I've seen the silly "start-up vs. project" debate rage on and on, to no end, but I have NEVER seen someone try to define what a "project" is and isn't. Are you actually serious???
> would you put something on your resume as a job if you had built it over the weekend and had only worked on it for a few days
Absolutely! When I interview people, I love finding out what they work on in their spare time. I don't care whether they are "projects", "startups", or whatever. Of course, only include it if it's something impressive that you hacked together in a few days.
My take on it is this: "Projects" are for fun. Projects may become elevated to "startups" only if they make money.
really? didn't read the article too well I guess? Quora has two founders who left jobs at facebook and dedicated themselves to it ... how would that fit the definition of a project in this article exactly?
I absolutely would love to see stuff like this on someone's resume, but it should not be listed under the employment section.
To me, startup implies company. You can't be CEO of a landing page, website, nor project. But if there's a separate corporate entity then you can be CEO of that. Titles and entities aside, if someone can credibly list their venture as work history, I would consider that a bona fide startup even if the other factors weren't there.
"Since I have spent the better part of my adult life in and around databases i will be the first person to tell you... there is very little you can build without them."
Seems that he just decided to entirely ignore systems programming, embedded device development, firmware development, etc.
lol i did not decide to ignore any of the things mentioned here ... simply put, I was saying that I tie most things back into databases both in programming and within my mind, I often think in relation to databases and how they can interact with each other.
my apologies for not expressing well enough that they do not do much all on their own or really even exist for that matter without several other factors. However my lack of recognition in the post was not a reflection of my understanding. sorry if it seemed that way
While databases are powerful, to think that they are a necessary component for all types of work is a rather limited point of view. I have to say that less than 10% of my programming work involves or interacts with databases of any significant kind.
Perhaps your experience, despite your claims, is insufficiently broad to recognise other possibilities.
Again I did not say "All things tie into databases" I simply said I tie most things back into databases because thats how my mind works.
I sold a company which wrote sharepoint plugins ... there were no database functions needed there, rather it was giving a database more functionality.
I recognize many things do not rely on databases in a significant way and perhaps my experience is not sufficiently broad, however I certainly am capable of recognizing other possibilities
My latest project, is building multiple websites, to test product ideas, that I would someday like to start up into a business. Due to the fact that I left my day job, this is proper usage of the terms...I think =)
Your website that you threw together in a couple of hours, that is NOT a project, and it certainly is not a startup.
Seriouly? So, a project is defined as an ongoing, methodical task, which extends minimally beyond some undefined amount of time?
If you're a tech person, you know that the "couple of hours" may well represent months of idea gestation, followed by two hours of very precise execution based upon, say, ten years of professional experience. Also, consider that any non-trivial website will require ongoing maintenance (try hosting any user-generated content, which instantly puts you in the anti-spam business), and you soon realize that a "two hour project/startup" is likely much, much more than that.
As for startup vs project, 'startup' means you consider yourself to be starting a business. That can mean a lot of things. I can just as easily say you need two million in funding and five signed "rock star" devs before I'd consider you a startup.
If someone gets violent or even offended because of what I call something I worked on for a couple days and threw on the web, then I'd say they've got the bigger problem.
This is very similar to the arguments in the game dev community defining whether one has ascended from hobbyist to indie status. It's nothing more than an infantile attempt to stroke the egos of the people who consider themselves in the upper-most status.
If somebody misnaming their "waste of server space", "project" or "startup" according to your personal definition offends you then well, that's your problem, not mine. Suck it up and learn to deal with it.
24 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 63.9 ms ] threadAbsolutely! When I interview people, I love finding out what they work on in their spare time. I don't care whether they are "projects", "startups", or whatever. Of course, only include it if it's something impressive that you hacked together in a few days.
My take on it is this: "Projects" are for fun. Projects may become elevated to "startups" only if they make money.
To me, startup implies company. You can't be CEO of a landing page, website, nor project. But if there's a separate corporate entity then you can be CEO of that. Titles and entities aside, if someone can credibly list their venture as work history, I would consider that a bona fide startup even if the other factors weren't there.
Seems that he just decided to entirely ignore systems programming, embedded device development, firmware development, etc.
This statement is in dire need of a qualifier.
my apologies for not expressing well enough that they do not do much all on their own or really even exist for that matter without several other factors. However my lack of recognition in the post was not a reflection of my understanding. sorry if it seemed that way
Perhaps your experience, despite your claims, is insufficiently broad to recognise other possibilities.
I sold a company which wrote sharepoint plugins ... there were no database functions needed there, rather it was giving a database more functionality.
I recognize many things do not rely on databases in a significant way and perhaps my experience is not sufficiently broad, however I certainly am capable of recognizing other possibilities
How do you tie that back into a database?
Seriouly? So, a project is defined as an ongoing, methodical task, which extends minimally beyond some undefined amount of time?
If you're a tech person, you know that the "couple of hours" may well represent months of idea gestation, followed by two hours of very precise execution based upon, say, ten years of professional experience. Also, consider that any non-trivial website will require ongoing maintenance (try hosting any user-generated content, which instantly puts you in the anti-spam business), and you soon realize that a "two hour project/startup" is likely much, much more than that.
As for startup vs project, 'startup' means you consider yourself to be starting a business. That can mean a lot of things. I can just as easily say you need two million in funding and five signed "rock star" devs before I'd consider you a startup.
OK. I think I've just found my new startup. YC look out!
If somebody misnaming their "waste of server space", "project" or "startup" according to your personal definition offends you then well, that's your problem, not mine. Suck it up and learn to deal with it.