At a certain point you're talking about SANs, FibreChannel routers, HVAC systems, UPS, virtualization, etc etc, and keeping up to date on all of this knowledge is a job in itself. So a guy spending most of his time doing "big IT" sysadmin stuff might not have the time to become a really great programmer.
That being said, I know plenty sysadmins that have gone on to become great programmers. And truly great programmers tend to love computers, both software and hardware.
Nah, Larry and Sergey were entrepreneurs, which meant they did whatever they had to to keep their idea alive. Which often included hardware design, sysadmin, algorithms, infrastructure, graphic design, accounting, investor relations and marketing. They sucked at most of it, but they were "good enough" to turn their idea into a multi-hundred-billion-$ company.
Those corkboard servers you show, BTW, were removed from service in a hurry once the fire marshal found out they were building servers out of corkboard.
Sure, but the point is that in the beginning, they were arguably great at developing software _and_ building a server farm that worked. My main point was that until you hit the "enterprise" server stuff, you have the capacity to be both a good server guy and programmer.
Above a certain point, there are so many technologies you need to know that people need to specialize.
In 99% of cases going with an ex-enterprise sysadmin for your CTO for a early-medium stage startup is a horrible idea. Sysadmin needs are significantly smaller than programming/engineering needs until you get to a really big scale. So, while either is probably OK if they are overall smart and good at tech management, my advice is go for someone with experience managing programmers vs. someone with experience managing sys admins if you have to choose. Ideally you get someone who has been CTO at a startup before and has experience bridging this particular gap.
The third aspect of this is management. Someone who has been in management for 10 years is not going to be a spectacular programmer or sysadmin because they simply wont be up to date, but they've got a solid tech background and great managerial skills. These tend to be better later hires, but could be right as well depending on your situation.
Back in those days I was running infrastructure for a failed small business leasing market place startup called elease. Our cage was right behind one of Google's. I think it was Globalcenter's Sunnyvale datacenter. Google's cage (the one with the warping mother boards) would exhaust this wall of heat into our cold aisle, which I felt attributed to the 15% failure rate we were getting on our VAlinux servers. VALinux .. Those were the days.
Comments
At a certain point you're talking about SANs, FibreChannel routers, HVAC systems, UPS, virtualization, etc etc, and keeping up to date on all of this knowledge is a job in itself. So a guy spending most of his time doing "big IT" sysadmin stuff might not have the time to become a really great programmer.
That being said, I know plenty sysadmins that have gone on to become great programmers. And truly great programmers tend to love computers, both software and hardware.
Larry and Sergey were apparently also server guys: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bsmif/3465464623/
Nah, Larry and Sergey were entrepreneurs, which meant they did whatever they had to to keep their idea alive. Which often included hardware design, sysadmin, algorithms, infrastructure, graphic design, accounting, investor relations and marketing. They sucked at most of it, but they were "good enough" to turn their idea into a multi-hundred-billion-$ company.
Those corkboard servers you show, BTW, were removed from service in a hurry once the fire marshal found out they were building servers out of corkboard.
Sure, but the point is that in the beginning, they were arguably great at developing software _and_ building a server farm that worked. My main point was that until you hit the "enterprise" server stuff, you have the capacity to be both a good server guy and programmer.
Above a certain point, there are so many technologies you need to know that people need to specialize.
In 99% of cases going with an ex-enterprise sysadmin for your CTO for a early-medium stage startup is a horrible idea. Sysadmin needs are significantly smaller than programming/engineering needs until you get to a really big scale. So, while either is probably OK if they are overall smart and good at tech management, my advice is go for someone with experience managing programmers vs. someone with experience managing sys admins if you have to choose. Ideally you get someone who has been CTO at a startup before and has experience bridging this particular gap.
The third aspect of this is management. Someone who has been in management for 10 years is not going to be a spectacular programmer or sysadmin because they simply wont be up to date, but they've got a solid tech background and great managerial skills. These tend to be better later hires, but could be right as well depending on your situation.
Back in those days I was running infrastructure for a failed small business leasing market place startup called elease. Our cage was right behind one of Google's. I think it was Globalcenter's Sunnyvale datacenter. Google's cage (the one with the warping mother boards) would exhaust this wall of heat into our cold aisle, which I felt attributed to the 15% failure rate we were getting on our VAlinux servers. VALinux .. Those were the days.