user in your target market doesn't cut the mustard IMO. And an early stage team doesn't need a project manager, or detailed spec sheets, or other "manager-y" stuff.
That being said, there are startups that could really benefit from early sales/biz dev efforts. I know of at least one YC08 company that has a founder who is selling the hell out of their offering already (for real dollars). THAT has real value, but it really only applies to certain startups (a UGC site like I think you're after isn't one of 'em).
>> Having ideas and being a user in your target market doesn't cut the mustard IMO. And an early stage team doesn't need a project manager, or detailed spec sheets, or other "manager-y" stuff.
I predict you'll fail with whatever you try to startup AS LONG AS you have this attitude. A founder who used to be a former user and can point to the flaws in everything on the market and came up with a better solution is an IDEAL person to have start something. Their intuition is based on their experience of what people like them (ie, former customers) will PAY MONEY for. That's a business. Hackers hacking all night is not a business. Sorry to burst your bubble.
You can't be more wrong. You only get PRACTICAL, USEFULL business ideas AS a customer/user. That's why 99.99% of programmers who start businesses flop - they're so wrapped up in some tiny aspect of their warped reality and how their awesome code makes a tiny part of it a bit better in ways nobody understands, that they never stop and think that 99.99% of the general population of who they think will be their customers couldn't care less.
That's if they even bother to think about who their customers will be. Most programmers can't think beyond "users" and I'm sorry, but now that we're entering recession times, you'll learn really quick that users does NOT equal same as paying customer.
The sad truth for you is that most successful companies were started by people without the technical skills but who were users of many things, had a "big picture perspective" and thought to themselves, "You know what sucks about the current state of things, this, this and that - someone should make something different like this and this."
Otherwise, from your model, you just have programmers making something most likely nobody will care about. That's not a company, that's code. If you get some users, that may a service, by which I mean of the charity kind. If they pay you, that's a product, though not necessarily a successful company.
HERE - FORGET MY THESIS - imagine instead this scenario - let's say all the "big idea" people went on some Atlas shrugged type of strike. That leaves you programmers in boston, and those in virginia, in New York, S.V, and about a hundred million others in Russia, Eastern Europe, India, China, Netherlands, Ireland, France ...
If the idea people are that irrelevant to starting great companies, and programmers are that all-important, why don't you guys all get together, form some sort of super development virtual company and spit out 50 million uber-companies all based on your awesome code?
I'll bet 50 idea people in various industries will start successful companies that MAKE MONEY for every 1 programmer with a brilliant algorithm to load YouTube videos 2% faster or whatever passes for a great business idea among hackers these days that manages to fool some desperate, inexperienced VC to put money into their project.
FINAL ANALYSIS: Masons build, but building without a good plan leads to well-executed crap. No inspired architect/designer, no beauty, no inspirational "thing" that PAYING customers can wrap their minds around. I've said it before and I'll say it again: just because you get "users" and maybe bought out by Mega-Corp. doesn't mean you've created a successful company. Get people to pay you money for your thing, that's a business. Otherwise, just a delusion that will never survive the next 4 years of economic slowdown. Can't figure out how to make people hand over their money for your "thing"? That's where you need "business idea" people who've honed their intuition from using everything in the market.
I predict you'll fail with whatever you try to startup AS LONG AS you have this attitude. A founder who used to be a former user and can point to the flaws in everything on the market and came up with a better solution is an IDEAL person to have start something. Their intuition is based on their experience of what people like them (ie, former customers) will PAY MONEY for. That's a business. Hackers hacking all night is not a business. Sorry to burst your bubble.
You can't be more wrong. You only get PRACTICAL, USEFULL business ideas AS a customer/user. That's why 99.99% of programmers who start businesses flop - they're so wrapped up in some tiny aspect of their warped reality and how their awesome code makes a tiny part of it a bit better in ways nobody understands, that they never stop and think that 99.99% of the general population of who they think will be their customers couldn't care less.
That's if they even bother to think about who their customers will be. Most programmers can't think beyond "users" and I'm sorry, but now that we're entering recession times, you'll learn really quick that users does NOT equal same as paying customer.
The sad truth for you is that most successful companies were started by people without the technical skills but who were users of many things, had a "big picture perspective" and thought to themselves, "You know what sucks about the current state of things, this, this and that - someone should make something different like this and this."
Otherwise, from your model, you just have programmers making something most likely nobody will care about. That's not a company, that's code. If you get some users, that may a service, by which I mean of the charity kind. If they pay you, that's a product, though not necessarily a successful company.
HERE - FORGET MY THESIS - imagine instead this scenario - let's say all the "big idea" people went on some Atlas shrugged type of strike. That leaves you programmers in boston, and those in virginia, in New York, S.V, and about a hundred million others in Russia, Eastern Europe, India, China, Netherlands, Ireland, France ...
If the idea people are that irrelevant to starting great companies, and programmers are that all-important, why don't you guys all get together, form some sort of super development virtual company and spit out 50 million uber-companies all based on your awesome code?
I'll bet 50 idea people in various industries will start successful companies that MAKE MONEY for every 1 programmer with a brilliant algorithm to load YouTube videos 2% faster or whatever passes for a great business idea among hackers these days that manages to fool some desperate, inexperienced VC to put money into their project.
FINAL ANALYSIS: Masons build, but building without a good plan leads to well-executed crap. No inspired architect/designer, no beauty, no inspirational "thing" that PAYING customers can wrap their minds around. I've said it before and I'll say it again: just because you get "users" and maybe bought out by Mega-Corp. doesn't mean you've created a successful company. Get people to pay you money for your thing, that's a business. Otherwise, just a delusion that will never survive the next 4 years of economic slowdown. Can't figure out how to make people hand over their money for your "thing"? That's where you need "business idea" people who've honed their intuition from using everything in the market.
"... I knew I would probably get attacked on this post in some way. I am not naive and I do realize my limitations. Additionally, in a business you are looking ideally for individuals who complement yourself in skills (i.e. one business person, one technology person). ..."
Hi Mel, normally I'd be ripping into a "business" founder as well. Well until I was re-reading "Founders at Work" [0] and come across Mitch Kapor. It made for very interesting reading and totally made me re-think non-tech founders. You see Mitch came into developing right at the start of the Apple ][ software building a companion bit of software for VisiCalc called VisiPlot (TIny Troll).
Then several things happened that played to his advantage mainly through other people severely underestimating his technical & business abilities. A) He was bought out of the royalty agreement for his licensed software (US$1.2M), convinced them his non-compete was not applicable to their product, hired key technical staff to re-build another product with spread sheeting & graphing & releasing the product as a second generation product to the new IBM PC.
Now I really must have glossed over this bit the first time. I didn't realise Mitch was a non-technical. He was completely underestimated and written off by people with "technical". So what did Mitch really do that stood out?
- created product
- recognised that change (new hardware) brings opportunity
- could read people better than given credit
- recognising technical weakness & hiring well
- killer business instinct
So don't let the negative replies curb your determination. Now 2 questions. Are you still at school or have contact with places where people learn to get a co-founder? Is the fact that best friends (potential co-founders) are normally of the same sex a key factor in finding a co-founder?
[0] Jessica Livingston, Founders at work, Ch6 Mitch Kapor, pp 90-93
[1] Ibid, p91. In the Apple ][ there was not enough memory to save data b/w applications and Mitch saw the potential key technology enabling seamless data transfer via floppies.
[2] Ibid p92.
Hi Mel, normally I'd be ripping into a "business" founder as well. Well until I was re-reading "Founders at Work" [0] and come across Mitch Kapor. It made for very interesting reading and totally made me re-think non-tech founders. You see Mitch came into developing right at the start of the Apple ][ software building a companion bit of software for VisiCalc called VisiPlot (TIny Troll).
'... I was totally ignorant how long things took
I had no background in computer science. I
was self-taught -- I was still writing in Basic. I
had no management experience; I was in
business school ... I was a transcendental
meditation teacher and a mental health
officer ...' [0]
Then several things happened that played to his advantage mainly through other people severely underestimating his technical & business abilities. A) He was bought out of the royalty agreement for his licensed software (US$1.2M), convinced them his non-compete was not applicable to their product, hired key technical staff to re-build another product with spread sheeting & graphing & releasing the product as a second generation product to the new IBM PC.
Now I really must have glossed over this bit the first time. I didn't realise Mitch was a non-technical. He was completely underestimated and written off by people with "technical". So what did Mitch really do that stood out?
- created product
- recognised that change (new hardware) brings opportunity
- could read people better than given credit
- recognising technical weakness & hiring well
- killer business instinct
So don't let the negative replies curb your determination. Now 2 questions. Are you still at school or have contact with places where people learn to get a co-founder? Is the fact that best friends (potential co-founders) are normally of the same sex a key factor in finding a co-founder?
[0] Jessica Livingston, Founders at work, Ch6 Mitch Kapor, pp 90-93
[1] Ibid, p91. In the Apple ][ there was not enough memory to save data b/w applications and Mitch saw the potential key technology enabling seamless data transfer via floppies.
[2] Ibid p92.
I did not mean to attack, sorry if you took it that way. Just trying to give you honest feedback.
"What is wrong with 1 non-programmer + 1 hacker sharing equity equally?"
Nothing if you can find someone to do it. Great deal for you.
No one is accusing you of "twiddling my thumbs". Your mere presence here suggests otherwise.
I'm only suggesting that in the earliest stages, 90% (or more) of the work that has to be done is hacking, pure and simple. This would be like me opening a hair salon and splitting equity with someone who knows how to cut hair. Sure, there's lots of other stuff to do, but the main thing that needs to get done is hair cutting.
Maybe with advanced tools, outsourcing, and some quick learning, you can prove me wrong. I sense from your posts you're the kind of person you can.
Again, I hope you find your match and find great success. Keep us posted. (And someday, come back and let me know how wrong I was.)
"What is wrong with 1 non-programmer + 1 hacker sharing equity equally?"
Nothing if you can find someone to do it. Great deal for you.
No one is accusing you of "twiddling my thumbs". Your mere presence here suggests otherwise.
I'm only suggesting that in the earliest stages, 90% (or more) of the work that has to be done is hacking, pure and simple. This would be like me opening a hair salon and splitting equity with someone who knows how to cut hair. Sure, there's lots of other stuff to do, but the main thing that needs to get done is hair cutting.
Maybe with advanced tools, outsourcing, and some quick learning, you can prove me wrong. I sense from your posts you're the kind of person you can.
Again, I hope you find your match and find great success. Keep us posted. (And someday, come back and let me know how wrong I was.)
Thanks :) Didn't mean to sound defensive. I posted expecting responses similar to yours. Initially I was naive but a little networking in the tech community solved that pretty quickly.
Don't take this the wrong way ... but I've had an inside perspective on how investors (who actually write checks, not blog articles about how cool they are) think. You'd be shocked to discover what little value they place on your code. And investors are not even the most important part of starting a business - customers are. They could care even less than investors do. If coding was that all-important, why doesn't every hacker code their way to multi-million dollar success stories? IF ONLY STARTING A BUSINESS was as easy as you say. I've been and am in a similar position, have come across COUNTLESS "hackers" with their own pet project, and coming up now a little over a year after they've all turned me down, amazingly, nobody cares about their excellent code - just like a year ago, and probably a year from now. Yes, product development is important. But alone it gets you nowhere. You need communication skills, ability to motivate during hard times, ability to redirect hostility and stress found at many startups, ability to sense people's needs (for example, most people I've ever met that write more checks than blogs about themselves as investors usually have manic-depressive natures and are looking for the "high" of being involved in something cool/worthwile/humanitarian/state-of-the-art). You need awesome design skills, ability present information in ways that make sense to non-technical users. You need ability to document work processes that keep everybody current and on-track. You need to be able to follow massive amounts of information to figure out who is likely to enter your space and where your space might branch off 6 months / a year etc. You need the ability to quickly figure out countless people and pitch them on their secret desires, not your startup. You need to be able to respond to massive, systematic changes in the market that can render your entire business model useless and be able to quickly figure out a whole new business from scratch that can still be built with dwindling resources. You need to be able to write countless business plans at a moment's notice in case you get interest from who knows where who knows when. You need to be able to figure out how to cheaply or freely market to your customers while overcoming a decade's worth of internet-enabled skepticism. TELL ME, who the hell is doing all of these things and countless more things I forgot to mention while you're busy coding? Or do you plan on doing these things "after you're done" coding? If so, how can you compete with a startup that has people doing all these things WHILE their programmers code?
"Great deal for you." If someone does years of market research, comes up with a clever way to make money and beat potential competitors and figures out a way to get money to finance the project, you think it's a "great deal for them" if they get 50% of a company they start while a hacker hacks, as if though the hacker is doing them a favor? Do you have any idea how many 1-person hacker companies trying to sell their "product" (ie, code) with no users to a larger company I have come across while looking for programmers for my startup effort? As much as you may hate hearing this, remember all those snobby ivy-league MBAs during the dot-com bust that thought they were a gift to the rest of us, you know, the ones hackers hate? You've replaced them. You're the next version of them, and 10 years from now I guarantee you as the dollar falls and your value to the market is reduced exponentially as more and more eastern-european/chinese/indians are graduating with PHDs and work histories for major overseas companies starting from even high school all the way through their grad programs, I guarantee you you will be replaced by another class that will recall, "Remember the days a decade ago when programmers thought they were God's gift to the world just because they could do what a billion foreigners with better educations can do just as well, or better these days?" Hubris cometh before the fall, amigo, and you U.S. based programming gurus have cornered the market on it.
"Great deal for you." If someone does years of market research, comes up with a clever way to make money and beat potential competitors and figures out a way to get money to finance the project, you think it's a "great deal for them" if they get 50% of a company they start while a hacker hacks, as if though the hacker is doing them a favor? Do you have any idea how many 1-person hacker companies trying to sell their "product" (ie, code) with no users to a larger company I have come across while looking for programmers for my startup effort? As much as you may hate hearing this, remember all those snobby ivy-league MBAs during the dot-com bust that thought they were a gift to the rest of us, you know, the ones hackers hate? You've replaced them. You're the next version of them, and 10 years from now I guarantee you as the dollar falls and your value to the market is reduced exponentially as more and more eastern-european/chinese/indians are graduating with PHDs and work histories for major overseas companies starting from even high school all the way through their grad programs, I guarantee you you will be replaced by another class that will recall, "Remember the days a decade ago when programmers thought they were God's gift to the world just because they could do what a billion foreigners with better educations can do just as well, or better these days?" Hubris cometh before the fall, amigo, and you U.S. based programming gurus have cornered the market on it.
I respectfully disagree with edw519.
While your assessment that you are indeed not a "programmer" may be technically accurate, but, if this is you:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/2/B06/B99
then I think you sufficiently qualify under a very broad definition of a hacker, or, alternatively, you are quite technical yourself. While you may currently feel you need a co-founder for your project who is a "programmer", you should not sell yourself short.
One thing you should strongly consider is just plunging in and trying to code for yourself. Take a look at this article regarding the founder of Plentyoffish.com. Mssr. Frind built the site while learning to program. See, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/business/13digi.html?_r=2&...
So one approach would be to learn to program while you put the site together. While this may be rough in the beginning and ultimately result in total failure, you will at least (a) know more about what goes into making a web app (generally) and (b) when you seek a technical co-founder you can be much more precise and clear about what you need.
As for languages, Ruby on Rails or Python would both be great. But, just for fun, take a look at Arc http://arclanguage.org/
Hope that helps.
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/2/B06/B99
then I think you sufficiently qualify under a very broad definition of a hacker, or, alternatively, you are quite technical yourself. While you may currently feel you need a co-founder for your project who is a "programmer", you should not sell yourself short.
One thing you should strongly consider is just plunging in and trying to code for yourself. Take a look at this article regarding the founder of Plentyoffish.com. Mssr. Frind built the site while learning to program. See, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/business/13digi.html?_r=2&...
So one approach would be to learn to program while you put the site together. While this may be rough in the beginning and ultimately result in total failure, you will at least (a) know more about what goes into making a web app (generally) and (b) when you seek a technical co-founder you can be much more precise and clear about what you need.
As for languages, Ruby on Rails or Python would both be great. But, just for fun, take a look at Arc http://arclanguage.org/
Hope that helps.
Thanks for the advice. Right now, I would like to continue in my hunt for a co-founder but do plan on trying to pick up some knowledge of programming even if I do find someone to work with.
regardless of whether you have previous knowledge or not, if you're willing to program (whether it's front end or back) and you do learn, even if it is on the fly, for this project... then maybe a 50 50 split does make sense...
Any suggestions on things to read so I can start to learn. I am going to buy a book on rails (agile web development). Know of joel on software. Programming.reddit.com. Anything else?
I've been working on a big project involving Adobe Flex for the past year. Before we started the project, they brought in Adobe trainers for 5-days of on-site, slightly-better-than-powerpoint Flex training. Too much information - from one topic to the next. We all knew no Flex. Theoretically, we could have learned Flex from the online tutorials but after the recovering from the deluge of 5-days of Flex we could claim plausible knowledge. Then, we sat on it for 4 months - no flex. Of course, not until we started trying to develop UIs using Adobe Flex 4 months later did we start to learn (painfully). But the training got us started.
The point of this little story - get help, ask questions (hacker personalities are problem solvers and love to solve problems), but get started. Training and mentoring can help bootstrap it. Ask a friend who is a programmer to help get you started.
You seem like a good writer - why not write a blog about learning enough about programming to build your own web application?
The point of this little story - get help, ask questions (hacker personalities are problem solvers and love to solve problems), but get started. Training and mentoring can help bootstrap it. Ask a friend who is a programmer to help get you started.
You seem like a good writer - why not write a blog about learning enough about programming to build your own web application?
I prefer Python to Ruby, but language choice is another topic entirely. There are a number of web frameworks for Python that are AT LEAST as useful as Rails, including Django and Pylons. In some ways, I think Django might be better for the type of site you seem to be interested in. Of course, I'm going mostly on assumptions...
I know there are a number of Python tutorials that were written specifically for scientists that are new to programming. I would think that a few tutorials that use practical examples from your own field would make the wall a bit easier to scale than a tutorial that just addresses complete noobs? I don't know of any similar "Programming for Scientists"-type tutorials for Ruby... (?)
There is also a good intro to programming book that uses Python (Zelle is the author) that was recently adopted by MIT. If you want a stronger foundation - but with a potentially slower payoff - you should look at htdp.org and SICP, both of which use Scheme.
I know there are a number of Python tutorials that were written specifically for scientists that are new to programming. I would think that a few tutorials that use practical examples from your own field would make the wall a bit easier to scale than a tutorial that just addresses complete noobs? I don't know of any similar "Programming for Scientists"-type tutorials for Ruby... (?)
There is also a good intro to programming book that uses Python (Zelle is the author) that was recently adopted by MIT. If you want a stronger foundation - but with a potentially slower payoff - you should look at htdp.org and SICP, both of which use Scheme.
I do agree with shooter that python is good technologically... but the problem with Python web frameworks is that there's no one official framework yet for python that's overwhelmingly popular in the python world (though someone can prove me wrong). The end result is that there aren't that many books on stuff like Django (compared to other technologies), which really sucks when you're just starting out.
Rails on the other hand has tons and tons of books. I just started a little less than a year ago and I've caught up fast because of the plethora of books and communities for Rails.
in the end, if you happen to find your partner quick - they may help you choose (that's probably the best route)
Forgot to mention - check out some video tutorials of Rails programming:
http://rubyonrails.com/screencasts
http://railscasts.com
http://peepcode.com (not free but really really good - they actually have 2 vids that covers all of the basics of Rails - in I think about 3-5 hours; you're not goign to remember all of it in the 1st run but it gets u comfy)
a decent list of resources
http://railshandbook.com/
http://rubyinside.com
http://dzone.com
http://poignantguide.net/ruby/ -funny and useful intro into ruby itself
Rails on the other hand has tons and tons of books. I just started a little less than a year ago and I've caught up fast because of the plethora of books and communities for Rails.
in the end, if you happen to find your partner quick - they may help you choose (that's probably the best route)
Forgot to mention - check out some video tutorials of Rails programming:
http://rubyonrails.com/screencasts
http://railscasts.com
http://peepcode.com (not free but really really good - they actually have 2 vids that covers all of the basics of Rails - in I think about 3-5 hours; you're not goign to remember all of it in the 1st run but it gets u comfy)
a decent list of resources
http://railshandbook.com/
http://rubyinside.com
http://dzone.com
http://poignantguide.net/ruby/ -funny and useful intro into ruby itself
How many books do you need for a web framework?
Django is pretty simple. There's already the official book in print. Not to mention one of the reasons Rails has so many books to begin with was due to really poor online documentation. Django doesn't have that problem.
Usually I think havings lots of printed documentation is very important, but in Django's case, due to its simplicity and quality of existing docs, I don't think it is an issue.
Django is pretty simple. There's already the official book in print. Not to mention one of the reasons Rails has so many books to begin with was due to really poor online documentation. Django doesn't have that problem.
Usually I think havings lots of printed documentation is very important, but in Django's case, due to its simplicity and quality of existing docs, I don't think it is an issue.
different people learn in different ways just like different people teach the same subject in different ways. To me having more variety helps out a lot.
Techwise - Rails and Django are more or less the same (compared to the other stuff out there). Rails just has a bigger community than Django. I think that really helps for someone just starting out (with a deadline to boot)
Techwise - Rails and Django are more or less the same (compared to the other stuff out there). Rails just has a bigger community than Django. I think that really helps for someone just starting out (with a deadline to boot)
There's even more books on Java. Maybe you should pick that up :) take a look at some tutorials if you want to learn python web programming. It doesn't take a book to START making useful sites with something like Pylons.
Maybe I should start offering some Pylons lessons online (for free, just to spread the love).
Maybe I should start offering some Pylons lessons online (for free, just to spread the love).
well Ruby and Python are near equivalent - so it's unfair to bring up the java point...
Great sites are nice but you shouldn't discount the power of books in the very very beginning of learning when you're not on your Nth programming language. I think u and I are so far off now that we forgot what it was like starting out...
Great sites are nice but you shouldn't discount the power of books in the very very beginning of learning when you're not on your Nth programming language. I think u and I are so far off now that we forgot what it was like starting out...
I'd rather have a few good books and "tons and tons" of quality libraries.
I also think that having a choice among frameworks is a good thing.
I also think that having a choice among frameworks is a good thing.
imho Rails has that too
besides the Python community is in the midst of consolidating web frameworks... there's a reason for that
I could be wrong but doesn't Django only have one book? Do the other Python frameworks even have a book for them (as opposed to chapter or two in a general programming book)?
besides the Python community is in the midst of consolidating web frameworks... there's a reason for that
I could be wrong but doesn't Django only have one book? Do the other Python frameworks even have a book for them (as opposed to chapter or two in a general programming book)?
To get started with Rails, learn at least minimal Ruby first:
http://tryruby.hobix.com/ Read "Programming Ruby" part I
http://tryruby.hobix.com/ Read "Programming Ruby" part I
Find something that has you start AND finish something, anything. Almost any O'Reilly book. Read the reviews on Amazon to see if it's the right thing. Webmonkey also has lots of beginner tutorials. The technology doesn't matter. The important thing is to try to BUILD something, fail (or not), and finally get it working. The first time you see something YOU wrote actually work, it's orgasmic.
An oldie but goodie:
http://webmonkey.com/webmonkey/programming/php/tutorials/tut...
You can't get wet from the word "water".
An oldie but goodie:
http://webmonkey.com/webmonkey/programming/php/tutorials/tut...
You can't get wet from the word "water".
Yeh, that's an awesome idea - let's get rid of the insights Ford gained from the assembly line and toss out about a century's worth of industrial progress and all drop what we're doing and waste time re-inventing each other's wheels. That will really help bring thing about much more efficiently. Tell me, once you're done with your product, do you see yourself going to a VC for funding only to have the VC tell you in return, "You want money from me? Well, I don't know - if you're willing to spend years learning how to raise money from institutional investors all over the world, I might be willing to look at your proposal, otherwise, well, it's not worth it for me."
Maybe you need a CEO with relevant experience. I hope the people who you approach turn around and tell you, "Gee, you're a noob when it comes to building/growing/managing a business - tell you what, why don't you first invest some time and become an executive at a Fortune 500 company like me, then I'll consider helping you out by adding my credibility to your "startup" which is basically just a bunch of code. Call me in 10 years when you're the EVP of a company whose products I use."
This is why we need "big idea business people." Leave it up to you guys and your "prove your worthiness to me first" approach to life and the world would fall apart.
Geesh - imagine going to a doctor or surgeon only to have them tell you, "Well, tell you what - if you're willing to go to med school, I might operate on you. Otherwise, you're not worthy of my effort."
Maybe you need a CEO with relevant experience. I hope the people who you approach turn around and tell you, "Gee, you're a noob when it comes to building/growing/managing a business - tell you what, why don't you first invest some time and become an executive at a Fortune 500 company like me, then I'll consider helping you out by adding my credibility to your "startup" which is basically just a bunch of code. Call me in 10 years when you're the EVP of a company whose products I use."
This is why we need "big idea business people." Leave it up to you guys and your "prove your worthiness to me first" approach to life and the world would fall apart.
Geesh - imagine going to a doctor or surgeon only to have them tell you, "Well, tell you what - if you're willing to go to med school, I might operate on you. Otherwise, you're not worthy of my effort."
I'm not saying that engineers don't need business people at all, but they do need competent business people. Either the business person in question is charismatic enough to convince or he has a proven track record or he already has money (from convincing investors). from your perspective would you partner/hire an engineer who can't build something. you can guage who's a solid engineer by what they've built, as oppose to just what they claim...
on another point, when u don't have a product yet does it always make sense to get someone to start selling it before it's there in every situation (as opposed to getting someone to help you build it)?
"imagine going to a doctor or surgeon only to have them tell you, "Well, tell you what - if you're willing to go to med school, I might operate on you. Otherwise, you're not worthy of my effort.""
that's a bad analogy, considering patients are doctors' customers
on another point, when u don't have a product yet does it always make sense to get someone to start selling it before it's there in every situation (as opposed to getting someone to help you build it)?
"imagine going to a doctor or surgeon only to have them tell you, "Well, tell you what - if you're willing to go to med school, I might operate on you. Otherwise, you're not worthy of my effort.""
that's a bad analogy, considering patients are doctors' customers
> but they do need competent business people
But most business competence is recognized in retrospect. How many Harvard MBAs with awesome corporate track records do you see starting awesome companys which make products you love? Like, almost none?
> to convince or he has a proven track record or he already has money
"proven track records" are what jealous people who inherit money to start investment funds look for to make business starters feel small. Tell me, based on the "track record" of Steve Jobs/Woz, Howard Shultz (door-to-door expresso machine salesperson), Richard Branson, and God knows who else, would you invest a penny in their "I dropped out of college/never went to chase my dream of beating huge, well-financed, well established companies on their own turf by doing something unproven" ideas? I bet not. But you'd be very rich if you did.
> from your perspective would you partner/hire an engineer who can't build something. you can guage who's a solid engineer by what they've built, as oppose to just what they claim...
But most people just showcase what they CAN build, which, in my experience, rarely translates into the ability to build what they've never built before.
>on another point, when u don't have a product yet does it always make sense to get someone to start selling it before it's there in every situation (as opposed to getting someone to help you build it)?
Sure. I'd gladly pick an awesome salesperson who can pre-sell it to 100,000 paying customers over 10 of the best programmers working away day and night all the time. That salesperson's ability will get me the money to tell VCs to go to hell and then have plenty left to hire the best programmers I can find. The programmers, meanwhile, don't guarantee anybody will buy it once its done.
>that's a bad analogy, considering patients are doctors' customers
Not really. Most surgeons make enough money to not have to work for the money and do it for the challenge/love. Imagine they got offended at everyone's lack of medical knowledge.
But most business competence is recognized in retrospect. How many Harvard MBAs with awesome corporate track records do you see starting awesome companys which make products you love? Like, almost none?
> to convince or he has a proven track record or he already has money
"proven track records" are what jealous people who inherit money to start investment funds look for to make business starters feel small. Tell me, based on the "track record" of Steve Jobs/Woz, Howard Shultz (door-to-door expresso machine salesperson), Richard Branson, and God knows who else, would you invest a penny in their "I dropped out of college/never went to chase my dream of beating huge, well-financed, well established companies on their own turf by doing something unproven" ideas? I bet not. But you'd be very rich if you did.
> from your perspective would you partner/hire an engineer who can't build something. you can guage who's a solid engineer by what they've built, as oppose to just what they claim...
But most people just showcase what they CAN build, which, in my experience, rarely translates into the ability to build what they've never built before.
>on another point, when u don't have a product yet does it always make sense to get someone to start selling it before it's there in every situation (as opposed to getting someone to help you build it)?
Sure. I'd gladly pick an awesome salesperson who can pre-sell it to 100,000 paying customers over 10 of the best programmers working away day and night all the time. That salesperson's ability will get me the money to tell VCs to go to hell and then have plenty left to hire the best programmers I can find. The programmers, meanwhile, don't guarantee anybody will buy it once its done.
>that's a bad analogy, considering patients are doctors' customers
Not really. Most surgeons make enough money to not have to work for the money and do it for the challenge/love. Imagine they got offended at everyone's lack of medical knowledge.
"How many Harvard MBAs with awesome corporate track records do you see starting awesome companys which make products you love?"
well a lot of them tend to join big established corporations... not to mention many successful entreprenuers don't have MBAs let alone degrees
"tell me, based on the "track record" of Steve Jobs/Woz, Howard Shultz (door-to-door expresso machine salesperson), Richard Branson,"
well I mentioned charisma right? Jobs and Branson are bad examples for your argument, since they are extremely charismatic - hell they're legendary for it
" most people just showcase what they CAN build"
better than empty words...
"Sure. I'd gladly pick an awesome salesperson who can pre-sell it to 100,000 paying customers "
what if it doesn't get built after you presold?
"Most surgeons make enough money to not have to work for the money and do it for the challenge/love"
well all the doctors I know from college have a lot of bills to pay, which don't include the extremely high cost of malpractice insurance.... =)
well a lot of them tend to join big established corporations... not to mention many successful entreprenuers don't have MBAs let alone degrees
"tell me, based on the "track record" of Steve Jobs/Woz, Howard Shultz (door-to-door expresso machine salesperson), Richard Branson,"
well I mentioned charisma right? Jobs and Branson are bad examples for your argument, since they are extremely charismatic - hell they're legendary for it
" most people just showcase what they CAN build"
better than empty words...
"Sure. I'd gladly pick an awesome salesperson who can pre-sell it to 100,000 paying customers "
what if it doesn't get built after you presold?
"Most surgeons make enough money to not have to work for the money and do it for the challenge/love"
well all the doctors I know from college have a lot of bills to pay, which don't include the extremely high cost of malpractice insurance.... =)
> well a lot of them tend to join big established corporations... not to mention many successful entreprenuers don't have MBAs let alone degrees
Exactly. Hence, track records are useless. Unless you have a track record of starting big successful companies. Nobody who has that would bother talking to programmers. They'd hire them to wash their ferraris for the entertainment value.
>well I mentioned charisma right? Jobs and Branson are bad examples for your argument, since they are extremely charismatic - hell they're legendary for it
Psst! AFTER they get rich it's called "charisma" .. until then, it's called being a loon. Take away fame and money and "charisma" suddenly = annoying personality.
> better than empty words...
Not really. I can build the biggest house of cards you ever saw. Not sure how that makes me money. Same thing with most applications I've seen programmers show me when they told me they're too busy to build my thing. Awesome. Profound. They even convinced me their solutions were technically superior to everyting. I can't figure out who'd give them any money for it, so in the end they amount to the same thing as my house of cards or "empty words" , ie, nothing anybody would actually buy.
> what if it doesn't get built after you presold?
Um, well, if programmers are still too snobby here after I got 100,000 people to pay me for it up front, (a) they're too stupid to hire because they don't realize the value of 100,000 people willing to pay you before it's even built and (b) I'd use the money to fly to Russia and spend 3 months finding programmers there.
> well all the doctors I know from college have a lot of bills to pay, which don't include the extremely high cost of malpractice insurance.... =)
Doctors, maybe. Surgeons, I doubt. Most surgeons can pay off med school with 1-few proceedures, depending on the nature.
> extremely high cost of malpractice insurance.... =)
I don't think the doctors themselves pay that - the hospitals / private companies which own/manage them these days do that.
Exactly. Hence, track records are useless. Unless you have a track record of starting big successful companies. Nobody who has that would bother talking to programmers. They'd hire them to wash their ferraris for the entertainment value.
>well I mentioned charisma right? Jobs and Branson are bad examples for your argument, since they are extremely charismatic - hell they're legendary for it
Psst! AFTER they get rich it's called "charisma" .. until then, it's called being a loon. Take away fame and money and "charisma" suddenly = annoying personality.
> better than empty words...
Not really. I can build the biggest house of cards you ever saw. Not sure how that makes me money. Same thing with most applications I've seen programmers show me when they told me they're too busy to build my thing. Awesome. Profound. They even convinced me their solutions were technically superior to everyting. I can't figure out who'd give them any money for it, so in the end they amount to the same thing as my house of cards or "empty words" , ie, nothing anybody would actually buy.
> what if it doesn't get built after you presold?
Um, well, if programmers are still too snobby here after I got 100,000 people to pay me for it up front, (a) they're too stupid to hire because they don't realize the value of 100,000 people willing to pay you before it's even built and (b) I'd use the money to fly to Russia and spend 3 months finding programmers there.
> well all the doctors I know from college have a lot of bills to pay, which don't include the extremely high cost of malpractice insurance.... =)
Doctors, maybe. Surgeons, I doubt. Most surgeons can pay off med school with 1-few proceedures, depending on the nature.
> extremely high cost of malpractice insurance.... =)
I don't think the doctors themselves pay that - the hospitals / private companies which own/manage them these days do that.
I agree. ideas are cheap (and they tend to change too). unless the idea requires a lot of biz dev (sales), I also fail to see the logic of a 50 50 split - unless money is involved
Do a 25-25 split (26 maybe, to have >50%) and hold the rest in the company so you don't lose control as you begin funding yourselves.
Startups (tech startups specifically) are a pass/fail course. You either all get money, or all get nothing (taken from one of PGs essays I'm sure). It's pointless to argue over equity except in order to keep control.
Startups (tech startups specifically) are a pass/fail course. You either all get money, or all get nothing (taken from one of PGs essays I'm sure). It's pointless to argue over equity except in order to keep control.
What split do you think is fair here? Assuming both are working hard on the idea?
50/50
Don't let anyone tell you can't do it, where there is a will there is way. I do have to say that if you don't find someone if you are serious about this you should build a prototype yourself. I think even if doesn't become the actual site , the experience you will learn will be invaluable. Also if I was a person who you were recruiting it would impress me that you cared that much to learn. Plus you ability to communicate with a technical co-founder will be that much better. I also think don't underestimate the power of prototype to get you funding.
Although not having a programmer on your team as a founder will hurt your chances if you're applying to YC, if your idea is sound and you are flexible you could always hire someone (even contract someone or outsource it) to build your idea, just make sure that person is pretty invested in making a good product, not just "doing a job". In addition to regular pay, you should still offer a good amount of equity (non-controlling) in the company that he's building for.
Put another way: A good way to find a programmer who could turn into a business partner is to start on your own and hire contractors. Eventually you'll find one who really gets along well with you and has a similar vision as you do. At this point (and after you've experienced "working" with him) you could bring him on as a partner and viola, you've got a programming co-founder.
Put another way: A good way to find a programmer who could turn into a business partner is to start on your own and hire contractors. Eventually you'll find one who really gets along well with you and has a similar vision as you do. At this point (and after you've experienced "working" with him) you could bring him on as a partner and viola, you've got a programming co-founder.
Yeah. I would not apply to ycombinator without a programming co-founder (I am going to apply to launchboxdigital though).
Definately have considered "hiring" someone, but I wanted to exhaust trying to find a co-founder first.
Definately have considered "hiring" someone, but I wanted to exhaust trying to find a co-founder first.
http://www.projectwedding.com/
a YC related company
a YC related company
Yup. Know Y combinator funded them. Actually, brings up another point. Curious what people think about applying to ycombinator if they have funded a potential competitor of your company in the past??
PG answered this in a post that I cannot find, but they don't share info between companies and they generally don't fund companies that do EXACTLY what someone else before did (e.g. Weebly again).
Applying is okay though.
Applying is okay though.
I don't think I said we wouldn't fund a co that did exactly the same thing as a previous one. The real answer is that we rarely (never, so far) get two companies doing exactly the same thing. They may be in the same general business, but they tend to each have their own approach to it, and any good market has room for multiple companies approaching it from different directions.
E.g. Snipshot and Splashup. Both are web-based imaged editors, but the similarity ends there. Snipshot is an easy editor for end users. Splashup is Photoshop.
E.g. Snipshot and Splashup. Both are web-based imaged editors, but the similarity ends there. Snipshot is an easy editor for end users. Splashup is Photoshop.
How long do you think it would take for YC to run out of markets if they limited it to one company per? It's fine, unless you're aiming for a direct ripoff (at least, that's my opinion! ;-) )
YC is an investment company. They certainly do help their investments to do well, but I don't think they would keep from funding a similar company if they think it will increase their potential return.
After all, they expect a good deal of their companies to fail. If they didn't fail because of the idea then doubling up through a similar company is a good way to increase their odds. They might not fund competitors in the same cycle though.
After all, they expect a good deal of their companies to fail. If they didn't fail because of the idea then doubling up through a similar company is a good way to increase their odds. They might not fund competitors in the same cycle though.
There has been discussion about this, and replies by PG, but I failed to find the threads. The outcome was that YC can fund two companies in the same field.
I think 1 business geek + 1 hacker has better chance of success than 2 business hacker. Paypal was founded on a similar model. However, what often happens is one partner tends to underestimate the hacker - either the business geek finds the hacker useless or vice versa. I guess some level of understanding and respect is an important element in any partnership.
Underestimating "the other's value" is a sign of immaturity and lack of experience. The more I learn about life, the more I appreciate everyone around me more. I'm sure lots of people underestimate civil engineers, car designers, pilots, surgeons, micro-biologists, etc. because life is complex and we have no idea how challenging people's contributions are and how they affect us. Having said that, IMHO it's usually hackers who underestimate everyone else's contributions ... until they get to the point where nobody's signing up for their "thing" or they have people sign up, but nobody's willing to pay them for it. THEN the value of business models, marketing expertise, sales techniques, etc. come into perspective, when they realize all the tweaking in the world doesn't necessarily translate into the handing over of the cash from paying customers.
I'm just curious how you came about this site? This doesn't seem the most general entrepreneurial site out there.
sidenote: seems googling "news yc" no longer asks if I meant "news NYC"
sidenote: seems googling "news yc" no longer asks if I meant "news NYC"
Anybody else read that as "wedding" or "niche space travel"? Talk about an unfocused startup...
Are people not allowed to have more than one idea at once?
You do realize that people have weddings in exotic locations, which = travel ... and then right AFTER the wedding they go on these things called "Honeymoons" which involve travel, right? So then, yeh, weddings and niche travel would tend to complement each other perfectly for a business like this.
Right. Downgrade my post. I made a perfectly valid, succint point, insulted nobody, pointed to a flaw in the logic, supported the original logic, and just because you disagree and can't defend your own logic you click off a point. Feel powerful, do you? You showed me!
I will be upfront. I am not a programmer but I do have what I consider to be strong ideas and have done extensive research on my ideas/web startups. I know what you are thinking. Business person who overestimates their value to company. No. I will divide equity equally with the right person and am not only looking for someone to develop the site but for a true business partner. Additionally, I would like to, if possible, apply to ycombinator for the summer.
If you are interested in discussing my ideas further, feel free to email me (address below). Also, I am interested in hearing about people's experiences working on teams where one person was a technologist and the other person was not or advice regarding my search for a technology co-founder.
Thanks.
[email protected]