Sure. Different people have different motivations. Nothing wrong with that. But, to be honest, if your goal is financial independence, go work in investment banking until you are 35, retire, go see the world, live frugally, learn quantum mechanics for fun, start painting in your free time. I know people who did that.
The point is: if you're after financial independence, take the boring, yet easy, path. Give 10 years of your life to a bank or law firm. Maybe you can make a million or two. Retire. But, if you're going to give 10 years of your life to a company that has a 1% chance of getting anywhere, then be committed to it, do it for fun, to build an empire. You'll most likely fail, but you'll have a good time, at least.
The barrier to entry for investment banking is a lot higher than it is for writing web-apps, also that route may be closed to a very large portion of the world (by virtue of location alone).
Building a web app that might be the gateway to your dreams takes nothing but a computer, a working brain and an internet connection. Getting into investment banking has a wholly different set of requirements and so might not be the 'boring yet easy path', it might in fact be much more difficult. Also, investment banking would not support the number of people that are trying their luck in the web-app (or phone app) lottery.
And for plenty of people 'boring' doesn't cut it, no matter what the rewards.
Investment banking only requires you to go to the right schools and to be able to tolerate excruciatingly boring work for 16 hours a day. I know people who amassed a nice loot that way. By contrast, I don't know anyone who amassed the same amount by creating software, although I know a few who tried.
The problem with web-apps is precisely that the barrier of entry is too low. You are competing against the entire world. No special skills are required beyond programming. It does not require credentials. What makes the game easy to play is also what it makes it so hard to win.
> Investment banking only requires you to go to the right schools
That alone is a deal breaker for probably a very large percentage of those that would want to go this route. Also, it requires a plan long in advance. So that 'only' is a bit out of place there I think.
> to be able to tolerate excruciatingly boring work for 16 hours a day.
That's another slight problem. You couldn't pay me enough for a job like that, I'd probably burn out long before reaching my goals, whatever they were.
> I know people who amassed a nice loot that way.
So do I, their personalities and backgrounds are about as far away from the typical web entrepreneur as you could get.
> I don't know anyone who amassed the same amount by creating software, although I know a few who tried.
I know more people that made somewhere in the millions to 10's of millions with a few 'out of the ballpark' hits in software than in any other business outside of regular trade.
I know one investment banker that did well, but then again, most of my contacts are in the software world, not in banking so that will likely skew the picture.
Competing against the entire world is pretty much the norm for every other business except for software. So first mover advantage, execution, customer support and so on are where you make the difference, and that gives people a sense of control over their destiny, which is a powerful motivator by itself.
that is only the 'easy way' if you are already through one of the best schools in the country. just to be considered by a law firm, I'd have to go to school for 6 years; that is enough time to start and fail one or two companies. also, if I wanted to get into a law firm that would pay what we're talking about, that school had better be Harvard or something else that is expensive and difficult to get in to.
I know several newly minted lawyers from reasonable but not top tier schools who are trying to find work. (unfortunately in fields I don't know and don't care much about, like family law, otherwise I'd find something for them to do.)
as for investment banking, the competition, I hear, is absolutely fierce. I'm a pretty bright kid for a biz guy, but your average quantz is going to eat me alive.
Working for other people is really only easier if you are the sort of person who is good at playing the organizational game.
My impression is that if you start a company in an area where you have some experience, your chances of success are way better than 1%. Is it better than your chances of making a lot of money working for other people?
my experience has been that building a business that pays bay area sysadmin wages is a /whole lot/ harder than getting a bay area sysadmin job. But my theory is that multiplying that bay area sysadmin money by five or ten is going to be easier to do with this business than it would be going back to school and attempting to learn a trade that would pay that much natively.
but yeah; most people who run businesses for the long term do it because they enjoy the freedom. My company is paying me about 1/3rd a bay area sysadmin wage right now, and I'm a /whole lot/ happier than I was being a sysadmin for someone else.
The point is: if you're after financial independence, take the boring, yet easy, path. Give 10 years of your life to a bank or law firm. Maybe you can make a million or two. Retire. But, if you're going to give 10 years of your life to a company that has a 1% chance of getting anywhere, then be committed to it, do it for fun, to build an empire. You'll most likely fail, but you'll have a good time, at least.