This question is heavily influenced with my experience of an offline entrepreneur.
While hearing voices for teaming with tech-savvy cofounders to create a prototype or working technology I can't help thinking of it as a trap for an entrepreneur. Let me explain why.
First of all, I have drawn from my personal experience that it is better to be a sole founder of a business (for me). Nothing to share, no conflicts, no psychological games or need for special social and communicative tactics to persuade your partner "to sign this contract" or something else.
The second thing is the following: if you do not own (I mean you actually write code) the core technology of your business (web startup) you do not actually control this business. Developers can leave for numerous reasons and you will loose the business at all (or the technology can be stolen, or the developer will refuse to support or it, or to develop it further, or will develop it not in the way you expected - anything).
As you probably understood my position is that: "an MBA hires programmers to build a business from his brilliant idea and inevitably fails" (I have heard that it was proven when the Internet Bubble burst in 2000, isn't it right?).
So, with my new web-startup in the early development phase, I have a dilemma: To develop a beta on my own and then hire experienced programmers (from beta sales profits) or to find a tech-cofounder/outsource from the very beginning?
The pros for doing it by myself are:
the control of the core technology will be preserved;
no trade-offs as when working with a cofounder;
maybe technological awareness will let me understand the promising tech directions better;
I will check my ethereal ideas for reality compliance very early.
The cons are:
- I will loose time getting familiar with and learning all the technologies needed (although I actually like all this geeky stuff and it is not a problem to learn, - it is much better to devote more time to Customer Development, Marketing and Sales from the business perspective).