[tfigueroa]

It's a bit of a false dilemma to choose between experience or aptitude.

In the start-up period, though, aptitude is a better strategic choice in that you need people who can grow as quickly as the venture.

Later, you need the people with experience, even if they're a bit slow. They're the ones that have been bitten by the edge cases, the deadlocks, the XSS openings - and know to avoid them.

[thrownaway2424]

Really? I'd rather have the experienced but dull people to put together the minimal product first. Having them onboard gives me more time to find and hire the right aptitude people, and having them there _first_ keeps the inexperienced people from sticking in all the deadlocks and security holes in the first place.

Do people really want their minimally-viable product to be full of deadlocks? I personally do not. And I don't want to hire promising but new-to-the-industry people who have to check stackoverflow to remember the difference between a pointer and a reference, or who spend hours trying to debug why something in their python program is iterating over a string.

Bottom line, I guess I don't see how anyone can want to bring in aptitude in the absence of experience. People with both would be fine, or a combination of both types of people would be fine. Aptitude without experience is not going to work.