Hi Guys, Well its me Aviv who started the whole mess :) i would like to thank alot to all the really great insights... though i still have to say that almost no one has come forward either as a CTO or a Programmer... So I am a bit disappointed...
so i am asking again if anyone out there knows someone that knows someone that want to be part of a really interesting web 2.0 project (we pay salaries...yep) as a programmer or any either Tech. title hew would like to have we are still looking :) you can contact me through the email or call me at 054-6838708 have a great evening Aviv On Jan 16, 2008 5:36 PM, Danny Lieberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mati, > > Hear. Hear. After lurking on the thread - it's time to put in my 2c.. > on the topics of age, compensation, roles and responsibilities and > platforms. > > 1. There IS age discrimination in programming, especially in Israel, but > not only. It has to do with many factors but one of the big > ones is compensation - since young programmers are cheaper (at least > cheaper while they are writing code, not cheaper in the product life > cycle). There is an excellent article in business week called Youth Matters > that touches on this topic in a non-emotional way - > http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2008/tc20080115_576235.htm > > 2.What about roles and responsibilities? > a. A young startup (whether staffed by 3 young programmers or 3 old > programmers) needs some minimal division of roles. > > We need to think about managerial roles in a software development startup > in terms of the difference between a CTO and a VP R&D. The CTO will have > the product ideas, he will in many cases write the original core code, he > can pull an all-nighter to write a prototype even at age 60, but he is > always a terrible manager. The VP R&D has not written code for at least 5 > years, he doesn't have new ideas and can't do an all nighter to hack a > prototype, but he delivers the goods on-time. The best VP R&D's are people > persons, excellent all around managers and very detail and results oriented. > > > The third person in our 3 man startup needs to know how to sell. > > NOTE - i am talking ROLES not TITLES. Until you hit headcount of 50 - > there shouldn't be titles on business cards and titles > should NEVER be a replacement for compensation. > > > 3. What about platforms? I detect a note of bigotry in the thread > regarding IDF grads - but at the end of the day, for a Web 2.0 startup you > can choose .NET or Linux + PHP and if you are professional programmers they > will both do the job. I.e - Web app Although programmers may switch > allegiance (from ACS to ROR, from ROR to PHP, from Perl to JSP etc...) it's > a rare company that switches platforms on a working product. > > BOTTOM Line - platform decisions don't really matter, once they're taken > it's a done deal. > > Good luck in your startup - > wr > Danny > > > On 1/14/08, Matitiahu Allouche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I am always impressed by people who can draw a wide fresco of general > > subjects, like the evolution of the computer industry. I am somewhat > > less > > impressed when I happen to know some of the details, and they are > > wrongly > > pictured. It saps my naive faith in things which are expressed so > > authoritatively. What Geoffrey writes about IBM is at best his own > > interpretation of the facts. > > > > Shalom (Regards), Mati > > Bidi Architect > > Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts > > IBM Israel > > Phone: +972 2 5888802 Fax: +972 2 5870333 Mobile: +972 > > 52 > > 2554160 > > > > > > > > > > "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 13/01/2008 18:04 > > Please respond to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > To > > "Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > cc > > aviv sher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il > > Subject > > Re: [Job Offer and a byte more] PHP programmer and CTO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 05:31:04PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > > > > > Actually, your example proves you wrong! Do you think that Google > > would > > have > > > grown to the size they are if they kept the same technology they had > > 10 > > years > > > ago? In those 10 years, Google adopted completely new technologies > > that > > they > > > didn't have before - they devised new ways to manage clusters (which > > they > > > didn't need when their cluster was just 50 machines), new filesystems, > > > > new > > > ways to show interactive pages ("ajax"), new concepts for email (like > > the > > > whopping 1 GB mail quota), new ideas and software for advertising, and > > much > > > much more. Someobody had to direct the company to go in that > > direction, > > and > > > not - say - to the Orace/IIS direction you mentioned. > > > > Thank you, you just made my point. :-) Google succeded because they > > chose > > a technology that could be expanded to do what they want. If they had > > chosen > > Windows NT server, or VMS clusters they would have failed miserably. > > > > If they had a second rate CTO, or were stuck in another technology, they > > would never have grown to the size they are. How many "new idea" email > > programs and companies have failed in the last 30 yeas? > > > > > So it's silly to think that a company only decides technology issues > > when > > > it is formed. Maybe what you are thinking about are these "dot com" > > startups, > > > which were formed with some technology and indeed never lived long > > enough to > > > switch or update their technlogy. > > > > Lots of them were much older too, for example, IBM which nearly died > > when > > they > > tried to drop their mainframe computers and get everyone to buy an > > AS400. > > DEC when they tried to push the Alpha over the VAX. Silicon Graphics > > when > > they tried to switch to Windows NT over UNIX, and Apple which joined > > with > > IBM and switched to the PPC chip. > > > > IBM had enough business to keep going and eventually recovered and a > > third > > procduct, the RS/6000 took over while they still sell mainframes (Z/390) > > and the AS400 is long gone. > > > > DEC lost the battle of the MIPS. Silicon Graphics just faded and Apple > > eventually became bankrupt and the board gave the company to Steve Jobs > > and Next, before they crashed, and so on. > > > > > > > > Both are certainly capble of doing the job with as much tailoring > > as > > Google > > > > had to apply to what they do use, but when did Google reach the > > point > > they > > > > could not have switched? > > > > > > Never. If Google were convinced today that Oracle/IIS had some clear > > benefits > > > to them, they could switch to them, at least in new installations > > (which > > in > > > an exponentially growing business, is almost the same as switching > > everything). > > > Obviously, they didn't find Oracle or IIS of any benefit to them, > > because > > > they could do the same - or more - with free software without having > > to > > pay > > > royalties (paying royalties for hundreds of thousands of copies for a > > piece > > > of software is damn expensive). > > > > Again proves my point. > > > > > > > I work in a company that has existed for over a hundred years. It > > still > > > hasn't reached that point. We are still always on the lookout on how > > to > > > change, what are the new technology trends, and how we can leverage > > new > > > technlogy to become more efficient, before all our competition does > > it. > > > If a company stops doing this, it will go out of business quickly. > > > > What company is that? > > > > > > How much equity are your really willing to give this stranger ( i.e. > > > > not a founder) to be CTO? 5%? 10%? any more and you risk diluting > > > > your control and making your seed investor nervous. > > > > > > > > When the company gets to a "short exit", i.e. buyout in 2-3 years or > > > > IPO, the 10% will be about 2%. If you go for the long term exit, > > which > > > > someone is espousing in an article in Friday's Jerusalem Post > > (presented > > > > as an op-ed, but really a free ad for his "late stage" investment > > fund), > > > > that will be down to less than 1%. > > > > > > In 1999, when I was looking for a job, the "jive" from prospective > > employers > > > I interviewed ( :-) ) was always the same - I would get a percentage > > of > > the > > > company (usually at the order of 1%), and since it is public knowledge > > that > > > every IPO is at least 1 billion dollars, even after dilution I was > > sitting > > > on several million dollars, almost guranteed. Yeah, right... > > > > Yes, I keep telling people who ask for business advice NOT to include a > > stock option plan as anything but a speculative gift. People will no > > longer > > fall for that "jive" as you put it. > > > > Geoff. > > > > -- > > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel [EMAIL PROTECTED] N3OWJ/4X1GM > > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 > > Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ > > > > > > ================================================================= > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Danny Lieberman > "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best > one." Occam's razor > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > www.software.co.il/ - Optimize your risk > www.software.co.il/blog - Israeli software, music and mountain biking > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Tel Aviv + 972 3 610-9750 > US + 1-301-841-7122 > Cell + 972 54 447-1114
