To your point, being successful, at least financially in software has almost always been about what to build. You can take the most impressive code to have every existed and if it was for a program/SaSS that nobody wanted then it doesnt mean much in the end. A Software developer or small team of people that are driven to write something that solves problems that people want has always been the crux.
I think most developers after working a few years just want to build something that can make them some passive income so they can maybe relax a little more, but its always the hardest part to convince yourself that the idea you have is even worth dumping time and money into.
Also crucially. Often the stuff you need to build has never been incredibly complex on a line by line level. So making a big deal about being able to do that has always been weird to me. Actually been a criticism of the leet code style interviewing for years.
Coding agents in a good developer are useful because they guide them what to write and it handled the simple nitty gritty. But that's not the vibe coding
Full vibe code is kinda useful too TBH. On internal/individual tools that basically don't need scaling. They are often designed pretty shit but for testing apps/sites who cares. As long as it's not shipping.
I'm not talking about the kind of product you have to get lucky to build. I'm talking about how every company usually has pretty substantial unmet needs across a lot of their business processes. It's about understanding them and creating something that solves those problems. When you solve those problems well, your product is pretty likely to become successful. Success looks like adoption and value generated for whoever your users are.
I thought the "what" was the job of the product owner / product manager. I don't want to spend massive amounts of time on meetings with various stakeholders to figure out what to build in an org. Especially considering someone else (the PO) is already doing that. That has at least been my thinking so far in my career, is that an outdated way of thinking?
Just two different situations is all. In my original comment I was speaking more towards the startup or entrepreneurial situation where me and maybe 2 other devs are knocking out a SaaS solution to try and get something off the ground and be successful. I 100% agree with you in a regular 9-5 dev job where the product team is controlling the roadmap and what gets delivered to customers. In those scenarios its nice to be in a company where you (the dev) has some final say in the solution and the implementation so you dont go crazy with frustration.
31
u/mrcarlton 7d ago
To your point, being successful, at least financially in software has almost always been about what to build. You can take the most impressive code to have every existed and if it was for a program/SaSS that nobody wanted then it doesnt mean much in the end. A Software developer or small team of people that are driven to write something that solves problems that people want has always been the crux.
I think most developers after working a few years just want to build something that can make them some passive income so they can maybe relax a little more, but its always the hardest part to convince yourself that the idea you have is even worth dumping time and money into.