Odd that Bill seems to measure the quality of a hacker by his ability to optimize. For me the test of a good hacker is inventing new kinds of software. Bill's test is probably an artifact of Microsoft's circumstances. Presumably hackers there rarely get to initiate new projects.
It was explained to me at a Microsoft recuriting session that I attended a couple years ago that if you work for engineering at Microsoft your job title is either Designer, Programmer, or Tester. People who do one don't do either of the other two. (Although, surely there must be some niches like their research department where cirumstances are otherwise). So, since all Programmers are confined to the straight-jacket given to them by the Designers, the ability to optimize is probably the best way to differentiate the good ones from the mediocre ones.
Needless to say, I wasn't impressed by the recruiter's pitch. Then again, the recruiter probably wasn't impressed by the Tux polo shirt and EFF cap that I arrived wearing :-)
'... So, since all Programmers are confined to the straight-jacket given to them by the Designers ...'
Not so. At MS, programmers are king.
A Program Manager comes up with the spec. It's up to the programmer(s) to implement it. So anything the programmer wants to ditch, goes.
Read more at JOS, 'Painless Functional Specifications - Part 3: But... How?' ~ http://tinyurl.com/3asbrp & in this excellent book, 'MICROSOFT SECRETS' (978-0028740485) ~ http://tinyurl.com/2ke4hf
Fair enough, but my point remains that the programmers are implementing a spec designed by someone else. When your hackers are completely in control, you can judge them simply by their ability to get things done. If they're implementing someone else's spec, then measurement isn't that simple because their performance will be heavily influenced by the quality of the spec, no matter how much veto power you give them. So, judging by skill at optimizing might well be the next-best alternative.
Then again, maybe we're all being ridiculously overanalytical and Gates just meant "improving" when he said "optimizing".
