How to save money running a startup(calacanis.com)
calacanis.com
How to save money running a startup
http://calacanis.com/2008/03/07/how-to-save-money-running-a-startup-17-really-good-tips/
16 comments
1. Hire a competent but old programmer who has debt, and a wife and kids. Pay him well.
It's actionable age discrimination, but go ahead. You gotta break some eggs if you want to make an omelette.
9. Make your team friendly. If there is a socially akward or shy guy who does not relate with the other members of the team, fire him
It's actionable discrimination and a shitty thing to do to an otherwise valuable but shy person, but he's too shy to bring this to your attention or to hire a lawyer, so it's a win-win. (Again, eggs->omelette.)
12. Take the money you make and put it back in company development. Keep the teams small and unified as you grow.
Also, breathe air, drink water, and eat food.
15. Take the guys in the startup to strip clubs. Get them laid.
Again, actionable sexual harassment, but you're a nouveau web entrepreneur and therefore not concerned about things like legal liabilities. Let IBM, Microsoft, and other old school outfits worry about things like that. Besides, you're saving so much money by doing this that you can afford the suit.
I feel like I've fallen victim to a motivational seminar version of Poe's law.
It's actionable age discrimination, but go ahead. You gotta break some eggs if you want to make an omelette.
9. Make your team friendly. If there is a socially akward or shy guy who does not relate with the other members of the team, fire him
It's actionable discrimination and a shitty thing to do to an otherwise valuable but shy person, but he's too shy to bring this to your attention or to hire a lawyer, so it's a win-win. (Again, eggs->omelette.)
12. Take the money you make and put it back in company development. Keep the teams small and unified as you grow.
Also, breathe air, drink water, and eat food.
15. Take the guys in the startup to strip clubs. Get them laid.
Again, actionable sexual harassment, but you're a nouveau web entrepreneur and therefore not concerned about things like legal liabilities. Let IBM, Microsoft, and other old school outfits worry about things like that. Besides, you're saving so much money by doing this that you can afford the suit.
I feel like I've fallen victim to a motivational seminar version of Poe's law.
<blockquote>9. Make your team friendly. If there is a socially akward or shy guy who does not relate with the other members of the team, fire him
It's actionable discrimination and a shitty thing to do to an otherwise valuable but shy person, but he's too shy to bring this to your attention or to hire a lawyer, so it's a win-win. (Again, eggs->omelette.)</blockquote>
I don't see anything actionable here unless he's a member of a protected class and can claim that's why it was done. Being shy is not protected. For that matter, it's not a shitty thing to do: he's bringing down the team. Sucks to be him, but if he's affecting productivity, out he goes.
It's actionable discrimination and a shitty thing to do to an otherwise valuable but shy person, but he's too shy to bring this to your attention or to hire a lawyer, so it's a win-win. (Again, eggs->omelette.)</blockquote>
I don't see anything actionable here unless he's a member of a protected class and can claim that's why it was done. Being shy is not protected. For that matter, it's not a shitty thing to do: he's bringing down the team. Sucks to be him, but if he's affecting productivity, out he goes.
Not to quibble, but there are disorders like Asperger's syndrome, social anxiety disorder, clinical depression, and so on. Many of these would qualify the person as handicapped and therefore a member of a protected class. If there's even a doubt, you might have to settle out to avoid legal fees or a potential defeat in court. Besides, reasonable accommodations are, by definition, reasonable. Maybe he/she can be one of the people that works odd hours to avoid others?
he's bringing down the team. Sucks to be him, but if he's affecting productivity, out he goes.
There was no mention of a productivity hit. We have to take the OP at his word that he/she meant, "If somebody isn't suave or outgoing enough, fire that person." I think I'd rather educate my team about diversity, tolerance, and respect than fire technically competent people who happen to like to keep their doors closed. If you have a team that requires all others to be social sophisticates and can't function in the face of shyness, then this is your second biggest problem after handling the inevitable discrimination suit for firing Joe Shy. Also, if I worked with me, I'd probably want some alone time, too.
There are just so many things wrong with point (9) that it's hard to get them all out. Here goes:
1) Team managers, unless highly skilled (and sometimes even then) don't always understand the factors that make their teams function/fail.
2) The aforementioned possible legal liability of insisting on a team of suaves.
3) The inadvisability of insisting on a team of suaves.
4) The presupposition that the person who is awkward/shy is the problem. Maybe (the hypothetical) you and your team are a gang of unproductive dicks?
5) Maybe you're productive dicks but it will never scale?
6) The whiny intolerance of anyone who's not having absolutely the easiest time of things.
7) The fact that none of this has ever been an issue on any team I've ever worked on?
8) The insipid notion that it's a zero sum game or that the only thing is the productivity or that you can improve productivity with misguided social engineering.
I could go on. I think that what it really comes down to is that I'd rather be the guy who succeeds by helping others succeed. Entrepreneurship is as much about finding value where others can't as it is about creating new value. That includes finding it in employees who are less than socially perfect.
he's bringing down the team. Sucks to be him, but if he's affecting productivity, out he goes.
There was no mention of a productivity hit. We have to take the OP at his word that he/she meant, "If somebody isn't suave or outgoing enough, fire that person." I think I'd rather educate my team about diversity, tolerance, and respect than fire technically competent people who happen to like to keep their doors closed. If you have a team that requires all others to be social sophisticates and can't function in the face of shyness, then this is your second biggest problem after handling the inevitable discrimination suit for firing Joe Shy. Also, if I worked with me, I'd probably want some alone time, too.
There are just so many things wrong with point (9) that it's hard to get them all out. Here goes:
1) Team managers, unless highly skilled (and sometimes even then) don't always understand the factors that make their teams function/fail.
2) The aforementioned possible legal liability of insisting on a team of suaves.
3) The inadvisability of insisting on a team of suaves.
4) The presupposition that the person who is awkward/shy is the problem. Maybe (the hypothetical) you and your team are a gang of unproductive dicks?
5) Maybe you're productive dicks but it will never scale?
6) The whiny intolerance of anyone who's not having absolutely the easiest time of things.
7) The fact that none of this has ever been an issue on any team I've ever worked on?
8) The insipid notion that it's a zero sum game or that the only thing is the productivity or that you can improve productivity with misguided social engineering.
I could go on. I think that what it really comes down to is that I'd rather be the guy who succeeds by helping others succeed. Entrepreneurship is as much about finding value where others can't as it is about creating new value. That includes finding it in employees who are less than socially perfect.
I think I'd rather educate my team about diversity, tolerance, and respect.
Sounds nice in theory, but in a startup you don't get points for being swell. The team needs to click, and if there are people that don't fit with the group dynamic socially, then that's already something working against you.
Fortunately the scene itself is pretty diverse. There are enough different sorts of founders out there that hire people like them that there's a place for shy and outgoing people to find a place to do their thing. I think the fallacy that kicked this off was that all founders are socialites. But if you've got founders that are socialites, they'll probably do better off with a team that is too.
For the record, I had one job that I didn't get because I would have slowed the rest of the team down (in that case it was because the rest of the team was German and I wasn't yet fluent in German). They were right not to hire me. They may have ended up hiring someone less qualified than me, but that made their team more cohesive.
Sounds nice in theory, but in a startup you don't get points for being swell. The team needs to click, and if there are people that don't fit with the group dynamic socially, then that's already something working against you.
Fortunately the scene itself is pretty diverse. There are enough different sorts of founders out there that hire people like them that there's a place for shy and outgoing people to find a place to do their thing. I think the fallacy that kicked this off was that all founders are socialites. But if you've got founders that are socialites, they'll probably do better off with a team that is too.
For the record, I had one job that I didn't get because I would have slowed the rest of the team down (in that case it was because the rest of the team was German and I wasn't yet fluent in German). They were right not to hire me. They may have ended up hiring someone less qualified than me, but that made their team more cohesive.
Besides, reasonable accommodations are, by definition, reasonable
You got me here! The reality is that unless we want to be totally balls-out mercenary and only follow the exact letter of the law, we have to treat people like human beings. And quite frankly, if I'm the person doing it, I'd rather pass on the millions than have to screw over the people I work with. There is Karma and I do have to live with myself.
You got me here! The reality is that unless we want to be totally balls-out mercenary and only follow the exact letter of the law, we have to treat people like human beings. And quite frankly, if I'm the person doing it, I'd rather pass on the millions than have to screw over the people I work with. There is Karma and I do have to live with myself.
What isn't discrimination? I agree with you - hire the the most talented people that make your company and team better. Ignore all the bullshit.
I was going to upvote the grandparent, and then I thought "Wait...he might be serious."
(#1) I'm not sure age discrimination works that way, does it? It's discrimination to not hire someone you think is too old, but what about too young?
15. Take the guys in the startup to strip clubs. Get them laid.
Getting your team laid AT a strip club does not sound like a good way to save money. Even without the, uh, soliciting of prostitution, I shudder to think of the strip clubs where one goes to "save money."
9. Make your team friendly. If there is a socially akward or shy guy who does not relate with the other members of the team, fire him
The startups I've worked at always had quite a few shy, socially awkward types (I've worked mostly at tech startups). We usually just invited these folks out to lunch and social gatherings and made them feel a part of the team. Perhaps we weren't being very economical...
Getting your team laid AT a strip club does not sound like a good way to save money. Even without the, uh, soliciting of prostitution, I shudder to think of the strip clubs where one goes to "save money."
9. Make your team friendly. If there is a socially akward or shy guy who does not relate with the other members of the team, fire him
The startups I've worked at always had quite a few shy, socially awkward types (I've worked mostly at tech startups). We usually just invited these folks out to lunch and social gatherings and made them feel a part of the team. Perhaps we weren't being very economical...
Shy and socially awkward in the "real world", fine. Shy and socially awkward in a crowd of hardcore geeks is cause for concern IMHO.
"15. Take the guys in the startup to strip clubs. Get them laid."
This was a great TicketStumbler company outing. I still think you should have good chairs (not necessarily Aeron). You're spending 1/3 of the day in them - get something nice.
This was a great TicketStumbler company outing. I still think you should have good chairs (not necessarily Aeron). You're spending 1/3 of the day in them - get something nice.
Thanks. I bookmarked your post, which is a whole lot more sensible than Calcanis' bullshit.
Calcanis has yet to demonstrate how Mahalo is different from 1990's era Yahoo. Until he can do that successfully, we can continue ignoring him.
Calcanis has yet to demonstrate how Mahalo is different from 1990's era Yahoo. Until he can do that successfully, we can continue ignoring him.
This proves my point that there are many, many people out there (no offense) who can provide more insight then the supposed "elite."
"1. Buy Macintosh computers, save money on an IT department"
# tail -f /var/log/messages
Oct 15 15:45:47 mike-laptop Bullshit detected.
# tail -f /var/log/messages
Oct 15 15:45:47 mike-laptop Bullshit detected.
I've developed professionally (like, at a company and stuff) on Linux, Windows, and OSX at my current gig. I do mostly Java and Open Source stuff like Python and Perl w/ Postgres. For me, Linux and OSX are about tied for most productive, with Windows coming in a close second. For the price, I think you'd be best off with Linux.
Having said that, I am a bit of a Mac fanboy, so they can pry my MacBook Pro at my current job from my cold, unemployed fingers. :)
Having said that, I am a bit of a Mac fanboy, so they can pry my MacBook Pro at my current job from my cold, unemployed fingers. :)
I'm sorry to say but for development a Linux machine is way more productive.
Expect for the learning how to use and set up Linux part, I would agree with you. I would say it takes about 10x longer for an amateur to become comfortable with Linux then OSX, which is a serious weak point in the productivity area.
If you're hiring amateur developers at your startup, then you're doing something wrong. If you're forcing experienced developers to use a particular OS because you read in some dumb blog post that it was a good idea, you're doing something wrong.
Really, I think on a small team, the best OS choice is the one that people know. There are very few cases where I can see OS dogmatism as being worth spending brain cycles on in an early-phase startup. If you're still small enough to all be eating at the same lunch table, you're also small enough that you don't need an IT policy.
Really, I think on a small team, the best OS choice is the one that people know. There are very few cases where I can see OS dogmatism as being worth spending brain cycles on in an early-phase startup. If you're still small enough to all be eating at the same lunch table, you're also small enough that you don't need an IT policy.
Even if that's the case, is how long it takes to become comfortable with an OS really an issue. Say it takes a user a day to become comfortable with OSX, it would take them by your estimate 10 days to be comfortable with Linux. That's not such a long time...
[deleted]
I find the idea of doing meetings over lunch horrible. The point of lunch is to switch off and recharge so that you can get going again in the afternoon.
Plus having an hour to recharge is more effective than 30 minutes. You may save 100 hours a year on lunch, but what do you lose in productivity and morale?
Plus having an hour to recharge is more effective than 30 minutes. You may save 100 hours a year on lunch, but what do you lose in productivity and morale?
You don't switch off and recharge in meetings? ;-)
Maybe you're thinking of the boring sort of meeting that has an agenda and 20 people there. Just eat lunch with people you work with and talk about work stuff.
I don't want to eat lunch with the people I work with. Go out for a beer afterward if I feel like it, sure, but during lunch, give me solitude, sun and a newspaper.
If he's trying to save money, why is he using the word "buy" so much?
Definitely agreed. "Learn to think cheap." has been important for us. "Money saving tips" that include Areon chairs and a several thousand dollar expresso machine are retarded. My co-founder wanted an external monitor for his laptop ... so he picked one up a 19" CRT for 5€ on eBay. We like expresso, so we have a 15€ coffee grinder and a 25€ mocha pot that goes on the stove. This isn't rocket science.
"so he picked one up a 19" CRT for 5€ on eBay."
Depending on what you do, a good monitor can actually help you earn money by making you either more efficient or enjoy your work more.
Depending on what you do, a good monitor can actually help you earn money by making you either more efficient or enjoy your work more.
So can Areon chairs. That doesn't mean that they're the most effective use of money. Really, this is a list of motivational tips, not money saving tips.
But even there, the sort of people I'd like to hire are much more excited about hard problems than fancy office accessories.
But even there, the sort of people I'd like to hire are much more excited about hard problems than fancy office accessories.
Not that I think all of his advice is sound, but every buy recommendation is followed by a justification of how much that item saves. Maybe you could save more through other means, but they are all, in theory, net savers.
For example, on the home economics front, I'd advise that you buy pots and pans at Target so you can cook your own meals because you'll save $15/meal/person x 3 meals/day x 30 days/month x 4 persons/household = $5400/month/household, on average. Maybe you can save more by buying used pots at the thrift store, or inheriting them from your rich uncle, or salvaging them out of the garbage, but that doesn't invalidate the point.
Your question was glib, and this is a forum for smart people.
For example, on the home economics front, I'd advise that you buy pots and pans at Target so you can cook your own meals because you'll save $15/meal/person x 3 meals/day x 30 days/month x 4 persons/household = $5400/month/household, on average. Maybe you can save more by buying used pots at the thrift store, or inheriting them from your rich uncle, or salvaging them out of the garbage, but that doesn't invalidate the point.
Your question was glib, and this is a forum for smart people.
The article was glib, hence the question.
Buying Areon chairs for $1500 a pop is not a "save money" move. That's not to say that it's not a smart move but if you want to judge it solely from an economic perspective, it's got fail all over it.
Buying Areon chairs for $1500 a pop is not a "save money" move. That's not to say that it's not a smart move but if you want to judge it solely from an economic perspective, it's got fail all over it.
If you're running a startup that means you're lean on employees, and that means hiring the best. Employee retention for folks with many employment options requires perks beyond just stock options.
And honestly, every coder appreciates a good chair... we do spend 8+ hours in it every day...
And honestly, every coder appreciates a good chair... we do spend 8+ hours in it every day...
If you're going to buy Areon chairs in an effort to retain key employees, great. That's good thinking.
If you're going to buy Areon chairs in a guise to "saving money" you are a fool.
I'm not against perks for employees, what I'm against is disguising clear expenditures of cash - justified or not - as "saving money".
If you're going to buy Areon chairs in a guise to "saving money" you are a fool.
I'm not against perks for employees, what I'm against is disguising clear expenditures of cash - justified or not - as "saving money".
Get a treadmill desk.
Nice. Saw those the other day, including one DIY version, and it looks like a good idea.
What I like about these tips is that they are mostly about buying things that are one-time costs, and avoiding the recurring costs.
the list mostly consists of 'spend/buy this and that (mac, 2nd monitor, aeron, espresso machine, etc) to save more money further'
those seem to be in direct opposition to the epitome of startup: steve wozniak
"All the best things that I did at Apple came from (a) not having money and (b) not having done it before"
those seem to be in direct opposition to the epitome of startup: steve wozniak
"All the best things that I did at Apple came from (a) not having money and (b) not having done it before"
I think this quote is misapplied to the original post. He didn't have enough money to get to the next level and do things that in fact were expensive, like get access to million dollar machines (once he went to college, he did get access to a mainframe, and ran up the bill so much he never went back until he started Apple, and only went back after Apple became a success.)
Therefore, I think a modern-day Steve from Silicon Valley would in fact have at least two monitors. If he could get parts at 11 and 13 to build a ham radio and computer, he could also find or build some lcd monitors in this day and age.
I think Waz wanted to learn about everything, and at some point money would stop anyone, and cause them to re-create things in their own room. But I'm sure he would either have monitors or assemble them. For a lot of people right now who concentrate on software, though, it is cheaper to buy monitors outright.
Steve was a hardware guy. If you're a software guy, write your own software. But you will need to spend a lot of time on your butt to program, and I think that is what the post is getting at.
Also, while a design for a circuit might lose value (besides the learning experience), monitors, desks, and chairs will be used for many, many years.
Therefore, I think a modern-day Steve from Silicon Valley would in fact have at least two monitors. If he could get parts at 11 and 13 to build a ham radio and computer, he could also find or build some lcd monitors in this day and age.
I think Waz wanted to learn about everything, and at some point money would stop anyone, and cause them to re-create things in their own room. But I'm sure he would either have monitors or assemble them. For a lot of people right now who concentrate on software, though, it is cheaper to buy monitors outright.
Steve was a hardware guy. If you're a software guy, write your own software. But you will need to spend a lot of time on your butt to program, and I think that is what the post is getting at.
Also, while a design for a circuit might lose value (besides the learning experience), monitors, desks, and chairs will be used for many, many years.
I am in grad school and need to live frugally so tomorrow I am buying a $4,000 espresso machine.
A 4k espresso machine is not for one person. If you have 20 people they might spend around that much a month at Starbucks. (10$/day) But I still think it's a perk and has little to do with saving the company money in the short term.
I think there are a lot of weak points in the article.
- Outsource all HR, he even calls it a no-brainer. To me outsourcing the well-being of your employees, probably the most important asset you've got is downright stupid.
- All this talk about saving five minutes by having in-house great coffee instead of lettin gpeople fo to Starbucks, having meetings over lunch, etc. misses an important point and tells me that this guy has no idea how to deal with human beings. Your employees don't go to Starbucks just to get a coffee, they go to get a break, to ponder over a problem, have an informal meeeting, or something else. It's not about the coffe. Same with lunch. People need breaks, particularly people that make their money by thinking. I read a post by Joel Spolsky where he claims that he probably works around 4 hours a day, the rest of the time he just goofs around trying to get his thoughts together, thinking over a problem, etc. And he seems pretty productive. People aren't machines - if you treat them as such expect results thereafter.
Jeez...
- Outsource all HR, he even calls it a no-brainer. To me outsourcing the well-being of your employees, probably the most important asset you've got is downright stupid.
- All this talk about saving five minutes by having in-house great coffee instead of lettin gpeople fo to Starbucks, having meetings over lunch, etc. misses an important point and tells me that this guy has no idea how to deal with human beings. Your employees don't go to Starbucks just to get a coffee, they go to get a break, to ponder over a problem, have an informal meeeting, or something else. It's not about the coffe. Same with lunch. People need breaks, particularly people that make their money by thinking. I read a post by Joel Spolsky where he claims that he probably works around 4 hours a day, the rest of the time he just goofs around trying to get his thoughts together, thinking over a problem, etc. And he seems pretty productive. People aren't machines - if you treat them as such expect results thereafter.
Jeez...
I think by outsource HR he meant all the documents/401k/tps stuff, not the actual hiring & interviewing. Calacanis has mentioned before that he personally interviews everyone. This obviously could have changed.
The last comment shows me how out of touch Calacanis really is:
"Outsource to middle America: There are tons of brilliant people living between San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York who don’t live in a $4,000 one bedroom apartment and pay $8 to dry clean a shirt–hire them!"
Hardly anyone pays $4,000 for a one-bedroom in SF, and if they are they're not working for a startup (or shouldn't be). For reference, I pay $1k in rent and have my own room and a backyard in SF.
Also, you _need_ to be in the same locale as your colleagues. especially in an early stage startup. You need to see people's facial expressions during brainstorming sessions and after idea pitches. You need to read their moods and work with them on a personal, in-person level.
I've worked with outsourced teams in India and the Ukraine, despite the talents of my foreign colleagues things NEVER went as smoothly / quickly as they would have locally. Especially with a fast moving early stage startup, that's of the essence.
"Outsource to middle America: There are tons of brilliant people living between San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York who don’t live in a $4,000 one bedroom apartment and pay $8 to dry clean a shirt–hire them!"
Hardly anyone pays $4,000 for a one-bedroom in SF, and if they are they're not working for a startup (or shouldn't be). For reference, I pay $1k in rent and have my own room and a backyard in SF.
Also, you _need_ to be in the same locale as your colleagues. especially in an early stage startup. You need to see people's facial expressions during brainstorming sessions and after idea pitches. You need to read their moods and work with them on a personal, in-person level.
I've worked with outsourced teams in India and the Ukraine, despite the talents of my foreign colleagues things NEVER went as smoothly / quickly as they would have locally. Especially with a fast moving early stage startup, that's of the essence.
Disagree on the phones. Buy a pc, a digium card and a few lines and spend a weekend setting up asterisk. It does not instill me with a lot of confidence when I call a business and get some guys garbled sounding cell phone voicemail instead of "Thanks for calling X...." and being able to dial a real extension. (Even if said extension just forwards to his cell.)
Billions of dollars could be saved by businesses everywhere if they were to migrate away from Microsoft products. It is a fact that Individuals and Businesses alike pay Billions of dollars in Microsoft Software Licensing and Computer Security alone. Clear and viable alternatives exist today in what is termed "Open Source Software". A number of viable alternatives exist under the generic name "linux" in which the expense is optional or "Free". For those individual users requiring additional assistance the optional support License average around $80 U.S. currency. Linux is an extremely "User Friendly" Operating System which by itself is not only easy to install, use and Update, it comes complete with "Open Source" Microsoft Compatible Desktop Utilities to replace those commonly used and relatively expensive applications such as MSWord and MSExcel Word Processing and Spreadsheet applications. In addition to these, a complete array (literally thousands)of readily available, easy to locate, install, use, update or even un-install just by selecting / de-selecting a check box!And most are equally functional to their commercial counterparts!. Applications such as Games, Educational Applications, highly useful Computer Utilities and Internet Applications exist TODAY. Not only is Linux easy to use, is well known as being invulnerable to attack by Computer Viruses. The fact that additional Billions of dollars are spent on System Security as a result of these omnipresent and dangerous Computer Viruses should be enough for the average PC user and business owner alike to see the value at hand. In just minutes, any computer system can be converted to the Linux Operating System by even the least savvy Computer user. As if we need any additional reasons to switch, Linux will outperform Windows which is like going out and buying a faster computer, without actually going anywhere! Do yourself and your pocketbook a huge favor by converting to any of the number of Open-Source Linux Operating Systems. I personally recommend "UBUNTU Linux" for any user. Not only will you have a Desktop Operating System that is much faster and easy to use, you will have removed that "Virus Target" from your PC as well....
I feel like this taints his motives. Prior to this post employees might have felt that Calcanis really cared about them.
"Working at Mahalo is sweet. We get Aeron chairs, 2 monitors, free food, free coffee, and free sodas."
It's still a sweet deal, but it just doesn't feel as nice when you learn that he was doing these things more for the bottom line.
"Working at Mahalo is sweet. We get Aeron chairs, 2 monitors, free food, free coffee, and free sodas."
It's still a sweet deal, but it just doesn't feel as nice when you learn that he was doing these things more for the bottom line.
Those things aren't mutually exclusive, they're actually quite complimentary. Nice working environment = happy, more productive employees = better for the bottom line.
Also, I wouldn't want any employee working for me that thinks to themselves, "Gee, I thought this company was being good to me but it turns out they're trying to make money." It's the whole point.
Also, I wouldn't want any employee working for me that thinks to themselves, "Gee, I thought this company was being good to me but it turns out they're trying to make money." It's the whole point.
Most of these make sense, but I don't really see how a 2nd monitor can save half hour a day. Also the $3000 espresso machine might be a little expensive when you can get one for $500 that's pretty decent.
It's fairly well known that multiple monitors increase productivity.
Here's one study: http://research.microsoft.com/research/coet/multimonitor/chi...
Here's one study: http://research.microsoft.com/research/coet/multimonitor/chi...
I would say that's an underestimate of the value of a 2nd monitor. If you're a programmer, get a second monitor if you have to buy itself. It's worth it.
I think it depends on the OS. OSX does a good job letting one monitor effectively host several applications. I find that harder to do in windows and the linux desktops I have tried.
Of course, OSX still needs a lot of pixels to do its job, so a single laptop screen won't really help. At my current job I have a large second monitor for my MPB and find myself hardly using the laptop screen for anything.
Of course, OSX still needs a lot of pixels to do its job, so a single laptop screen won't really help. At my current job I have a large second monitor for my MPB and find myself hardly using the laptop screen for anything.
In Linux/BSD/Unix, it depends more on the window manager (dwm/wmii/ion3/ratpoison/etc nullify the need of 2nd monitor)
I guess the 2 monitor programmers are windows guys (nothing wrong with that) ... and then they migrate to osx/linux, bringing the bad habits and polluting osx/linux over time
your second monitor for MBP, is it used for extending the view for osx, or it's just a cloned view of the laptop screen (let's say via external monitor cable)?
if it's a cloned view, vnc is an old and reliable technique that works regardless of cpu/os used (you can control powerpc mac, intel mac, windows, linux, bsd machines ... in one box)
dual/multi-boot and parallel guys, try to beat that! :D
I guess the 2 monitor programmers are windows guys (nothing wrong with that) ... and then they migrate to osx/linux, bringing the bad habits and polluting osx/linux over time
your second monitor for MBP, is it used for extending the view for osx, or it's just a cloned view of the laptop screen (let's say via external monitor cable)?
if it's a cloned view, vnc is an old and reliable technique that works regardless of cpu/os used (you can control powerpc mac, intel mac, windows, linux, bsd machines ... in one box)
dual/multi-boot and parallel guys, try to beat that! :D
Ratpoison hardly nullifies the need for a second monitor. It's all about screen real estate. You're working on a tough programming problem, you want a few different files of code, a browser open to some documentation, and some extra emacs (in my case) buffers and/or terminals for various errands. You just want it all to be visible at once. It's much easier to just keep everything there rather than "put it away" somewhere that's not visible. This is true regardless of your window manager.
With 2 monitors you can have code on one screen and browsers on another screen (if you are building a web app). With a third monitor you can have email, or a design comp. Depending on the complexity of what you are doing you may have several programs and browser tabs open. Personally, I develop in Windows, I have 2 monitors, I expand the task bar to 2 rows to accommodate more programs and quick launch icons, and I have no less than 20 tabs open in Fx or Ie at all times. Multiple monitors beats the hell out of sorting through open progs. Doesn't seem like it but the micro-savings throughout the day add up.
I use a 2 monitor system with the task bar vertical along the center. It's hard to getting used to but definitely nicer in the end since you can see the programs open.
> Most of these make sense, but I don't really see how a 2nd monitor can save half hour a day
Wow, no programmers on your team?
Wow, no programmers on your team?
Don’t buy a phone system. Savings? At least $500 a year per person..
Uh, maybe if you've never heard of VOIP. $39.95/mo for an entire company plus $0.03/minute.
Uh, maybe if you've never heard of VOIP. $39.95/mo for an entire company plus $0.03/minute.
I know 95% of what Calacanis writes is garbage or just promoting himself/Mahahlo, but these were some great tips.
Yea, I'm curious as to what he would add to this list for running a startup in a recession
1. Hire a competent but old programmer who has debt, and a wife and kids. Pay him well.
2. Hire a bunch of interns to work on your code. Pay them badly.
3. Let the interns do the unimportant stuff, under the control of the old guy.
4. When the mission critical parts of your software come, for example design or scaling issues, bring in freelance consultants to help you do this
5. Hire lit major students to write a bunch of content for you. They are cheap and good at writing.
6. Release upgrades often and publicize each release as much as you can. You don't need PR.
7. Fire anyone who believes he is a rockstar, knows the best way of doing something and insists it has to be done that way, or somehow thinks he is owed something
8. Get small offices. Make your workers work short hours, so they have time to do stuff at home, and so that they stay with your company because of the amount of freetime available
9. Make your team friendly. If there is a socially akward or shy guy who does not relate with the other members of the team, fire him
10. Get a guy whose job is to manage outsourced projects. Outsource as much as you can and hold this guy directly responsible for the results
11. Don't go to conferences, don't stay in hotels. Spend to promote your product, not to promote yourself.
12. Take the money you make and put it back in company development. Keep the teams small and unified as you grow.
13. Spend your ad money on measurable ads like adsense etc. No expensive placement ads. You can optmize then
14. Hire people on freelancer contracts. You can save on their benefits as well as the management costs for doing their taxes
15. Take the guys in the startup to strip clubs. Get them laid.
You wanted to save money, right? If you do the above, you don't need aeron chairs to keep your team happy, productive and cheap. However, it's unsexy, and some people will look down on you.