Has Apple Made Programmers Cool? 378
An anonymous reader writes "CNET suggests that Apple has totally changed the general public's perception of programmers: It's now suddenly cool to code. No matter what platform you're on. They argue that App Store millionaire success stories have 'turned a whole generation of geek coders from social misfits into superheroes.' Apparently, gone are the days when a programmer was the last person you wanted to talk to at a party: 'Mention to someone that you make apps and their interest will pick up instantly. This is an astonishing change from what a programmer in the '80s could have expected in reaction to their job description.' The App Store millionaires, or 'Appillionaires,' may have done all of us programmers a huge favor. Programming is now socially acceptable: 'Previous generations strapped on electric guitars and fought for super-stardom in sweaty dive bars, but today's youth boot up Xcode on their MacBook Pros.'"
meh, must be like the 23423th geeks are cool (Score:4, Interesting)
meh, must be like the 23423th geeks are cool story I've read - in 20 years or so.
I'm cool like a fool in a swimming pool anyhow, fucking ridiculous to say that apple did it though.
"mention someone that you make apps" and be sure that they'll bitch for work, you to work for them, or they'll ask for money or drugs.
Re:Appillionaires? (Score:4, Interesting)
Ahem. Apple doesn't have the App Store. It has an App Store. And that's official. They lost their case precisely over this against ... Amazon [v3.co.uk] :-)
Re:No, they haven't (Score:5, Interesting)
If someone asks what you do and you reply that you're a cobol programmer woring for a mortgage company, it's hardly likely to make you seem like the coolest guy in the room.
It might make you cooler than the salesman for the mortgage company. Some guys I met at a music festival who worked for a mortgage company told me my job was much cooler. I work for a museum, and after the usual "but why would a museum need a computer programmer?" response, it's easy enough to explain something to anyone, no matter what their education/job/age. Also, they've probably heard of the museum, which helps.
I reckon the scientists who work here have "cooler" jobs though, which are more interesting to talk about at parties.
Disagree. (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry but I just don't buy it. Social acceptance is likely to only be on the surface, scratch the surface and that person at the party will show the same interest as if you said you worked as a Customer Experience Enhancement Consultant. Keep talking and the look of interest will have moved to disinterest, then beyond that, to the look of someone who's just had a healthy whiff of chlorophyll.
The fact of the matter is, (some) apps are cool, but coding for a living isn't. Sure, some app developers have become rich, but most don't. Unless you've got more money than a small country noone will care beyond polite acknowledgement (and even then, maybe not, I imagine Bill Gates' money didn't make him any more interesting).
The upside is, chances are the other party goers jobs are probably some sort of administrative role or a traditional profession that isn't at all exciting. You won't care what they do either, because most people's jobs are boring. Not everyone can be, or wants to be a Frog Shaker.
Craig's List job ads offering equity (Score:4, Interesting)
If they really do have a million dollar idea and you can get by without pay, getting paid in equity is the best way to get rich.
But if their idea is so valuable, why do they need to find business partners on craigslist?
Re:No, they haven't (Score:2, Interesting)
I understand totally that hardcore feminists wish that the world worked differently, but it doesn't - women prefer guys who are well-travelled and attractive to other women. Droping hints like the above is almost gauranteed to get women interested in GP.
Re:No, they haven't (Score:5, Interesting)
True, women like guys who (they perceive) are popular with other women. That's why if you want to meet women it's far, far easier if you already have a woman in your company, even if she's only your friend. Otherwise you're "fishing without bait."
If you're quiet and not hanging around a woman who might be mistaken for your girlfriend, and you're not strikingly attractive, women will *never* talk to you. Never ever forever never. You might as well be a ghost. If you strike up a conversation and sprinkle on some (not necessarily true) bragging like CmdrPony did, you will get some attention, even if you're a bit on the ugly side.
This reminds me of something Ashton Kutcher once said: "If I had known how many women [my wedding ring] could get me access to, I would have started wearing one a lot sooner!" And that's coming from Ashton freaking Kutcher. That's like Usain Bolt saying he regrets not wearing some model of running shoes earlier.
It's Cyclical (Score:4, Interesting)
Being a programmer was cool back during the Dot-Com days too. Everyone assumed you were about to become another instant millionaire. Then Buy.com, I believe it was, imploded and set off the chain reaction that left a lot of those "cool" programmers unemployed and decidedly uncool for a long time afterward. The Pollyanna lesson I would usually leap to draw from that is to do what you love no matter how "cool" others think it is.
But now watching the 1% the obvious answer in America is, duh, to remember to bribe as many Congressmen as you can while the going is good to make sure you get bailed out when the bubble bursts so you can immediately reinflate the bubble using Chinese money and the sweet, sweet vapor given off by the combustion of the hopes and dreams of millions of future Americans and a country that might have been all the while getting even more fabulously rich than before. Rinse, repeat.
Re:No, they haven't (Score:5, Interesting)
First off - If someone's only interest is programming, why the hell would they care about social skills?
IMO programming is inherently a social activity.
You're obviously new at this. OSS is a social activity, before "the net" it was more common to encounter programmers like Ted. Ted worked for a company for five years, he was a freakin' genius, he wrote all the software in 100 devices that the company makes and sells. He wrote it all by himself, and maintained it when there was an upgrade required. The company was successful enough that, finally, Ted couldn't handle all the software by himself. They hired a couple of kids fresh out of school to help Ted. It didn't go well, in a short time, Ted left. The kids built up to a team of 5 or 6, but they had a high attrition rate, most quit within 6 months and few ever produced anything usable as a product. Finally, 3 or 4 years after Ted's departure, a core set of programmers were established who could work "as a team," sort of, at least they didn't up and quit when they had a disagreement. Even 10 years after Ted's departure, the sales staff still refers to "the Tedware," and it is still running the majority of the products - even though the new stuff looks better because it is built with modern tools, it takes a team of 3 programmers 6 times as long to make a product "ready for sale" as it took Ted "back in the day."
Re:No, they haven't (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure what you mean by "aren't that good". It's pretty egotistical to say that guys like Ken Thompson "aren't that good".
I suppose the fact is that there are different ways to be good at programming - some people are better at solving architectural issues, some are better at finding clever algorithms to solve problems, some people simply organise their code better, etc. So programmers can complement each other by interacting for sure, but that's more in design/thinking stages than when it actually comes to writing code. For coding, I've not read of anyone that actually likes to work in an environment full of distractions. It sounds like maybe you don't mind it. In that case you're either very good at fitting programming problems + social interaction into your head at the same time, or you are working on some really simple problems.
Anyway, what about guys like me who are the only developer in the company, and just have to get on with it themselves? I don't feel that I need a team to help me figure things out. I seem to be getting on fine as-is.
Re:No, they haven't (Score:5, Interesting)
The group doesn't have to actively take interest - they help in other ways anyway.
Simply having someone listen while one tries to explain a problem they're trying to solve is often a great help: having to express the problem verbally can make the solution obvious. (This would theoretically work even if the listener was inanimate, since the speaker comes to the solution on their own. Tried it with oversize teddy bears, but the developers don't go for it.)
Giving the group facilities, like a pool table and a table tennis table, will encourage them to take breaks together, and they'll inevitably talk. They may not think they're interested in what each other are working on, but ideas still cross-polinate. Sometimes offhand comments are what one needs to hear.
Some people react well to /b/tard-like abuse. With a diverse enough group, you'll end up with someone who can dish it out. The people who take it well will seek such a person out. Some people can and do raise their standards if told they're not good enough. (Don't try this as a management tactic - just keep a /b/tard or two around, and the people who need abuse will seek it out.)
After some time working together, people will identify complementary skills in each other, and get help when faced with obstacles. If the people who they seek assistance from aren't willing to spend some time helping, maybe they're not the kind of people you want around. (There's another kind of problem person - the one who's too eager to help, and in fact takes work off other developers and does it in its entirety, so the original assignee never learns.)
Seriously, if you haven't seen an effective team in a decade, you aren't working with people who are anywhere near best-of-best developers.