northbranch

I think the author glossed over an important point:

"Within individual firms, the difference in performance was only 20% or so."

Is this because good developers congregate together, as suggested, or because having at least one good developer raises the productivity of those around him or her? They can certainly influence an organization through their choice of platforms and tools, aiding the productivity of everyone on the team.

This pattern is incredibly useful in Q, and one of the things I miss about using it daily. Of course, now I mainly use java, so the pendulum has truly swung.

We've had a similar experience. It was a good experiment, but our marketing is driven more by trying to connect with individuals and turn them into ambassadors. Rather than blanket the web with ads, I try to find influential people who I think will love our products, and send them an unsolicited sample. Besides, what's more fun than mailing out free polka dot socks?!

This post really hit home, as I was dealing with some negative comments on a reddit ad for my new site last night:

http://www.reddit.com/comments/tzfhy/the_hippest_mens_socks_...

I think there is a great takeaway here that negative feedback is often useful, but you should not blindly try to please everyone. For us, comments like that will certainly help refine our pricing and marketing strategies. Trying to convert that person into a customer, however, would be a waste of energy and focus.

Exactly - without any data to train a model, most algorithmic and high-frequency strategies avoid IPOs.

While it's easy to make fun of the guy for this, it's also a good indicator of how much work remains for products like AirPlay and Roku. The average consumer just isn't aware of the technology, and it's still relatively difficult to research and setup (compared to just calling your cable company). There's still big opportunity in this space.

Nope, not intentional. I'll darken that text, thank you!