Why hobbyist programmers matter

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Thomas Tomiczek — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:47:00 GMT

You DO speak english, right?

::To me, “hobbyist” is painting with a wide
::brush -- anyone from a student doing a
::homework assignment to a businessperson who
::writes Excel macros can probably fit
::somewhere into the “hobbyist” bucket

Well, obviously not. Obviously you live in your little world.

Because I - a non natve english speaker, look up in the english dictionary what hobby means.

Let me quote:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hobby

::An activity or interest pursued outside
::one's regular occupation and engaged in
::primarily for pleasure.

Both of your example are per definition not hobby programmers. At least for everyone who cares what the samentics of hobby ARE.

Neither the student nore the business person do programming "outside their regular occupation and envaged primarily for pleasure".

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Shane King — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:01:00 GMT

Dictionary definitions don't tell the whole story. English is a living language, terms evolve as people use them in different ways.

"Hobbyist" programmer has come to have an implied meaning of "someone who doesn't get paid to program". It's a broader definition than the dictionary definition of "hobby", I know. However, one of the features of English is that words sometimes morph like that!

I realise this must make it hard for people who are not native speakers. It can even be hard for native speakers of different backgrounds. You can understand all the words but fail to understand the meaning.

Anyway, as far as the question goes, I think the pricetag is what matters most to hobbyists. Ease of use counts too, as just about any other factor you can name that affects a professional, but mostly price. Hobbyists by their nature probably don't have someone buying the software for them. When you have to shell out from your own pocket, you become very price sensitive!

I think this is the main reason why open source is so popular amoungst hobbyists. Sure, having the source is nice (free as in speech), but lets face it, not costing anything is a huge incentive (free as in beer)! I know when I was a student I relied heavily on open source not just because I liked the software, but also because I wanted to be able to afford to eat.

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Joe Bork [MSFT] — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:12:00 GMT

I didn't say that those students or those businesspeople necessarily are hobbyists, I said, as you point out, that they "can probably fit somewhere into the 'hobbyist' bucket." That is, students who write software as a part of their curruculum are likely to also pursue programming as a hobby. Likewise, businesspeople who have learned to write Office macros are more likely to apply those skills elsewhere, perhaps as a hobby.

Whether a "hobbyist programmer" is a student or not, or a professional worker or not, is really immaterial to my larger point -- the hobbyist programmer audience is important to the success of the .NET tools and platform. It is important to Microsoft to help the hobbyists be successful, and we ignore them to our peril.

Hobbyist code monkey is tomorrow's enterprise architect

Jeff's Junk — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:04:00 GMT

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Mike Kozlowski — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 18:33:00 GMT

I'd say the most important hobbyist market for dev tools is people who just enjoy playing around with new technology to see if it's cool, and to learn how things work in various environments. The key to attracting those people isn't wizards and fancy IDEs, it's making sure that 1) the technology is free, 2) it's easily downloadable, and 3) it's well-documented.

For anyone running a Windows XP/2000 Pro machine, .NET fits those criteria very well. You can download the SDK freely and easily, start programming with it right away, and access tons of documentation at gotdotnet.com and MSDN.

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Joe Bork [MSFT] — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 20:11:00 GMT

I agree completely that the broad availability of basic platform libraries, compilers, and debuggers is very important, and the .NET SDK provides all of these for free. But you shouldn't underestimate the value of having an IDE and how development tools in general can affect people's productivity.

This is especially true for the hobbyist, someone who is often new to the .NET platform or to development in general. The task of understanding a new framework or language can feel daunting.

The ability of an IDE and related tools to ease the pain of development and to make the process less intimidating is a powerful one. The fact that tools like Visual Studio, Ecplise, or SharpDevelop exist (independant of their cost) is at least a tacit acknowledgement that many people find an IDE helps them be vastly more productive at software development.

Of course, having a great IDE alone is not enough, but the combination of powerful tools and an expressive platform can only beneficial to developers.

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Mike Kozlowski — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 20:52:00 GMT

Joe, this is where I'm using a slightly different definition of "hobbyist" than you are. The kind of hobbyist that I'm talking about is the sort of person for whom programming really is a hobby, something they do for fun and pleasure (and, generally but incidentally, profit). These are the people who are going to try out a new language/OS/IDE just for the hell of it; and who, if they like it, are going to try to get it used professionally, so they can keep working with it.

Hobbyists (in the sense I'm using the word) will be new to .NET, but not new to programming. Of course, they may like an IDE anyway, and it's only my Unix background that makes me think Emacs and the SDK is good enough for getting started...

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Joe Bork [MSFT] — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 21:03:00 GMT

Mike, I understand where you're coming from; maybe "hobbyist" isn't the best term for how I'm using it. But whatever terms you want to use, there's a class of developer whose day job isn't coding all the time. Maybe they are new to .NET, and maybe they are new to programming in general. The debate about where exactly those developers fall along the spectrum is one that goes on internally as well.

The bottom line is that it is important for Microsoft to invest in tools that ensure the success of both the developers who make a living building software on our platform, and those who are new to our platform.

re: Why hobbyist programmers matter

Hobbyist — Fri, 05 Mar 2004 16:10:00 GMT

I started programming at c64 with basic in age of 8-9, while i consider myself a hobby programmer, i love being on the almost-bleeding edge technology, being also a techno-geek (naturally).

For me programming represents form of art and feel of control, but it's also a lot of pain, sometimes headache, as i don't code daily and when i code i always have tendency to want something that (i feel) even the MS gurus may have to think a second about.

But ultimately i just get the idea of something never done before, and then i want to do it as easily as possible (no marshaling of nested structs etc). So you guessed it, most of the time i find that the thing i would like is something that might be considered easy only with the latest (.NET and whatnot).

Which brings me to the point that it would be much appreciated if hobbyists like me in countries which don't may even have MS events, or interest to shell out big bucks for MSDN subscription, would still have the possibility to get in touch what may be the 'standard' way of developing in coming years.

(yes i know the friends and irc channels, but MS would care more about possible future devs of their platform, would they send them to beg-a-beta around unofficial channels?)

But i guess it would be tough to justify need and bw costs for official channel for public distribution of frequent builds.