> I'm trying to understand what exactly they did from everybody else that set them apart.
Because I'm one of the success stories, I'm in a position to answer. A successful programmer is not just a programmer, he is also a personal representative, a salesman and a contract negotiator.
I originally wrote what became Apple Writer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Writer) because I was writing a technical magazine article that was difficult to organize. I finally realized I could use my newly acquired Apple II to organize my disorganized notes and help in editing. So I divided my time between writing the article (about Special Relativity) and programming my Apple II to help with the writing task. This meant I was the first user of my program, and I was a demanding customer, a factor that helped the project along.
Eventually Apple heard about my program (originally called LexiCalc, a name meant to remind people of VisiCalc) and, having far too few programs for their computer, asked to see my program. After a lengthy negotiation in which I demanded and secured a 25% royalty rate, we had a deal.
The bottom line -- Apple Writer didn't become a success only because of my programming skills. It became a success and a household name because I was able to negotiate a royalty marketing deal with Apple that served both our needs. The fact that a 25% royalty rate was excessive, was unknown to either me or Apple at the time of the original negotiation, and by the time we both realized it, I was unwilling to change the terms.
To reiterate, programmers that become successful do it by having skills beyond programming -- they know how to present themselves, they know how to negotiate, and they earn a reputation for reliability.
I think this is a common theme - technical people who also have business skills are more likely to succeed; business people who have technical skills are similarly more likely to succeed.
Or more generally: it's much easier to excel in the intersection of two (or three) disciplines than to excel in a single discipline.
Programming + Biology. Programming + Economics. Business + Comic book writing. Programming + Business. Cooking + fluency in Japanese & English. You get the idea.
This is a good point. I was thinking in terms of people in specialised roles having broader knowledge, but you are right that there are good opportunities in blended roles. Either way, it's great to have depth in multiple fields.
> business people who have technical skills are similarly more likely to succeed.
Yes, and business people and managers who have technical skill and knowledge possess the advantage that they can detect when programmers are lying to them or exaggerating, and they can schedule realistic programming project times. Nothing is worse than a manager in charge of programming projects who doesn't understand programming.
Absolutely. This is true in many fields, but I think particularly for the software industry. There are so many people in management positions who are clueless about what engineers and software can and can't do.
I think this is a common theme - technical people who also have business skills are more likely to succeed; business people who have technical skills are similarly more likely to succeed.
Exactly. I was fortunate enough to realize this early on in college. Since that realization I've always made the effort to straddle the tech and business side. Programmers, even average ones, have the ability to multiply business effort by orders of magnitude. Look around in any business and even today it's easy to find places were software can help.
Programmers in the first category should still be able to get a job if they can communicate their skill. Listing both old and new stuff (punch cards, Cobol, C systems programming, Java, Ruby, Python) always commands respect from me for a seasoned programmer. If they contribute to a current open-source project or have some free app on, it should be a no-brainer.
> To reiterate, programmers that become successful do it by having skills beyond programming -- they know how to present themselves, they know how to negotiate, and they earn a reputation for reliability.
Apart from those, being able to build the right app at the right time helps too.
Because I'm one of the success stories, I'm in a position to answer. A successful programmer is not just a programmer, he is also a personal representative, a salesman and a contract negotiator.
I originally wrote what became Apple Writer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Writer) because I was writing a technical magazine article that was difficult to organize. I finally realized I could use my newly acquired Apple II to organize my disorganized notes and help in editing. So I divided my time between writing the article (about Special Relativity) and programming my Apple II to help with the writing task. This meant I was the first user of my program, and I was a demanding customer, a factor that helped the project along.
Eventually Apple heard about my program (originally called LexiCalc, a name meant to remind people of VisiCalc) and, having far too few programs for their computer, asked to see my program. After a lengthy negotiation in which I demanded and secured a 25% royalty rate, we had a deal.
The bottom line -- Apple Writer didn't become a success only because of my programming skills. It became a success and a household name because I was able to negotiate a royalty marketing deal with Apple that served both our needs. The fact that a 25% royalty rate was excessive, was unknown to either me or Apple at the time of the original negotiation, and by the time we both realized it, I was unwilling to change the terms.
To reiterate, programmers that become successful do it by having skills beyond programming -- they know how to present themselves, they know how to negotiate, and they earn a reputation for reliability.