Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
This question was asked by Ed Burns in his book ‘Riding the Crest’. I remember that almost all of the rock star programmers found helpful if one had new and kool gadget. Programmer stays in touch with the latest design, hardware and software implementation which may affect also his work.
What is your opinion on this question?
I believe it is fairly irrelevant.
Firstly, every domain (for example Web, OS X, iPhone, Windows) has its own aesthetics which means experience from gadgets won’t necessarily transfer that well, in the same way a great Windows UI won’t necessarily be a great OS X interface.
And owning a gadget hardly ever teaches about the underlying hardware or software implementation.
However, being able to appreciate great design, whereever it appears, whether that is in gadgets, literature or architecture has to be useful. And a curiosity about the world and a determination for life to be better will probably often lead to great programmers getting gadgets, however this is a case or correlation not being the same as causation. The gadgets don’t help the programming skills, but the same traits drive both.