Also I think you undermine the idiots.

Also, visionaries wouldn’t be reading this article either, so can’t blame the drones. They’re actually quite useful and I’d say 75% of programming is drone-work, so I think this category pretty much covers at least 95% of programmers. Nothing wrong with being a drone, so long as you play nice.

tim bernes lee is a better example. but, such big inventions wait for a guy to detect them, the most genius guy will be the first, if not bernes lee, the next best inventor would have done so some time later. praise nature for allowing the technology, don’t create an imaginary programming genius that way, because technology like the www can be understood by a lot of people.

your programmer types might also be people in their learning phases, it’s hopefully allowed by your thesis, that people can switch between those types (quite often)

i don’t really see a point in these distinctions, it’s a way to judge very fast, many people come up with such “types of”, and the descriptions are always incomplete and might scare people on their career paths

The workhorses are always good to have around though. Programming is a job, and that’s it. So long as they produce something usable, readable, and effective, then we can be happy.

Of course, visionary programmers are all about the right brain.

As for the 9-5 developer, I think its not a bad thing. I am going to try to limit my time at work to 8 hours (though they will be different hours) because I feel that makes me more productive.

Of course, I’ll keep my side projects and do more programming that’s not work related, but I think the characterization you made makes it seem like not working overtime is something to be ashamed of.

I don’t think your intent was to say that, but I wanted to clarify because I think the attitude someone could come away with can do more harm than good.

Anyway, I enjoyed it.