? Presumbly I spoil the fun again ?
One of my professors once said:
'For the term "system" you may also use the term "thing".'
Engineer is quite similar.
Depending on which language you use, and under what law you are engineer can mean anything, or nothing at all.
Personally I have an engineer degree from a german university ('machines engineering, electrical and systems automation' - one of those monsters... ?)
In germany the title Ingenieur is protected and can only be achived by a college graduation.
So what bothered me for many years is that computer scientists and programmers also name themselves engineers.
From a strict (german) engineer's point of view they are not.
They are natural scientists.
This is neither ment to be worth more and for sure not less.
It's different.
An engineer always grasps just the knowledge he needs, and asks if something is of any use.
A natural scientists doesn't care about usage.
He's curious about anything he doens't know yet, wants to understand it, and tends to get lost into deep analytics.
Against a wide misbelief engineers always aim to achieve the very least and cheapest solution possible (KISS, unix philosophy - laws of engineering).
Salesguys always want more features, because the amount of features sell.
They don't give a shit if something works, is of any use, or even dangerous as long as it sells and as few money as possible needs to be paid for warranty, penalties and repairs.
Scientists don't care about costs at all.
No price can be put on knowledge.
They want to check out what even more can be done, aim for infinity.
Engineers are focused on the target's usage, the cost and the schedule.
If something does the job satisfactory
exactly as defined - not more, not less - for an engineer the task is done.
(Therein lies the core problem between salesguys and engineers.
Salesguys claim to exclusively define, but they don't, because a) they often don't know enough and b) they don't want the responsibility.
But they expect the engineers to meet the not or vague defined specification to the point precisely.
And tha's what they also do not understand, that's impossible.
One cannot meet an undefined specification.
There are impossibilties no matter how often you repeat Toyota's slogan ?)
An engineer has awareness of systems.
He's always aware of real systems exist in a real world.
They consist of real hardware within physical limits of a real world, ages, need maintenance, repairs, backup, and replacements.
An engineer knows to draw the line between simulation and reality.
Real systems are in real environmental conditions, exposed to atmospheres, temperature changes, moist, dust,.....
- and above all: users
An engineer is aware of building something without any use is total nonsense.
A (computer) scientist may create things just to see if it can be done, only. (e.g. no engineer would have ever created the programming language brainfuck ?)
Often enough computer scientist/programmers need to be beaten to document their software.
When the code runs, they think they're done.
And they think, if they understands it, so does everybody else - or they are not worth it ?
(E.g.: Yesterday I upgraded my packages.
Also qemu had an upgrade.
Before the upgrade I could run my Win7-image with the option '-soundhw all'.
qemu grumbled a bit this is outdated and not to be used anymore, but nevertheless it worked, I had sound.
After the update the option now is ignored, error message. No sound anymore.
But don't you think the documentation was updated, too.
Of course not!
I still cannot get it from how to get me sound, except the deprecated options. ?
So now I have to switch to virtualbox again, because their new update now includes USB 2 & 3. [thanks kpedersen to post that info {? reading the forum brings knowledge}]
Bottom line: The update causes users (at least me) to switch to another software and prevent even more users to join.
As from an engineer's point of view this is absolutely not comprehensible.
Because for an engineer you will not make an effort to create something and then prevent people to use it...
If one would talk to those about this, they would argue, and explain... - but not update the f#c41ng documentation!! ?)
I remember a night in the late 90's.
The time of Sony's PS1 and the dawn of mainstream internet.
We were sitting together, having a couple of .... beers, too.
Ingo, a very promising student of computer science, started rhapsodizing entusiastically about the advantages of Hypertext:
'...imagine, you don't need to download anything anymore. No need to have copies at all,... just link to it...this will be great!'
As an engineer-to-be I said:
'Yeah, well, but still we are dealing with files lying somewhere on harddisks on some computers, need electricity and addresses. If somebody decides to move or remove them, e.g. some salesguy says "get rid off this old rubbish", or simply the hardware fails your link is broken.'
25 years later we're all still aware of our very good, old friend 404 ?
He:'...yeah, well,..... to depend on hardware is still an annoying issue that must be solved....' ? ?
- natural scientists.
No engineer would serioulsy consider something totally hypothetic.
However, bottom line,
if one looks at the origin of the word engineer just means 'someone who creates' - as I said, anything or nothing at all.
And I agree with previous posters like Alain de Vos.
After all titles are for the bureaucrazy of hierarchic organisations.
They cannot tell you for sure what somebody can do.
And in the end that's all what matters, only.
Since I am no part of any organization anymore I don't have to bother about such idiocy like ranks and titles anymore,
I can take people as they are, not about how many stripes are on their shoulder.
This is freedom. ?
After all, with modern software engineering one cannot draw a line between science and engineering, as I did to define both.
It is both.
It's kind of science.
And it's engineering, no mistake.
You need engineering to realize something useful working.
And you need science to create something new.
Bob Pease:
"
People often ask, "Would you encourage your son or daughter to go into engineering?"
I reply, "Yes, if it is analog circuit design."
They say, "Explain!"
I respond, "My friends and I know many analog design techniques, tricks, and secrets.
They cannot be learned from SPICE.
Every year there are 200,000 Chinese engineering graduates, and they don't know what we know.
We can solve problems they cannot."
I rest my case. /rap
"
www.theglobeandmail.com
