All Programming is Web Programming

> I don't like how the argument devolves into "this stuff I do is complicated so I'm smarter and your stuff is simple so you're dumb".

This itself is a microcosm of the attitude that is espoused by a certain insecure subset of techies where someone who doesn't understand computers is an idiot.

To me this is a clear indicator of someone whose self-esteem is tied up in identifying as an intelligent person, but who in reality is not nearly as smart as they think.

Intelligence can be applied to anything. Sure, system programming gives a nice barrier to entry such that someone with an 75 IQ will probably never even get something to compile, but mostly it's just curiosity plus time and effort applied to the craft. Brain power can be applied to anything whether it be programming, art, sales, sports, management, or investing.

The bottom line is all programming is limited by the capabilities of human intelligence, and all areas of programming are ripe for development by the smartest minds we can muster. Someone throwing stones at one area or another just to protect their self image is a simpleton as far as I'm concerned.

The author fails to realize that not all programming is either web programming or desktop software programming. This is just a subset of programming: software development. It's reasonable to assume that all software development will one day be web programming since a web app is much more accessible than its desktop equivalent. (I personally hope that this is not the case, because with web apps customers pay a regular fee for the server resources they use rather than a one time payment for the program itself; web apps are more expensive for users)

But software development is far from being the majority of programming, most programs are written by people from mathematical and science fields. Since these aren't distributed, it's easy to forget that they even exist. These academic programs are frequently replicated many times by other organizations because if one lab publishes the results of a new study, other labs will want to verify them, and they're not going to use the same code, that would hardly be a thorough verification.

But I don't think that even all software development will become web development. I wasn't round back then, but I'm guessing that people said the same thing about command line programs becoming GUI programs back when GUIs came out, and yet I use vim, tmux, git, countless REPLS and many other command line programs.

I suppose this is here only because it was mentioned in the comments on HN somewhere today. I'm finding it odd whenever I see such "targeted" content, like the articles on swearing. Or when I read a comment and suddenly there's a blog post in the front page talking about the same thing, but not mentioning the comment it self.

Some people put too much value in this karma thing I suppose.

The marketplace decides these things not esoteric arguments about polymorphic inheritance. What probably pisses the debater about "web programmers" is that they can make huge fortunes from these things where as most "systems programmers" do not. For the most part no one who writes cheques cares that someone decreased the cycle count a context switch. It's a poor value prop. The outlier in this axis is HFT where someone might care and the programmers fully understand and communicate the value they create.

Yes, someone can position faster context switches as something they care about and the person who does that will get cut a cheque, and that's basically what "web programmers" do. We market the incredibly difficult work of "systems programmers". The closer to the metal you are the further you are down the food chain.

Is Linux harder to program than early incantations of Facebook? Probably. Is Zuck going to make more money from his PHP webapp than Linus from will from his C Kernel? Probably.

Are they more expensive?

What is the cost in time of supporting a desktop app? What is the cost of losing all your data because you failed to put in place a backup solution? What is the cost of having inaccessible data because it's silo'd on a desktop somewhere?

People don't pay for the server resources, they pay for the value added by packaging a piece of software together with hardware and providing support services (sys admins, devops, etc) to keep that infrastructure running 24/7. They also pay for the expertise that keeps that company with great engineers instead of mediocre ones. Server infrastructure is simply the most identifiable cost to a developer, but is not at all what people pay for.

They pay for peace of mind knowing that really qualified people are managing their infrastructure and that they don't have to worry about it so they can focus on more important tasks like running their lives and businesses. If you value your time SaaS is generally a great deal (especially if you're not extremely knowledgable about IT/IS).

Same thing with the app store, you're not paying for the infrastructure, you're paying to access a market segment where people open their wallets to buy shiny things and are willing to pay more for quality.