Technical = Coder. Non-Technical = Non-Coder.

http://42floors.com/blog/posts/technical-coder-non-technical-non-coder

by jaf12duke • 14 years ago

139 93 14 years ago

voxx• 14 years ago

Kinda inspirational.

delinka• 14 years ago

The first (only?) comment on the blog hits on an important point: I know lots of technical people who don't code. These people build networks, configure racks of equipment, and generally keep data centers running smoothly ... and couldn't code their way out of a SIGTRAP. (Contrary to this, I've met plenty of non-technical people who "repair" PCs and know how to click the UI of the latest malware removal tool.)

I understand that the target audience is the MBA who thinks that since he bought a laptop last week, he's now "technical," but it's an important distinction when your story is read by a bunch of technical geeks.

<rant>Proofread your blog posts. This is why your blogging software allows you to create drafts - dump your rage into the editor and save the draft. Come back later after you've cooled down and fix your grammatical and spelling errors. Also, don't forget to pay some attention to organization.</rant>

mjn• 14 years ago

It makes even less sense in other areas of engineering. I'm a computer scientist and can code, but it would be absurd for me to claim that, if I collaborate with a chemical engineer or mathematician who can't code, that person isn't "technical". It's getting increasingly useful to know how to do at least basic programming all across the sciences and engineering, but there are lots of other technical skills as well, mathematical skill being a big one. Even at tech companies, a statistics wizard who can write only basic code (say, simple R scripts) but knows the underlying theory and practice very deeply would certainly be a "technical" employee, for reasons other than their rudimentary coding ability.

mitko• 14 years ago

Mostly OT: as a somebody who programs computers I dont enjoy the word 'coder'. For me personally it has the mental connotation of somebody who is just there to 'code' it up, who is given a spec from above to implement, somebody who doesn't need to have any creativity to do his part of the software assembly line. I much prefer the titles 'programmer' or 'sw engineer' because they corelate with problem solving and creativity. Those are two traits without which a technical cofounder that's just a coder will probably be of less use.

jsavimbi5• 14 years ago

Agreed. Nothing worse than hearing a non-technical-business-resource-humanoid mention that they'll just write up the specs and hand it to the coders. Unfortunately, that's the world we live in.

zenogais• 14 years ago

It's just lazy entrepreneurialism. Everyone wants to make lots of money without having to really do the taxing lowly day-to-day work.

tatsuke959• 14 years ago

>"You can't build stuff. You can't take an idea in your head and produce a product that works."

Yes. You certainly can.

Being able to "build" something doesn't mean writing all the code, performing all the welds or assembling all the parts. James Cameron didn't build his submarine that set the record for deepest dive, but he most definitely took an idea from his head and turned it into a product that works. He did so by assembling a team around him to accomplish his goals.

Why are programmers so set on believing that there is nothing near as important as "writing code" in a business? Being able to turn idea into product involves a hell of a lot more than writing the code. Sorry to tell you, lots of people can code.

its_so_on6• 14 years ago

So, if using nothing more than your checkbook and phone, email, and skype, you could get something built, then you can build it? Well, yes.

But take away the checkbook, and now you're either running on bullshit, or you can't build it anymore. Whereas the the guy who fits this blog poster's definition of "technical-cofounder" - this guy can STILL build it, without a checkbook, without running on bullshit (having to convince someone). By actually using local and remote "building-stuff" tools:

In other words, the post is about building something using ssh versus building something using email. Building a project using git versus building a project using skype. Yes, they are both about building something, but in a different way. The guy says the person who uses the former of the two is the technical cofounder.

This is an important distinction pre-any-cash, if you actually, you know, have to set up a stack and develop a running application on it.

Or are we so far into the bubble that having an application actually running on a stack when you're trying to raise money to expand it, is downright quaint?

tatsuke959• 14 years ago

What's the number one reason small businesses fail? They run out of money.

The "checkbook" is the most important thing. So, yeah, having money or more importantly being able to access or raise money, is more important than almost anything.

I guess this is the difference between being a programmer and being a true entrepreneur. I don't think I'm unable to build anything: social network, car company, health-care service provider, you name it. And I don't, personally, need specialized expertise in any of it.

Edit: I think we were both editing, so I removed my inflammatory "mocking" comment.

gnaritas2• 14 years ago

> Sorry to tell you, lots of people can code.

Sorry to tell you, no they can't. There's a thousand business dudes with ideas that need implementing for every one that can code. And there's a shit ton of people who claim to be able to code but couldn't solve FizzBuzz.

tatsuke959• 14 years ago

Really? You're really going to try to tell me that there are not many, many people on this planet that can competently code?

>"There's a thousand business dudes with ideas that need implementing for every one that can code."

Having an idea doesn't make you a "business dude", just like writing "Hello World!" doesn't make you a coder. This is the arrogance I speak of.

demian• 14 years ago

I think he didn't meant "produce" as in what a movie "producer" does, but as in what a builder does.

It's understandable that programmers tend to be reactionary when approached by non-programmers to make software. The industry has a history of people saying that they write "the recepies for the cake" for programmers to follow, while they actually just write "make a cake".

xibernetik3• 14 years ago

Semantics. Someone else (Acheron Project) designed and built the submarine. Cameron organized and enabled the endeavor, but the product, the Deepsea Challenger, was not built by him.

You can argue what the words mean, but it's clear what "built" in this context means, and it's not enabling or organizing or funding, it's coming up with the full technical design and implementing it.

Yes, programmers get caught up in thinking they are the gods of business. They aren't. However, (bad) non-technical folk are quick to lose sight of how much their business or ideas are reliant on the technical prowess of someone else. It's not just "writing code" - it's coming up with the overall architecture, understanding how it will scale, being able to come up with something that won't fall apart the moment it gets released to the public. If this was easy, outsourcing would be a lot more common in the field and programmers would not have the sort of pay they do.

Non-technical skills are important. However, technical expertise is the difference between an idea and a product. Both are critical in order to achieve fantastic things. The problem seems to be that there are a lot of non-technical, unproven idea-men and -women who think just because they have people skills, they can fashion this "million dollar idea" into a business... They _just_ need a coder. It's easy to get blind-sided when you're not in a given field, be it the technical folk saying "well that business crap is just fluff" or the non-technical folk thinking just anyone can whip up a killer social app given a month or two.

zedshaw3• 14 years ago

Take all the activities required to build some kind of software. Let's just say, a little website. And let's say you need marketing, sales, design, product management, and coding.

Now, start removing everything and see if you can still build something. Remove marketing? Yep, I can still build it. Sales? Yep. Design? Yep. Product Management? Yep.

Coding? Nope. Can't even build it if you don't have that. The other stuff is definitely important, and it definitely makes or breaks successful businesses, but none of it is essential. Coding is a hard requirement when you want to make software, and if you don't have it, or understand it, then all the other stuff is kind of pointless.

The stupid thing is it's not that hard to learn the basics. It just seems "idea guys" want to be lazy and not learn the essential element of the business they want to enter.

sethgodin• 14 years ago

Not the "business" they want to enter, of course. The "business" involves plenty of other elements. Yes, the craft, the art, the essence--that can't live without the code.

But don't call it a business unless you figure out how to get someone to pay.

kylebrown• 14 years ago

Its also a form of laziness when someone (whether a coder or non-coder) presupposes that some original software is the essential element of their business idea. Barry Silbert had that realization in founding SecondMarket (its in a talk of his on youtube). He was wasting a lot of time trying to get others to build him some extravagant website when somebody told him to just forget about the website, open up a spreadsheet and start making phone calls. So that's what he did and SecondMarket was born.

Its probably similar to the way businesses sometimes expect new software to be a magic bullet that will fix broken business practices.

jsavimbi5• 14 years ago

If I just plunked down ~$100K plus another ~$200K in lost salary for two years of business school, not to mention the money spent and experience gained during my undergrad and subsequent years of employment, do you think I'd stoop down to learn the job of someone who just walked in off the street? The job that requires no advanced degree and a skillset learned through informal training over the internet and some weekend workshops.

I wouldn't because it would be an inordinate waste of my time. Just like a skilled engineer would never walk over to human resources and ask the boss' girlfriend to teach them all about recruiting because after all, recruiting is a core requirement if you plan on expanding your little website business beyond just yourself. They'd simply wing it until they found someone good enough that they could afford to hire.

fleitz2• 14 years ago

> Why are programmers so set on believing that there is nothing near as important as "writing code" in a business?

Because most of the people who believe these things have nothing to fallback on other than their ability to code. It's generally the manifestation of being extremely insecure.

brokentone• 14 years ago

While this post is simplistic (we all know there are a lot of technical posers) and the conclusion (found in the title) is wrong, there are a few good points made along the way.

Technical does not have to equal coder, although you can flip it around (all coders are technical) so it's a simple case of affirming the consequent. Happens to a lot of people. There are other technical skills that are quite valuable other than "coding" as noted here. I consider a passionate network admin, DBA, or sysadmin just as (or more) valuable as a "coder"

This paragraph is good though: "You can't build stuff. You can't take an idea in your head and produce a product that works. You haven't had things break on you. You haven't spend hours looking for a mistyped space. You don't get in the zone. You've never been on pager duty. You haven't spend 10 years learning your craft. You're reliant on other people to make things for you."

It even applies to people who "know how to code" (which by definition are "coders." It all comes down to passion.

I have no CS degree, certs, and haven't finished many programming books. However, I've been one of the best techs at my last few gigs. Why? Because I'm interested and passionate about this stuff. I go home at night with a problem, figure it out in the shower, SSH in, and test it out. It's fun to me to fix the problem, I don't want to wait till tomorrow.

I spent time in school breaking our school's intranet and housing electronic lock system (successfully) which I showed to our IT folk and they fixed it. Took a lot of time, but it was fun.

I sit at home (and work) reading source code, RFCs, man pages etc, while others Google for the first response. They may be a little faster, but they'll have to Google next time they hit that issue. I gained understanding, and I won't forget that.

joejohnson• 14 years ago

God! So many typos! Still, I agree with everything said here.

16s• 14 years ago

Yes, he'll need a non-technical person to teach him when to use then, and when to use than. Believe it or not, that's very important and they are different words with different meanings. Perhaps an English/PR major or a well-rounded MBA to cover all the non-technical stuff a business needs.

davemel372• 14 years ago

The legend goes that Abraham Lincoln had a terrible temper. Whenever someone upset him, he would write the fellow a nasty letter and drop it in the mail and he would feel better. Years later it was discovered that his wife would remove the letters from the mailbox and noone ever saw them.

While this post never told a lie and certainly didnt chop down any cherry trees i suspect it hurt more people than it helped.

raverbashing• 14 years ago

I see one exception to this rule, and it's something very specific.

If you're dealing with a very specific knowledge or domain and you're an expert in that field, I guess you could be a "technical non-coder"

For example: healthcare/medical, economy, statistics, etc Some of those can work their way around Matlab for example, but not create something on the web

naner• 14 years ago

We get 17 seconds into your new startup pitch when I ask you if you're technical and you say yes.

A bunch of startup marketing mumbo-jumbo later and you tell me you're looking for a coder to help you.

WTF?! You said you were technical?!

Say what you mean. Ask if they are a programmer.

skrebbel2• 14 years ago

Word. Also, I know plenty mechanical engineers who'd be somewhat offended by the article title. Tunnel vision, anyone?

krschultz• 14 years ago

True to some extent. I'm a mechanical engineer and every engineering I know would answer 'yes' when asked if they were technical. I'd be shocked if anyone out there defined 'non-technical' in such a broad way that an engineer wouldn't count just because they were laying out a circuit board or designing a biomedical device instead of writing Ruby on Rails code..

sontek2• 14 years ago

Some of the best programmers I know have mechanical engineering backgrounds!

dalore• 14 years ago

If the mechanical engineers were doing a startup that involved mechanical engineering then I would say they are technical.

reneherse• 14 years ago

Technical = Coder goes hand in hand with the narrow definition of 'startup' that's commonly used here. It's not meant to discount other engineering abilities, it's just a bit of jargon one needs to adapt to.

grepherder2• 14 years ago

Came here to say almost the same thing, but one more tidbit. Technical = Technical, Programmer = Programmer, and in some cultures even Technical != Programmer. Granted I'm not in US, and I know in the jargon around here people who can code would generally be called technical, but where I live if someone asked me if I was technical I would say no. I can code and I understand maths. I'm not an engineer or anything, neither do I have knowledge worth anything about hardware. That doesn't even pass as "technical" around here. I know it's a bit nitpicky but wording is important if you value your time as you claim.

xibernetik3• 14 years ago

In the (software/web) start-up culture, technical means writing code. If someone says "I'm creating a fitness app, yeah I'm technical" you expect them to mean "I can code" rather than "I know how to use CAD". Your argument applies in many contexts, but not this one.

neebz• 14 years ago

I think when they say 'technical' , it probably means are you the one doing the technical job in the startup. For a CS-based startup, it's a programmer. For a hardware based startup, it could be the electrical/mechanical guy.

tel• 14 years ago

I think the point was over specific, but still valid.

"Technical" translates to "someone who's actually building something physical". It's guiding the division between social/business/marketing constructions and, well, technical ones. I'd think the argument applies equally the the guy building the hardware (when that happens) and maybe even to the ID guy building the enclosure.

brm• 14 years ago

I find myself in an even stickier place. As a designer I work in HTML and CSS, borrow and implement other people's javascript to make my interfaces do nice things, and dance around in wordpress php, tumblr themeing, and the superficial code of other content management systems. Beyond that I certainly don't 'code'.

Sure I move around enough in ruby and python enough to make the pretty face I've designed work with the app and I certainly don't consider myself technical if asked, but I seem to be lightyears beyond the business or ideas person on the building side of things.

More than a superficial designer, less than a front end developer is one of the strangest places to be.

coryl• 14 years ago

How about "semi-technical" or "almost-technical"?

jsavimbi5• 14 years ago

Make a choice then: learn to code or focus on design.

I can help you. I make double as a designer as what I made as a front-end developer and I'm also happier for it. The more focused you become on design the less dependent you'll be on either the business side or the engineering team. And you'll be more in-demand than either.

entangld• 14 years ago

Any other tips in this regard?

kposehn• 14 years ago

Hmm.

You can be technical without being a coder - the problem is most people confuse being technical with having some technical knowledge.

helen842000• 14 years ago

It comes down to the question asked. He just needs to ask for coders outright.

sontek2• 14 years ago

I think this misses the true hardship of non-technical founders. I'm a programmer working with a non-technical cofounder and it isn't me vs her, I don't think I'm putting in more than her because she does the pitches, meetings, e-mails, finances, etc.

If you are a non-technical founder and you can prevent your technical founder from doing anything non-technical... you are pulling your weight!

That being said, the problems I have with a non-techie is that she doesn't understand the tech things:

1. E-mail is not a todo list, we have a bug tracking system.

2. Stop talking about "Your programmer friend said...", I understand you don't know technology and want to verify what I say but how is not understanding it from 2 people instead of 1 going to help?

3. Open Source is important, so yes we will be committing to our github once in awhile on company time, that is because we are using that project for the company.

4. Alpha/Beta is different than MVP. Just because something is ready to show you doesn't mean its ready to be shown to the world.

njharman• 14 years ago

3,4 seem business and not technical. If you can't get those, you can't get software development business and shouldn't be involved with one in a leadership role.

#3 you disagree with and decide against, but you have to understand why.

alexanderberman• 14 years ago

I think this is an overly simplistic dichotomy. There are definitely people who are "technical" who wouldn't be the ideal person to build out a big data startup's software (for example). As a founder, they might be more useful in shaping product vision, defining marketing strategy, doing business development etc, but not necessarily actually doing the hands on coding. Is this person technical? Certainly. Is this person building the product? No.

qthrul• 14 years ago

Summary: There are people that equivocate "technical" with something other than an invitation for clarification and discussion.

pgroves• 14 years ago

The more painful part of the article is the subtext that a startup's "product" is by definition something built in a few months with RoR or Django.

For all the talk of how much angel and V.C. money is available for young companies, it's not going to do much if investors won't branch out into ACTUALLY new product areas.

adahm• 14 years ago

Have to say, I feel like being a "non-coder" is becoming shorthand for calling someone second class in this tech startup ecosphere. As someone with lots to bring to the table, especially domain expertise, business acumen, marketing, design, etc etc. I always feel a bit on the outside looking in. I have started to learn to code but more so to become conversational with hackers/programmers/coders. I'll never be that good though, I know that. I might be able to get to the point where I can hack together a prototype or speak to someone like a conversational Spanish speaker speaks to a native Spanish speaker. But will that be good enough?

I feel like the point that needs to be made here is that EVERYONE has something to bring to the table. Everyone is good at something and on a TEAM, that's what matters. Sure a team of amazing coders can make something great, but a great product does not a great business make. Sometimes, ie PayPal and others, all coders create a hugely successful business. But Zuckerberg is not a great entrepreneur because he's a great coder. He's a great entrepreneur who happens to be able to code. So instead of worshipping at the alters of coders, and I have TONS of respect for what you guys can do, we need to acknowledge that a successful STARTUP is more than code. So much more. Its about assembling the right team with the right combination of skills. Coding is one of them sure, but to say its the only one and labeling someone who doesn't as "non-technical" like its a bad thing, negates the notion that a business runs on more than just what can be hacked together. If a car were just an engine, we'd still be driving model-Ts. What makes something beautiful, what makes it successful, what makes it sell for 1 billion dollars is the specific combination of skills and how they work in chorus to solve a need better than anyone else. And those skills are varied, complex, and come from a lot of different areas.

sparknlaunch12• 14 years ago

Yet another black versus white discussion. Technical versus non technical. Coder versus non coder.

The two cannot co-exist? You are either one or the other?

dhimes• 14 years ago

Agreed. It's one of those blog posts that reflects the deep ignorance of the poster. Wish I caught the article before it was too late to flag, and saved the author the embarrassment of being discussed on HN.

I would only invite someone aboard who articulated these feelings if they were very junior and I thought they had potential.

If they were trying to be an investor, game over. Don't need people who think they know more than they do in a position of authority. They inevitably wreck the morale of the entire company, and can literally kill it.

davemel372• 14 years ago

This post is highly reminiscent of a previous post... http://42floors.com/blog/posts/be-yourself-abnormal-people-c...

The recurring theme is..."Don't be a faker. Don't be a poser."

My two cents is that most of us feel like we got to where we are by "Paying Our Dues" and resent others who seem to jump to the top without making the sacrifices we made.

The real truth is...we all have stories playing in our heads of who we are, and what we accomplished. It is very easy to look across the street and wonder why you had to work so hard, and other seem to just have life handed to them on a silver platter.

The reality is though, we have no idea what challenges they faced and overcame, and more importantly they have no control of how we perceive them.

Seeing a programmer in a suit, upsets you cuz its fake, but it really upsets you because you know it took a heck of a lot more than a suit to get funding. Boy would it suck if he got funding just for wearing a suit.

Seeing a non-coder claim to be a technical founder must suck because you are a real founder, who knows what it really takes, and you feel you have no right to claim you are a technical founder.

The truth is, we can write whatever story we want about ourselves, and you can choose to believe whatever stories you want to about others. None of it really matters...

At the end of the game, "The Pawn and the King both go back in the same box."

I can really relate to how the author feels within other context, but I know that the day I let go of those perspectives, was the day I grew my wings and learn to fly. The day I realized I could be whoever i wanted to be. THe day I realized that no one needs to die to make me king....

MOST IMPORTANTLY... to all you young ones starting out. The folks insisting you need to pay your dues for years and years and one day you will reach the top... Remember, those old folks are your competition, it is in their best interest to keep you down. Sure, their experience and sacrifice counts for something... but if you want to be a technical co-founder, by all means... It's Your Life. Be Whoever You Want to Be.

Dobbs• 14 years ago

From what I've seen of the software/web world technical means just that: technical.

This includes but is not limited to Programmers, Operations, and even your Sales Engineers. I've seen Operations guys who understand technology orders of magnitude better than programmers at the same company.

What the author is referring to is slightly different and imho he badly expresses it. Being able to use the internet and an iPhone is not technical that is just internet savvy.

cowmixtoo• 14 years ago

Whatever.

I haven't been a 'coder' since 1994 yet I'm defiantly "technical". The teams I lead, AFAIK, don't question my contributions because I don't code. Nor are my designs less valid.

In fact, my years of involvement on the operations side of the house sometimes make my choice 'technical' choices more informed than what straight coders cook up.

Again, phooey.

dazbradbury• 14 years ago

>You can't build stuff. You can't take an idea in your head and produce a product that works.

>You haven't spend 10 years learning your craft. You're reliant on other people to make things for you.

I don't think that has been a problem for lots of people. Take Steve Jobs, as far as I'm aware, he didn't write any code for Apple. What would his answer be when asked, in relation to his company, "Are you technical"? I don't know, but as the founder of a technology company, I imagine he would say yes. Or something to that effect. He's pitching a tech product.

As many others have said, if you want to know if someone is a programmer, ask them.

pwthornton• 14 years ago

Someone might be really good at managing networks or keeping a site going under heavy load, but they might not be good at programming. Are they non-technical? On the same front, someone who is good at coding, may not be the best person in the world for keeping a Web app under heavy load and managing traffic from around the world. Someone with an information systems engineering degree, for instance, may know how to code, but not that well, and still have an extensive technical background.

If you want to know if someone can program, ask them if they can program, and then ask them to what extent, what kind of programing they do, etc.

xpose2000• 14 years ago

I don't even listen to a non-coders pitch these days as they can't do any of the real work.

Jason writes as though he understands the life of a coder. I love that. Perhaps that's the most important aspect of being a non-coder.

I've also noticed that non-technical people tend to care more about MBAs, degrees, and are easily woo'd by the name dropping of past employers. Whereas coders focus more on experience and live examples of work.

rbucks• 14 years ago

Can there be such a thing as semi-technical?

I have built products, coded them myself or with some oDesk help, and can at least read Python, PHP, and (less so) Ruby. I got the most technical MBA you can get (MIT Sloan) and have utmost respect for engineers.

I've run a chown -R from the root dir when I thought I was in my Wordpress dir and effectively killed the server. I've spent hours troubleshooting CodeIgniter problems and http 500 errors. For this, I have a Clintonian "I feel your pain" view towards programmers/coders/engineers/so-called-technical people.

So my point is this: I think it IS important, if you run a website, to try to build stuff on your own. But just because you can't build your own libraries doesn't mean you can't say you're "technical".

If someone asked me, I'd probably say "yes" but qualify it. I'm not a technical builder, but I understand what it takes to get technical things built.

fleitz2• 14 years ago

I've spent 10 years coding, and I'd be equally useless on a team building CPUs. Similarly, I'd be equally useless on a team building a kernel.

A company of one isn't much use, the corporate form allows people to come together to build more than they could on their own.

Who really cares if someone is or isn't 'technical'. One of the important roles of a CEO is being the interface between capital and labour.

A good CEO with a decent grasp of technology and a little bit of money can put together a team, they are far from useless. Everyone has a role to play, it's extremely myopic to think someone can't build a company simply because they don't code.

I doubt Steve Jobs had any idea how to program an iPhone and I doubt much of his code had anything to do with the rise of Apple once he retook the reigns in the 90s.

daemon13• 14 years ago

This post equates coding skills with creativity/character/skills, required to build a product or a business.

Maybe ask Kevin?

:-)

Technical = Coder. Non-Technical = Non-Coder.

Related Stories