The developers on your founding team could learn .NET over the summer (in your spare time), pay the licensing fees starting in September, and take over development then. Surely the licensing fees aren't that big, compared to developer salaries (are they)?
But you wrote "we likely would not be able to handle everything [development-wise] between just the founders." So you'd have to hire some more .NET developers. I'm sure there are lots of .NET developers out there, but they'll probably charge enterprise rates. Maybe you'll get lucky.
I also worry about the founders not being able to fully understand what the .NET programmers are doing. That could cause problems. For example, the founders, being unfamiliar with .NET, might not know how hard it really is to constitute the splitzerblivits with the kazmeltrix. Schedules could slip.
Scenario 2:
Start now with a framework your two developer co-founders know. Take the cash to get some more developers right away (who know that framework). It sounds like there are no licensing fees, so that's good. Also there would be no need for the founders to spend time learning a new framework. Too bad for the experienced .NET developers, but then it was only ever going to be a short-term gig for them anyhow.
Maybe make a list of the pros and cons for each scenario. I've probably missed some, because I don't know all the details. Then you can make a clear-eyed decision.
As for learning .NET over the summer, there definitely isn't enough free time in the incubator/program – it's half-education, half-building-companies.
Re: .NET developers charging enterprise rates, that's something I've heard anecdotally. Do you (or anyone else on HN) know if it's actually true? Payscale says that a "software engineer" with 2 years experience with .NET costs about the same as 2 years of experience with Rails...
Comments
Scenario 1:
The developers on your founding team could learn .NET over the summer (in your spare time), pay the licensing fees starting in September, and take over development then. Surely the licensing fees aren't that big, compared to developer salaries (are they)?
But you wrote "we likely would not be able to handle everything [development-wise] between just the founders." So you'd have to hire some more .NET developers. I'm sure there are lots of .NET developers out there, but they'll probably charge enterprise rates. Maybe you'll get lucky.
I also worry about the founders not being able to fully understand what the .NET programmers are doing. That could cause problems. For example, the founders, being unfamiliar with .NET, might not know how hard it really is to constitute the splitzerblivits with the kazmeltrix. Schedules could slip.
Scenario 2:
Start now with a framework your two developer co-founders know. Take the cash to get some more developers right away (who know that framework). It sounds like there are no licensing fees, so that's good. Also there would be no need for the founders to spend time learning a new framework. Too bad for the experienced .NET developers, but then it was only ever going to be a short-term gig for them anyhow.
Maybe make a list of the pros and cons for each scenario. I've probably missed some, because I don't know all the details. Then you can make a clear-eyed decision.
Thanks for the advice, Troy!
As for learning .NET over the summer, there definitely isn't enough free time in the incubator/program – it's half-education, half-building-companies.
Re: .NET developers charging enterprise rates, that's something I've heard anecdotally. Do you (or anyone else on HN) know if it's actually true? Payscale says that a "software engineer" with 2 years experience with .NET costs about the same as 2 years of experience with Rails...