Computer Science vs. Software Engineering

theodp writes "Microsoft's promotion of Julie Larson-Green to lead all Windows software and hardware engineering in the wake of Steven Sinofsky's resignation is reopening the question of what is the difference between Computer Science and Software Engineering. According to their bios on Microsoft's website, Sinofsky has a master's degree in computer science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and an undergraduate degree with honors from Cornell University, while Larson-Green has a master's degree in software engineering from Seattle University and a bachelor's degree in business administration from Western Washington University. A comparison of the curricula at Sinofsky's and Larson-Green's alma maters shows there's a huge difference between UMass's MSCS program and Seattle U's MSE program. So, is one program inherently more compatible with Microsoft's new teamwork mantra?"

Comments

Engineer is better fit to lead product development

[Anonymous Coward]

In my opinion CS majors have always been the philosopher kind who like to nit-pick every angle of development. Product development leadership requires someone more practical as an engineer.

as if

[iamagloworm]

as if the schools these guys went to makes a difference? their skills are learned from experience working in the industry and their value is in using their judgement based on that experience to make the best choices.

Re:as if

[Anonymous Coward]

True story.
I am a computer science student but I do internship as a software engineer.

Re:as if

[Anonymous Coward]

In most cases that's true. Based on the comments at http://minimsft.blogspot.com/, it's the politics and social networking at Microsoft that matter much more under Ballmer's regime, not solely the technical competence. Having said that, there are some pretty rough reviews of her technical skills and the path she took to the top.

Re:as if

[Dahamma]

Yep, these are senior executives with a thousand or more people reporting to them who spend most of their time in meetings. The details of computer science or engineering classes they took in college 30 years ago are pretty much irrelevant to their current jobs.

And it's especially true in this case, as personal computers were in their infancy when they were in college, anyway. Trying to compare two programs based on what they are *today* makes no sense when they graduated in the 80's.

Re:as if

[Anonymous Coward]

Who takes this bullshit "opinion piece" seriously anyway? He tries to force some kind of view on things, and pull out something by its hairs, that isn't there.

The whole thing is nonsense, and in fact, just like with trolling (which this probably is), we shouldn't even be discussing it.
Hell, we shouldn't even acknowledge the existence of TFA/TFS.
.
.
How did I get here? What are we talking about? Can I pick something?
How about creating a lobby just for us, with the power of hacking an social engineering and tech knowledge combined?
Yes, I think that's a vastly more fruitful topic than anything Slashdot has to offer right now. (Not that that it was hard.)

Re:as if

[eric31415927]

This is the same in most industries. A degree from any number of schools gets one an interview. Experience and ability gets one a job.

Re:as if

[iamagloworm]

not to mention that i also just looked at their bios and larson-green has worked at microsoft for 19 years and sinofsky 23 years. these are not jobs where you send in your resume and a cover letter about how good you are.

Re:as if

[Sir_Sri]

Schools matter somewhat in terms of their career trajectories and the experiences they earned. You can't get hired as a professional engineer if you aren't an engineer sort of thing, so your school can shape your biases somewhat. But as you say, at this stage, corporate executive level, they're much more about their experience after the fact.

But different schools, especially computer science schools are wildly different in their programmes, so you can't really compare 'CS to SE', CS at one particular school to SE at a particular school sure, but in general, not so much. Some places SE grows out of comp eng and is in part electrical like comp eng, some CS places are more hardware than software, some are even pure maths vs programming etc.

A fresh grad is not a corporate executive, much as our Ivey business grads would like to think that, 10 years of experience after a degree you can go a lot of different things. Your degree sets up where it's easy to start, but not where you're going to go.

Re:as if

[__aaltlg1547]

Based on the comments at http://minimsft.blogspot.com/, it's the politics and social networking at Microsoft that matter much more under Ballmer's regime, not solely the technical competence.

Every company is like that. Working with people is a job requirement for managers.

Re:as if

[eugene ts wong]

I don't understand. Why wouldn't they send in their resumes and cover letters and talk about how good they are? Isn't that how it normally works at all levels of society?

Re:as if

[nateb]

Employment at that level is much more about who you know and how you network and politick.

Re:as if

[chrismcb]

Schools matter somewhat in terms of their career trajectories

Yep you are right... If you are a CE you can aspire to become a VP at Microsoft. But if you are a CompSci you can also aspire to become a VP at Microsoft... oh wait...

Re:as if

[Sir_Sri]

And an MBA from an Ivey (or Ivy) business school can aim to be a MS VP too, one would guess they get there from a different route than someone on the technical side of things.

It's the difference between science and tech.

[Pseudonym Authority]

Computer science, is a ... science. It's concerned with algorithms, factorials, LISP, Turing machines, and all sorts of other crazy awesome shit. Software engineering is concerned with Ruby on Rails and Wordpress.

If CS were called engineering, SE would be called mechanics.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet for the most part in my experience, most CS grads coming out of school end up getting the same programming gig.

At a high level CS may have at one point been about the science of computing. At this point, unless you go to an ivy league school it has become a trade.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[betterunixthanunix]

Computer science, is a ... science

Only in the old sense of the word "science," i.e. "knowledge," but then software engineering would also be "science." CS is not about gathering data then forming a theory; it is about developing logic systems from a set of basic assumptions (e.g. the semantics of your programming language, or of a theoretical computational system like a Turing Machine or Lambda Calculus). That would be mathematics (which at one time would have been called "science" as well). CS is a particular branch of mathematics: the branch that is concerned with computational methods, which was originally developed as part of an attempt to classify all mathematics in terms of symbolic manipulation (but which ultimately led to a proof that not all mathematics is symbolic manipulation).

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[vux984]

Same as any other science degree.

Most grads in math, physics, chemistry also end up doing relatively "mundane" jobs. A degree in bio-chem and you can be a lab technician. A degree in geology and you analyze oil drill results. Physics degree -- you might end up working on radio antennae...

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

The bachelor-level curriculum of CS, like that of Engineering and a lot of other STEM fields, requires one to learn a lot of shit they'll never use. Even then doing well in school doesn't mean that one is that smart or useful in the field. As far as engineering goes, I for one don't understand why mechanical engineers have to pass dynamics, thermodynamics, and differential equations just to draw gears and hinges all day (which, admit it, is what most mechanical engineers do).

Same goes for computer science. All the wheels have been invented, so it makes no sense to be forced to do shit like proofs and set theory. And both computer scientists and engineers still can't speak clear English or use apostrophes correctly, even the native American ones write like a Chinese doctor's Google translation of a technical process.

Software engineering, at least in the U.S., is just computer science-lite with a bunch of bloviating buzzwords.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Empirical studies are a big part of computer science, because the worst case time complexity of Quicksort for example is an interesting fact, but what you really want to know is how it performs on the data in your application. While it is interesting to know that the Halting Problem is undecidable, computer scientists are nevertheless working on ways to find whether programs will run to completion (or have other generally undecidable properties), because for many real world programs there are in fact answers that are quite useful. Computer science is not axiomatic, i.e. built from the ground up. It is just as much about observing and explaining real world systems, like modeling big computer networks. In particular, CS is not a branch of mathematics, but uses it, a lot.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[gtall]

I see you don't get the point of college education. It is supposed to stretch your mental capabilities so that when confronted with a new situation, you aren't without the mental faculties to understand and master it. Why should CS majors learn calculus? Because mathematical reasoning is important, and many CS people rub shoulders with engineers. You want to talk to them and be useful, learn your calculus...well.

Higher Education is just that Higher Education. It is not Trade School Skill Boot Camp so you can regurgitate the latest buzzwords MS and the rest of their ilk cram down managers throats.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[loufoque]

Engineering is actually the science of applying fundamental science for practical applications.
So it's science too.

Using Ruby on Rails is not engineering, it's just development.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[afgam28]

That's not really been my experience. If you think that Software Engineering is concerned with RoR and WordPress, then no offense or anything but you probably have a narrow understanding of the (computing) world and lack breadth in your studies and experience.

Computer Science, like science in general, attempts to expand human understanding of a field of study. So Computer Scientists spend a lot of time exploring new things. For this reason, they rarely talk about Turing Machines. Some do, but most don't - they've been studied to death already and there's relatively little left to discover about them. How often do you see new papers about LISP or Turing Machines? Most Computer Scientists I know research things like Machine Learning and Computer Vision.

The term Software Engineer gets thrown around a lot, and the meaning depends a lot on who is using the term. At my company, Software Engineers are concerned with things like performance/scalability and reliability. For example, have we got redundant systems in place in case a data center goes down? And will the algorithms we use handle peak expected loads?

The key difference is that CS is about finding out about things that people don't already know. SE is about building thats that are immediately useful to people. The equivalent to mechanics is called "IT".

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[loufoque]

I don't know anyone who did studies in math, physics or chemistry but who didn't end up doing teaching or research-like work in their respective fields (well there was a guy who studied physics who ended up doing bio-chemistry, but it was because they were interested in the effects of lasers on their stuff).

Then again I don't know anyone who studied those fields and stopped before getting a MSc.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[betterunixthanunix]

Computer science is not axiomatic, i.e. built from the ground up

Really? When most people write a computer program, they assume the semantics of their programming language (even when you bootstrap a compiler, you need to make assumptions about whatever computational system the bootstrapping code runs on). If you do not call that "axiomatic," then I am not sure what you would say is "axiomatic."

In particular, CS is not a branch of mathematics

Considering that the field of CS began with an effort to classify mathematics and that we have results like the Curry-Howard correspondence, I am not really sure how you can make such a statement.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

I sort of explained what I mean by axiomatic, but perhaps these excerpts from Wikipedia are more enlightening: "An axiom is a premise or starting point of reasoning. As classically conceived, an axiom is a premise so evident as to be accepted as true without controversy" and "an axiom is any mathematical statement that serves as a starting point from which other statements are logically derived."

Some aspects of computer science, particularly of theoretical computer science, are closely related to mathematics, and they are indeed built from the ground up. But those are only small parts of computer science and certainly not the most important ones. The existence of "pure" results which do not depend on empiric observation doesn't invalidate the much bigger part of computer science that is science in the same way in which physics and chemistry are sciences.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[some old guy]

Please don't pretend to understand the nuances of what ME's and the other practical engineering disciplines do and why we need to know what we're taught to do it.

Your lines of code are physically exactly like every other line of code. They do not have things like mass, heat, flow, friction, stress, wear, corrosion, and a dozen other things that gears and hinges have.

With rare exceptions (usually in aerospace research), when a CS or software guru makes a mistake, things don't blow up and hurt people. Hard-science engineers are educated for a reason. Diligence is not optional.

The thread is about CS vs SE. Practical engineers work in a different environment entirely, and are not applicable to the current thread.

Thank you.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Dahamma]

Seriously? Well I know many people who majored in these and others and ended up as programmers/software engineers, lawyers, MBAs (corporate and I-banking), and a few MDs. One chem major ended up playing minor league baseball before going to med school. And a physics major is is now an CG animator.

I'd go as far as saying the majority (as in more than half) graduating with those undergraduate degrees don't end up going on to academia/research, and that's from a school ranked #1 in Physics and #2 in Math programs in the US. Plenty do, but if "most" is defined as the majority I'd say the GP has a point.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Dahamma]

Higher Education is just that Higher Education. It is not Trade School Skill Boot Camp so you can regurgitate the latest buzzwords MS and the rest of their ilk cram down managers throats.

Exactly! In hindsight my biggest college regret (and strongest recommendation to college students) was not having enough time to take more electives completely unrelated to my major.

And while I'm sure most of the major-required classes benefited my career background in some way, many of them really aren't that relevant to what I do. And work isn't everything - engineering college students should really try to go take a couple semesters of Chinese, medieval history, psychology, creative writing, whatever. They will make you a much more well rounded and interesting person in *life*, and occasionally might even be more useful to you at work, you never know...

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[loufoque]

I believe the reason for the difference in our experience is because you're talking about undergraduate studies.
Undergraduate studies don't mean much, and are often used as a mechanism to tell if people are smart enough to do science, but are not expected to actually do science as a job. It's mostly an evaluation criteria.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Mr2cents]

"Computer science is not a science, and it's not about computers" - Hal Abelson.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Pseudonym Authority]

I'm well aware of him. What was his other quote... something like `We conjure the spirits of the computer with our code'? It's been a while since I picked up SICP. Never-the-less, as great as it is, I'm going to have to reject his mysticism and maintain that it is, in fact, a science.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Dahamma]

Well, you were at some point talking about undergraduate studies, as well:

Then again I don't know anyone who studied those fields and stopped before getting a MSc.

Gotta get a bachelor's before continuing on to get a masters, and stopping would imply just a bachelor's in the field which was my point...

But sure, definitely if you get a graduate degree you're much more likely to do research. Still, I know a chemistry PhD who is a drug sales rep (probably making more than her MD husband) and a physics PhD who is a venture capitalist & former CEO. And I work with a few PhDs - one has his in CS, another in Aero Eng. and another in Math, but they are all software engineers/architects. Still have plenty of counter examples ;)

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Mr2cents]

Sciences deal with understanding the natural world. CS doesn't. It's more closely related to logic and mathematics, neither of which are sciences.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[HornWumpus]

I've personally had to break in a physics PhD, recently doing post doc at CERN (this was 10 years ago). It was ugly, very ugly.

They assigned him to work on a Access front end for SQL server (spit), designed by another PhD (applied math, good at solving LPs, DB design involved lots and lots of columns, second table joined cause he ran out of columns.)

They wanted him (the new guy) to find the useful bits in that steaming pile, which he was unprepared for. Nobody was, Heisenberg's uncertainty etc. That code was out of HP Lovecraft. It made people insane. To say nothing of the FORTRAN behind the scenes, that stuff was,,,interesting.

I tricked the Access author into exposing an API of useful functionality, however backward assed. I showed him how to call the Access app from visual basic. (for which I will burn in hell for all eternity, he used this to feed a webpage!) Talk about a stack from hell, old school ASP, VB object, Access VBA called via OLE, FORTRAN.

I should really be more ashamed, but I'm not. I quit shortly after. I gave them the last bit of glue but the mess is theirs. I had nothing to do with calculated GOTOs in the FORTRAN for example (next iteration entry point was a global with a non-discriptive name, all kinds of code added or subtracted *magicnumber*).

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong! There are plenty of touching points between Computer Science and Electrical Engineering that involve the natural world, see e.g. wireless networking, SCADA systems, physically unclonable functions, embedded systems, smart cards, rfid security, biometrics, intrusion detection... need I go on?

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[cheesybagel]

Who designed and constructed the Colossus decoding machine? Hint: it wasn't Turing.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Mr2cents]

None of those try to study or gain a better understanding of the natural world. You said it yourself, it's electrical engineering. You could also say that mathematical formulas are used to describe the natural world. While true, that doesn't imply that math is a science.
I think the best field where you could make a case is in modelling, e.g. of galaxy formation, climate change and such. Here computer simulations are really becoming a third pillar alongside theoretical science and experimental science. If you look more closely, in simulating you are just testing that your model of reality is complete with all it complex interactions (or if you are missing something), or try to make some predictions based on the results of your model.
Then again, you could continue to argue about this ad nauseam. Personally, I find this kind of pigeon holing not very interesting. By changing the definitions ever so slightly, you could get very different classifications. Whether it is science, engineering, math, logic, or computer science, I love them all equally and it eventually comes down to "all for one and one for all". Bicker all you want.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not quite sparky. You seem to have technology jobs confused with science jobs. For the physics degree, you might also end up installing that antenna, but is more likely you *design* the antenna. Installing and tuning it are different from design. A few years ago a neighbour lady said that I had studied computer science and now kids are taking all of that in school. Not really. I mean yes, they do stuff with computers in school. They teach them word processing and such. But they also teach drivers education in school too. Now there is a difference between drivers education, and being a mechanic, and likewise a difference between being a mechanic and working at the Ford assembly plant, and a difference between that and being an automotive engineer. Oh, and one more step to being a researcher who creates new kinds of internal combustion engines, (or designs new kinds of engines that don't burn gasoline, etc.). I studied computer science. Its not learning how to use a spreadsheet. Its not like just designing the spreadsheet application and programming it (although that's part of it). Its not just designing and building the operating system that the spreadsheet application runs under (although that's a part of it too). And its not just artificially intelligent spreadsheet applications like you've never seen before (although that's a part of it too).

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[theArtificial]

They do not have things like mass, heat, flow, friction, stress, wear, corrosion, and a dozen other things that gears and hinges have.

True, but the control systems which drive those are typically software driven.

when a CS or software guru makes a mistake, things don't blow up and hurt people.

Mars Orbiter was due to improper units. Stuxnet software was impressive. Siberian oil pipeline explosion due to malicious software. Or medical eqipment software configured to deliver fatal x-rays, remote exploits with pace makers. Airbush crash due to software. How about software which drives Wall Street trades, surely that affects many more people? What about power outages due to improper software configurations? Here is a nice list of issues involving software.

Hard-science engineers are educated for a reason. Diligence is not optional.

Also why people who build things where lives are on the lines are licensed and bonded.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

The debate should be computer engineering vs. software science really.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[__aaltlg1547]

My company hires people as Software Engineers. We don't care if they have CS or SWE degrees. We care if they understand control systems, physical systems, complex and finite math and calculus. And they must be able to program.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely disagree, at least in my experience SE is far more about the engineering process and more concerned with C or assembly and object oriented design than anything to do with Ruby........

You're mistaking IT and SE.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[DMUTPeregrine]

Well, my father did teach at UCLA after getting his PHD (math, differential geometry to be specific) but he's been working in the software industry for over 20 years now. That said, his specialty happens to be quite useful for a good variety of software, and programming pays better than professorship.

Of course an anecdote isn't reliable data, but your post is an anecdote as well.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should CS majors learn calculus? Because mathematical reasoning is important, and many CS people rub shoulders with engineers. You want to talk to them and be useful, learn your calculuswell.

While mathematical reasoning is important, and some basic calculus is worthwhile, I think most CS graduates would be far better off with a better understanding of discrete algebra (which I have had use for, and which was a set of elective courses) and the like than the vector analysis, differential equations Fourier series, and so on that I had to study, none of which has been even remotely useful to anything I've done outside those classes. (OTOH, high school calc is important, especially if you're doing any kind of financial management involving interest.)

Wen rubbing shoulders with engineers, if things are actually being discussed in terms of high-level calculus, you probably need a fairly decent understanding of the basics of their field anyway, otherwise you have no idea what the formulae represent.

It isn't that I don't think CS students should learn things which they won't use later on (after all, most CS grads will never be kernel hackers or write compilers or anything like that, but it is still valuable to learn (not to mention fun, at least outside of exam time)), but rather that the compulsory components should be chosen for their usefulness in understanding CS.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[some old guy]

As an EE who designs and implements industrial controls for a living, I'm quite aware of the role software plays in physical implementations.

My point is that practical engineers need a larger helping of physics in their lunchboxes on a daily basis than pure programmers, hence the usual course of study in E-schools.

Controls design requires a sound background in both, though. This is why none of my factories have burned down and my robots have yet to kill or maim their operators.

Apparently you've never worked in a large American manufacturing plant. Lives and limbs are on the line every minute, and the engineers are usually unlicensed. We do manage to muddle through, though, thanks to a rigorous education.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[Cederic]

Software engineering to me is much like non-software engineering: It's about repeatable outcomes.

Applying the knowledge that's out there, choosing the correct approach, factoring in the constraints and future needs, then delivering something that works.

So nothing like computer science, and fuck all to do with wordpress.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[xelah]

Well....maybe maths rather than science. And both are subjects of study, not kinds of people. Nothing in CS or SE is secret. It's not sugery, or orchestral conducting, or flying. Nothing needs access to special knowledge, or special resources, or special people. You don't need cadavers or supervised training, nor an orchestra, or an aeroplane. Any competent developer should be able to learn enough computer science to do his job (and more, out of curiosity), just as he's expected to learn new tools, languages and problem domains. To expect a big difference in the skills and capabilities of two people many years of working in industry after they've graduated from CS vs SE courses is foolish.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[TigerTime]

I'm not sure if you're trolling or not, but if you're serious, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. I graduated from a fairly renowned University here in the US that offers Computer Science, Computer Engineering, and Software Engineering, as well as a couple other more specific engineering programs.

  - Computer Engineering focuses on the hardware, and is more synonymous with Electrical Engineering.
  - Computer Science and Computer Engineering students took nearly the same classes except for about 3 classes where Engineering students took more math/software classes classes and Computer Science students were able to take a concentration in a different subject of interest outside of engineering

I'm not sure what shitty school you went to, but in ours we all learned LISP, algorithms, AI, programming theories, discrete structures, and software modeling and construction. The idea of an Engineering student doing fucking Wordpress and Ruby on Rails for a degree is an absolute farce. And if that's what your university offered in their program you should be ashamed for your school.

Re:It's the difference between science and tech.

[volpe]

Physics degree -- you might end up working on radio antennae...

Or as a quant on Wall St.

CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

Computer science is a branch of mathematics; software engineering is a collection of methods for applying that math in the "real world." Software engineering is not about state machines, compilers, programming languages, parallel algorithms, etc.; it is about how to use write "concrete" implementations of such things in a way that makes sense for real-world computation.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[iamhassi]

Science is "why", engineering is "how". Science studies why things are the way they are, while engineering just accepts the way things are and works with that. That said, would rather have a scientist, since they understand things better.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

Eh, most computer scientists are not going to be able to develop a system that meets specifications by a deadline unless they also have software engineering skills. I know expert cryptographers who can barely implement a working software system and who have no idea how to make software for use in real applications. Computer science research projects are usually "write only" software that can only be used by the person that wrote it, because it is written without regard to anything beyond proving a particular point or idea (so-called "grad student code," at least at my institution).

So really, for a real-world project, you probably a (good) software engineer.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

Engineering is, by definition "applied science".
As a professional, licenced, software engineer I can tell you that we did nearly identical core math theory to CS majors, including state machines, compliers, theory of computer languages etc. However we had much less choice of electives because we were also required to develop in three other key areas that were optional in CS:
1. Basic sciences (Physics, Chem, Bio) in order to have the fundimental understanding required to work effectively on a multi-diciplinary team
2. Software Quality (theory & practice)
3. Project Management

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

Computer science is a branch of mathematics;

False. Mathematics does not care about grounding or motivation in reality. Computer science without grounding in reality is math, computer science with grounding in reality is how should I put this, computer science.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

False dichotomy. INTENTIONAL false dichotomy. (= lying for the purpose of manipulation)

We have, and need not only both scientists and engineers, but everything else there is too. Like teachers, software *users*, testers, designers, etc, etc, etc.
And it's rather beautiful that we have such a complete set of jobs for every aspect of the system.

Need I say more?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

Science is "why", engineering is "how".

Not really. Science is finding out how/why and engineering is applying that knowledge.

If you want to study computing devices and how they relate to computing methods (or implement them) then you're talking about computer science.

Software engineering is exactly that - building things. It helps a lot if you know how to build things well, but you can build software poorly (knowing nothing of computer science) and still be a "software engineer."

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

Mathematics does not care about grounding or motivation in reality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_analysis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_mathematics

Also,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry-Howard_Isomorphism

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

Eh, most computer scientists are not going to be able to develop a system that meets specifications by a deadline unless they also have software engineering skills. ...which in practice are taught in nearly all computer science undergraduate programs. So anyone currently claiming some superiority of SEers over CSers is likely just trying to prop their own degree.

I've developed shipping code for companies as well as research projects at university. Research code is write-only since it is not worth architecting properly something that is meant for one time use, not because of some supposed lack of software engineering skills.

Heck! a good software engineer is equally likely to program a write only perl script to do a one time migration of their system.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[gtall]

Yes and no. Many mathematical disciplines were invented because some physicists or engineers were trying to solve a real world problem. At some indistinct point, the mathematics involved becomes a discipline unto itself. The deep problems are mathematical but they got driven by real world considerations. It also can flow in the opposite direction, number theory starts out from mere counting for taxes and commerce. It progresses until it is involve with problems that have nothing to do with its origins. But then computers and security become important, and suddenly, abstract number theory which had no claim to the real world except in an abstract sense, become vitally important for real systems.

The universe is wild place, there are rarely sharp-edged corners dividing academic disciplines.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

As to N.A. and A.M if you ask most mathematician they will tell you those fields are not really math.

The Curry-Howard link is neither here nor there. Math is applied routinely in many sciences, and is often inspired by reality (more so in the past that recently) yet this has never been central to what math is.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a question, for those who actually have some real world experience with this.

If most CS and SE grads have four year degrees, and they spent the first two doing gened courses like every bachelors degree, then how much practical difference is there really between them on only two years of differentiation, in related fields?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

As to N.A. and A.M if you ask most mathematician they will tell you those fields are not really math.

Except for those mathematicians who work in applied fields of math, who will tell you that they are mathematicians. Not that people could be biased or anything like that, or that experts might not agree on how to define their field.

The Curry-Howard link is neither here nor there. Math is applied routinely in many sciences,

The Curry-Howard correspondence is not a statement about an application of math in computer science. In simple terms, the correspondence is this: a mathematical proof can be converted into a computer program, and a computer program can be converted into a proof of some mathematical statement. Yes, there are some technicalities here (e.g. a program with an infinite loop), but this is not just some application of math to computer science, it is a fundamental link.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[afgam28]

False. Mathematics does not care about grounding or motivation in reality.

Ever heard of "applied mathematics", like for example statistics or operations research?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[loufoque]

It still is about state machines, compilers, programming languages, parallel algorithms. Having research papers with mathematical formulae and proofs is all nice and dandy, but at some point it's nice to actually implement the shit, test it out, studying the practicality of the thing etc., and that's software engineering.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[loufoque]

computer scientists are not going to be able to develop

You could have stopped there, that's accurate enough.

Computer scientists can't write code, and they really shouldn't. It's a waste of both their time and that of others.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[loufoque]

Except engineering *is* science.
Don't confuse fundamental/applied with science/non-science.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[afgam28]

As a Software Engineer, I care plenty about "why" things are the way they are. For example, I care a lot about why unindexed database joins are O(n^2), because I need to know how to avoid writing slow code. Engineers who don't understand why their software will perform/scale adequately and meet SLAs aren't very good engineers.

I think a more accurate way to describe it is: science is more about "new" and engineering is more about "useful". Scientists don't bother researching things that are already known and engineers don't bother implementing things that they don't think anyone will want to use.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

Software engineering is taught but not required by most CS curricula (at least from what I have seen), which are generally focused on training students to use programming languages and giving them some surface-level exposure to theoretical and practical concepts.

Research code is write-only since it is not worth architecting properly something that is meant for one time use, not because of some supposed lack of software engineering skills.

Except that research code is not always meant for one-time use; there are quite a few research programs that are used in multiple projects, which which are poorly documents, poorly engineered, and hard to run. I have seen a lot of grad students spend weeks trying to figure out how to extend some part of a research project written by some other grad student -- and once they have figured it out, they just hack out the solution, with little attention paid to design or even documenting what they did (it is particularly amusing to see this happen in software engineering research groups). Part of the problem is a lack of demand on the part of PIs, who rarely require that code be documented or well-designed and who are usually more concerned with publishing a paper by some deadline (there are exceptions, usually from groups that are more concerned with solving a problem in the real world than with padding the PI's CV). Another part of the problem is that for most graduate students, the exposure to software engineering tools and practices ended with the use of build systems (and usually did not go very far in to that).

There are exceptions, but let's put it this way: if someone told you they had a PhD in CS, would you assume they could design a maintainable or reliable software system?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

Science is "why", engineering is "how". Science studies why things are the way they are, while engineering just accepts the way things are and works with that. That said, would rather have a scientist, since they understand things better.

That's funny.

Never had to maintain code written by a scientist, have you?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[pregister]

I'd say, where the rubber meets the road, science is "Huh?" and engineering is "Hmm".

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[subreality]

IMO "CS" is misnamed. There's not a lot of science, as in applying the scientific method, involved. Would it be better to start calling them "computer mathematicians"?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

science is studying the existant.

engineering is creating the possible.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[marcosdumay]

if someone told you they had a PhD in CS, would you assume they could design a maintainable or reliable software system?

Hum, no. And I wouldn't assume that if somebody told me he had an equivalent degree on software engineering either.

The ugly reality of IT is that nearly everybody in it don't have a minimum idea of how to code. Whatver dimension you choose, be it maintainability, number of bugs, complexity, actualy implementing the specs, discovering what the specs are, use of resources, whatever... You name it, nearly everybody working on IT doesn't know it.

Now, about the question at TFS, there is as much diversity between different courses of the same type ("computer science" or "software engineering") as there is between different courses of different types. The course type alone tells nothing.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

A fundamental link as much as everything in physics can be translated to an equation, yet no one claims all of physics is math, because the goals are different, which brings us back to our original point. Motivation is more important than technique.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

Software engineering is taught but not required by most CS curricula (at least from what I have seen),

It is part of the ACM curricula recommendations.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

Computer scientists can't write code,

Funny you write that, since the SE moniker didn't even exist as an option until about 15 years ago or so. Before that all software was written by CS people. You might actually have heard of some of them.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[cheesybagel]

That is funny because I have a computer engineering degree and I learned about state machines, compilers (besides lexer and parser theory we had to write two of them during the course), programming languages, parallel algorithms. I also learned lambda calculus, semantic tableaux, first order logic, modal logic, operator algebra, propositional calculus, etc. In fact many of our classes were held jointly with the students of the maths department and the exams were the same.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

it is all engineering. don't confuse science with multiple choice tests or academia nonsense. math and science are engineering. they build new things. good scientist is always a good engineer and vice versa.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[geminidomino]

Might depend on the school.

At FSU, where I got my degree, for example, the difference between CS and SE was, literally, one course.

CS took "Programming Languages"

SE took "Software Engineering II"

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[ameoba]

When a professor insists computer science is X but not Y, have compassion for his graduate students.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Epicaxia]

Computer science is a branch of mathematics; software engineering is a collection of methods for applying that math in the "real world."

Close, but I would add the following:

• * A computer scientist can formally prove that his algorithm will solve your problem effectively. He or she is focused on solving interesting problems. Computer scientists are more likely to be found on a technical track or consulting. Small, extremely difficult, technologically challenging problems and performance demands are commonly attract of computer scientists.
• * A software engineer is an engineer who programs as, or in the course of, his job. He or she is focused on creating a product (in the engineering, not business, sense). Software engineers are more likely to move eventually towards a managerial track, and will be oriented towards formal processes (requirements, etc.--either agile or formal). Software engineers are more likely to be found in enterprise environments and in disciplines where integrated systems (aerospace, etc.) are critical.

This is actually different from the developer-vs.-software-engineer discussion the other week--'developer' is a generic term for anyone who can write code. It can therefore also be a nearly-derogative term to people who write code but are neither computer scientists nor software engineers--for example, a computer scientist or software engineer might call someone a developer if they can write a web page or script a game, but aren't familiar with the underlying architecture of the server or engine they're using.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[QQBoss]

Funny, the head of my department said my degree was in Software Engineering in 1988. Then I got a job doing computer engineering and didn't write a meaningful program (though I did fix a lot of programs for CS majors who didn't understand the underlying systems implementations well enough) again until about 1997, so perhaps you have a point.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Cederic]

And yet all of this ignores one key truth: You don't graduate as a software engineer.

You wouldn't put a graduate in Civil Engineering in charge of building a bridge. You wouldn't put a graduate in Software Engineering in charge of building a non-trivial piece of software.

You give both a thorough grounding in the professional approaches, the chance to work with more experienced practitioners, and a chance to translate their academic skills into real ones.

In that context, the degree is pretty fucking irrelevant. You can learn software engineering on the job. It just happens to be quicker and easier if you know how to program first.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Cederic]

Funny you write that, since the SE moniker didn't even exist as an option until about 15 years ago or so. Before that all software was written by CS people

Funny you write that, since I'm working with people that wrote a system forty years ago that's still in production use now.

I'm working with different people that wrote a different system 25 years ago that's still in production use now.

I've worked in the past with people that wrote a system 33 years ago that's still in production use now.

Not a single fucking computer scientist amongst them.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a single one? I call BS.

I can believe it for the 40 year old system since back then the CS moniker itself was kind of new. Most programmers then came from math or physics. For the other ones you are full of it, and I'm sure more than one person with a CS degree had its hand on it over the years.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

the head of my department said my degree was in Software Engineering in 1988.

Whatever the head said doesn't mean much. The first diploma with SE on it was in the UK in 1987, the first such degree in the USA was in 1997, which is, let's see, carry the one, fifteen years ago.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

A fundamental link as much as everything in physics can be translated to an equation

Everything in physics can be modeled using math, assuming certain things about the universe. The Curry-Howard correspondence is not a statement about how to model computer programs nor is it a statement about how to model mathematical proofs, it is a statement about computer programs and about mathematical proofs.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

No, it is a statement about the logic semantics of a computer program. A program is more than just a sequence of instructions. You are abstracting that away in order to fit the correspondence but back in the real world computer programs have other aspects such as readability, extensibility, architecture choices, etc.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Compaqt]

If it *is* science, why are there even two words? Outside the field of computers, do you see any difference between engineering and science?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

I don't agree with this.

Programming is how to program things to accomplish goals.

Engineering is not just creating that product -- it's creating the ways to manufacture the product, the efficiencies it may need, the testing, adherence to regulation, development planning, factory golden drop creation, bug report and change request handling, many other things.

See also chemistry vs. chemical engineering.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[betterunixthanunix]

No, it is a statement about the logic semantics of a computer program

Which is all that a computer program is, regardless of how you describe the program, even if you implement the program in hardware.

A program is more than just a sequence of instructions

Of course not; a sequence of instructions is just one way to describe a given program (and there are infinitely many such sequences for a given program).

back in the real world computer programs have other aspects such as readability, extensibility, architecture choices, etc.

You mean like how we do not think of 5 as "S(S(S(S(S(0)))))" when we need to count five things? Yes, for applied or practical purposes we will typically take a few steps back from "foundational" or "rigorous" ways to reason about things like numbers or programs, because we are more concerned with what we are trying to accomplish than with rigorous definitions and proofs. That does not mean that when we count or write a Perl script we have somehow stopped doing math, it only means that we traded rigor for practicality.

When you look at research on code maintenance, what you will find is that mixed in with the CS there is psychology and social science (and usually the authors are both computer scientists and scientists from those other fields). The fact that computer scientists do interdisciplinary work does not mean that computer science includes those other disciplines, nor does it mean that any definition of computer science that fails to account for those other disciplines must be wrong. Mathematicians often work with economists; does that mean that definitions of math that fail to include economics must be wrong?

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[bored]

Before that all software was written by CS people.

That is false, math, physics and engineering majors were writing software long before CS programs existed.

The first university to offer CS in the US was Purdue in '62. There were other places teaching "programming" classes but they fell under other degree programs. This means that all the major early contributions to "computer science" were made by people with degree's in other fields.

In fact, by the time formal CS appeared, computing as we know it was pretty much already defined (see S/360, LISP, FORTRAN, etc).

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[QQBoss]

Yes, good point. I remember we were told we were working towards and expected to get ABET certification beyond just our computer science designation (the head of my department was an evaluation team member for the CAC at the time, though obviously not for reviewing our program), but I never found out the result (though obviously it must have been negative). Doesn't matter all that much now, post-2005 my department no longer exists and most of the college of engineering along with it. Don't worry, Sandy-sufferers, FEMA learned so many best-practices as a result of Katrina that they will have you fixed up in a jiff... errr.... what??? Ummm, never mind.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Alomex]

Which is all that a computer program is,

You keep on repeating this as it would make it true. Here are two objectives of a computer program that are not captured by your semantic reductionism: (1) a means for humans to talk to computers and (2) a means for a programmer to communicate with whoever is responsible for maintaining the program later.

I don't expect you to understand it.

what you will find is that mixed in with the CS there is psychology and social science.

Correct, which emphasizes how much CS is its own science. For example, if you look at biology you'll find that it mixes chemistry, physics, statistics, anatomy and ecology among other things. This should be a red flag telling you that your simplistic reductionist view of CS is wrong.

does that mean that definitions of math that fail to include economics must be wrong?

The would wrong economics, correct mathematics.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

> Except engineering *is* science.

Not really. The two disciplines overlap in lots of ways; some science is necessary for engineering and some engineering necessary for science, but I consider them two different disciplines.

For one thing, engineering predates science as a formal discipline. Science used to be called "natural philosophy."

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's because Physics is just making up some rules for how everything works. Most of Physics are unproven assumptions, and that's definitely not math.

Re:CS is Math, SE is an application

[Anonymous Coward]

In my last university, the lack of architectural design was more because everyone came from a mathematics background and saw FORTRAN and Matlab scripts as the way to write everything.

Deja Vu?

[Anonymous Coward]

It feels like we just discussed this a week ago - oh, wait, we did!

http://ask.slashdot.org/story/12/11/10/2038211/ask-slashdot-developer-or-software-engineer-can-it-influence-your-work

Another gem from timothy, right-supreme glorious editor for life.

Re:Deja Vu?

[Anonymous Coward]

The implication that developer and computer scientists are the same, even though they're actually on opposite sides of being a software engineer, shows that we clearly haven't discussed it enough.

From a network engineer

[AlphaWolf_HK]

To me Computer Science speaks of people who might want to design a new integrated circuit or otherwise do some kind of hard hacking, whereas software engineering refers to people who like to make said hardware do new tricks.

If Microsoft is sticking to the operating system department, I would figure the software engineer might be better qualified.

I'd say computer science would come into play when it comes to designing the surface tablet, except Microsoft isn't in the business of designing the bits and pieces, just the overall form factor. The bits and pieces come from the likes of intel, samsung, etc.

Re:From a network engineer

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer Science is a branch of mathematics. It's theoretical, and purely in the realm of software. Computer Engineering is the discipline that does hardware.

Re:From a network engineer

[The Dancing Panda]

You're talking about Computer Engineering, which is a different field than either of these.

Re:From a network engineer

[klubar]

I believe hardware is done by an electrical engineer.

Re:From a network engineer

[HornWumpus]

Computer engineering is close to EE, it only took 1 more semester to get both.

Re:From a network engineer

[luis_a_espinal]

I believe hardware is done by an electrical engineer.

Depends on the type of hardware. A transistor might be hardware, but building one would hardly be within the realm of a CE major. Similarly, a CE major will do more works towards computing than a EE major. All in all, there is a large overlap between EE and CE majors (and between CE and CS, and between CS and MIS ad IT).

SE (not the discipline, but the role) is found across all three. It's going to be interesting how SE pans out as a distinct discipline considering that SE is seen by the majority of people as application-centric. When you have CS/CE/EE people working on large SoC or software-defined radios, the need for SE with great intimacy of hardware increases.

IMO, I think a SE degree at a master level is a better alternative than as an undergrad level. Then EE and CE folks can opt for a SE track to supplement their CE/EE skills. An undergrad SE degree only benefits those working with application and non-embedded system-level development.

Back in the good old days ..........

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about America, but in India, when I graduated in in '98, Computer Science/Engineering meant learning both hardware (chip designs, architecture, programming for 8086, 286, 386 and other peripheral chips, studying hardware designs of computers and motherboards, right from AND, OR and NOT gates) and software (designing languages, operating systems, programming in C, C++, VB etc.)

Scientists versus Engineers

[Okian Warrior]

An engineer uses his tools and techniques to solve problems.

A scientist invents new tools and techniques.

If you're just using your knowledge to build things for people, you're an engineer. Unless you're exploring the limits of knowledge, coming up with and testing new ideas, you're not a scientist. And publishing has nothing to do with it, it's a mindset.

Knuth is a scientist - by laying out algorithms and describing their merits and deficiencies, he's essentially publishing a box of tools that others can use. Bill Gates is an engineer - he implemented known algorithms and solutions into a unified package (nothing new there).

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[loufoque]

I am exploring the limits of my knowledge daily, I am an engineer, a bit of a scientist, but still not a computer scientist.
Get your definitions straight.

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[Clubbah]

He said limits of knowledge, not limits of your knowledge.

My definition would be in science you discover things, in engineering you create things.

It's all BS anyway. A CS can create things and a SE can discover things, they overlap.

In my CS101/2 classes we sure learned about Big O and OOP and recursion and whatnot which some would consider an element of SE.

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[loufoque]

Engineering is science, dismissing your point entirely.

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[Clubbah]

IEEE disagrees with you.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/tech-careers/engineering-is-not-science

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[loufoque]

What a random guy says on a small website article hosted on some IEEE website is irrelevant and doesn't reflect the opinions of IEEE. You may want to look it up in a dictionary or encyclopaedia instead.

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[Anonymous Coward]

What! You mean my much-vaunted VB coding skills don't make me a computer scientist, but just another IT worker? How will I look down on the lowly sysadmins and networking people if I'm not special?

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[HornWumpus]

Engineering is applied science + business + art.

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[Cederic]

Oh heck, don't go confusing things by bringing art into it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Computer_Programming

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[Clubbah]

Ok, how about Wikipedia:

>As stated by Fung et al. in the revision to the classic engineering text, Foundations of Solid Mechanics:
"Engineering is quite different from science. Scientists try to understand nature. Engineers try to make things that do not exist in nature.

>Scientists study the world as it is; engineers create the world that has never been.
—Theodore von Kármán

>There exists an overlap between the sciences and engineering practice; in engineering, one applies science. Both areas of endeavor rely on accurate observation of materials and phenomena. Both use mathematics and classification criteria to analyze and communicate observations.

>In the book What Engineers Know and How They Know It,[29] Walter Vincenti asserts that engineering research has a character different from that of scientific research. First, it often deals with areas in which the basic physics and/or chemistry are well understood, but the problems themselves are too complex to solve in an exact manner.

Re:Scientists versus Engineers

[Anonymous Coward]

Not quite. Science (research-based) and engineering are complementary, but orthogonal.

That's why there's chemical engineering vs. chemistry, electrical + mechanical engineering vs. physics (electromagnetics + mechanics), genetic engineering vs. genetics, bioengineering vs. biology, civil engineering vs. uh... civilology, etc. etc.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer scientists understand what P=NP means and software engineers try to make people think they are smart by talking/acting as if they know means.

CS ws SE

[Anonymous Coward]

CS is mainly theoretical science, software engineering is one part of CS - how to analyze, design and build software. Usually SE is taught as a part of the CS curriculum, but perhaps some places have a separate program on it.

It's about work experience

[Anonymous Coward]

Having recruited plenty of people here in Finland, I can safely say, that the education means very little in the work life.
It's good to have _a_ degree, as it shows your employer two things:
1) You are able to learn new things.
2) You are abel to finish something that you started.

The curriculum never touches the latest topics in industry, you will learn more _relevant_ things in your first workplace during the first half year than you did over your 5 year education. Maybe some useful theory is in the back of your head, but you really don't make use of it actively, it has just opened the right paths of thought for you to be able to learn new things in the field.

CS vs Engineering 30 years later

[Anonymous Coward]

Those guys are 50 something. The difference between Computer Science and Software Engineering does not matter 30 years after you graduated. Whether you kept up with progress and what kind of experiences you acquired during that time is what matters. Old guy did not left because of the school he was in and the new guy was not hired because of the school he was. They left / have been hired because of what they did last 7 years.

At that level, it's about experience

[Hentes]

What you learned in school is irrelevant at that level.

Re:At that level, it's about experience

[gtall]

What you learned in school might be irrelevant. The mental training you received at school and how it influences you to approach problems very much is relevant.

Re:At that level, it's about experience

[dbIII]

Also, since it wasn't really traditional engineering, architecture or whatever bogus title is strapped on the front I doubt there really was a great deal of difference between the two courses. Back then it was really a focus of applied mathematics and to an extent it's still that in a way. Even at graduation the two courses were probably a few electives away from having a completely identical result.
So I'd say, not only irrelevant at that level, but most likely irrelevant at any level (even with current courses). Whatever gaps exist in one and not the other could probably be corrected by reading a small number of books or papers of the course of a few months.

Silly question

[Samantha Wright]

Compare what is emphasized in each curriculum. Whoever is contemplating this needs to seriously RTFM. The terms have very long and precise histories. The question may as well be "what is the difference between physics and structural engineering?" and the response would still be "why don't you use an encyclopedia?"

...Or we could get down to the actual question that the submitter was insinuating, which is "It is most likely that Sinofsky and his replacement will have different mentalities about how the Windows department at MS should be run. But will having a software engineer replace a computer scientist yield results that are better or worse for the company's bottom line?"

Re:Silly question

[Alomex]

The terms have very long and precise histories.

You are being ironic, aren't you? The terms have very short (less than 50 yrs for CS and 30 for SE) and there is still a lot of confusion as to what exactly an SE is or whether it falls under the purvey of regular engineering.

99% of CS grads are Software Engineers

[Zadaz]

Engineering, as it's practiced in other fields, is applying existing models (often created by scientists) to make something new or modify something old. Bridge building applies a lot of science but doesn't do any science.

Scientists postulate new theorems, perform and evaluate studies, publish papers on those studies.

The vast majority of CS grads go into jobs where they use existing languages, algorithms, APIs and libraries to create something new or modify something old. Thus Engineers, not scientists. How many CS grads have even submitted papers to peer review?

Yes, there are the CS people doing actual science, performing studies, creating the new stuff for all the future SE's to use, but they're the vast minority. If you want to see more than 2 in the same room go to SIGGRAPH.

Re:99% of CS grads are Software Engineers

[godrik]

In most universities the department is actually called "computer science and engineering".

Re:99% of CS grads are Software Engineers

[headhot]

Thats the problem. The market needs Software Engineers that were trained as Software Engineers, not Software Engineers trained as Scientists. The why both approach and solve problems are completely different. I'm not saying CS people can't solve problems, but its the SE that know what problems the solutions create.

Re:99% of CS grads are Software Engineers

[Anonymous Coward]

At California State University, Long Beach's College of Engineering, it's the CECS (Computer Engineering & Computer Science) department, and a lot of the earlier courses in both tracks are the same. http://www.csulb.edu/colleges/coe/cecs/

Re:99% of CS grads are Software Engineers

[Animats]

Yes, there are the CS people doing actual science, performing studies, creating the new stuff for all the future SE's to use, but they're the vast minority. If you want to see more than 2 in the same room go to SIGGRAPH.

True. More true in the 1990s, when rendering and physical simulation were being figured out. Game development used to need theoreticians. Now it needs people who can wrangle the large number of people and vast amounts of data that go into an A title.

Re:99% of CS grads are Software Engineers

[dbIII]

As a former professional engineer with some minor research background I dispute that - my exposure to scientists working in a research environment made me a better engineer.
Of course this argument is silly since CS and SE graduates are a few O'Reilly's books away from being identical whether they call themselves software engineers, software architechs, software gurus or software supreme court judges. The situation is really due to title creep where the top computer guys got called engineers or whatever to distinguish them from the lower ranking employees - it's just a white collar version of "leading hand".

Simple.

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer Science is about the science of computation.
Software Engineering is about the engineering of software.

Wow, that was simple.

There's no difference at some schools

[Niris]

Where I'm finishing up my CS degree, there isn't a software engineering program at all, but rather you can take 3 electives in it. A lot of our CS electives are way more practical than our core classes, too. It's a pretty nice mix when you can skip the theoretical nonsense, I just don't know how well that holds up compared to other universities

Software Engineering = the grind

[russotto]

Software Engineering, in the sense of the Seattle University program, is the attempt to reduce the production of software to a set of reproducible steps that any monkey (code monkey) could accomplish. You know, you start with your requirements, you proceed to a high-level design using object oriented design techniques, then you make a low level design, and finally, almost as an afterthought, you write code. As anyone who has been on a software project which attempts to follow this particular discipline knows, it doesn't work. It does, however, succeed in its secondary goal of turning an interesting job into a horrible grind.

I suspect working on Windows is already a horrible grind, so it probably won't make much difference.

Re:Software Engineering = the grind

[davidwr]

Oh, I don't know, I've followed that discipline many times and I enjoy writing up the requirements.

The problem is I or the team I was on have to re-write the requirements when we realize that either 1) the requirements aren't what the customer wanted (communication error), 2) the customer wants something else now (customer error), or 3) I/our estimate of the cost and time to deliver the product was way off because, like almost all programming projects, I/we had literally never done this exact project before and was/were unaware that certain things would take much longer than I/we estimated.

One of the most important black arts in project management is estimating what people and resources you will need and how long you will need them for. A rule of thumb I learned from a mentor ages ago still holds: Make your best estimate, double it, then raise it to the next unit of time: "2 months" becomes "4 years."

Re:Software Engineering = the grind

[Anonymous Coward]

That software engineering process seems to work for safety critical avionics software. Unfortunately, it is a horrible grind.

Re:Software Engineering = the grind

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what I've seen...Software engineers are paperwork masters. They are good for meeting with clients and determining how something should function, what it should look like, what rules it needs to follow. CS is much better at implementation though.

I would think an optimal team would be 1 software engineer and several computer scientists. That way the engineer can meet with clients and make the necessary paperwork and leave the CS to do the real work..

Why are managers talking about CS vs SE?

[Anonymous Coward]

Neither one is their job.

Re:Why are managers talking about CS vs SE?

[overshoot]

Neither one is their job.

Nice try, but wrong. CS is admittedly not about project management etc. (although SE is often either part of the curriculum or an elective) but software engineering, as formally defined, is all about management of software projects to get predictable quality results.

And, yes, I've been involved with both at the formal academic level.

Re:Why are managers talking about CS vs SE?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I've been involved with management at the formal academic level, and for the type of work upper management does, it almost doesn't matter what company they work for. (Almost, because it helps if you don't have to blindly trust your underlings. It doesn't make a difference otherwise.)

Who cares - she's a manager

[Anonymous Coward]

She's at the top of the managerial pyramid, she doesn't need to know much about either.
Her job is to keep tabs on the progress of each of the projects managed by people one level below her, then kick some of them up the arse if their projects are not coming along properly. If the kicks don't work, then assign someone external to the project to find out the real problems and either re-evaluate the scope or replace the manager.
The idea of someone managing hundreds of projects doing any engineering or computer science is mad.

Discrete Math's not a requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's where you cover that, & you do it as early as an AAS degree in CSC, in NY State @ least, by your 2nd year/Senior Year in the "SUNY" System... & the BEST COURSE during that, imo @ least? DataStructures!

* So this "masters in software engineering" doesn't HAVE that? I wonder if the "masters in CSC" does. IF they don't?? They ought to... it makes you *THINK*, not even like any other math out there imo.

(I thought it was hard too personally).

APK

P.S.=> I've got their undergrad degree (B.S., Business Admin + MIS concentration/minor) & am currently 90/120 credits built toward the B.S. in CSC (However - I don't have a masters in CSC or SE)...

Why?

Well, for example/instance: I've seen the coursework MBA's do for the Masters in Business is why - it's TOO "10,000 ft. view" & NOT DETAILED ENOUGH!

(Helped my brother during studies for his MBA & he was like "You did this stuff 20++ yrs. ago & STILL remember it?" & I was like "Well, yea - how can you USE it, IF you didn't COMMIT it?").

Hence, why I went for the 2nd degree in STRAIGHT CSC instead (more detail, & I took more languages than it required for the AAS work (60 cr. hrs.)), so I had more "detail"... & learned more (to me, that IS the TRUE BOTTOM-LINE on any degree)...

... apk

Re:Discrete Math's not a requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is incorrect. I am a slashdotter and APK sucked my dick so therefore APK has sucked a slashdotter's dick.

Re:Discrete Math's not a requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic here once? No.

Re:Discrete Math's not a requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic here once? No. Go away troll.

Re:Discrete Math's not a requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic here once? No. Hence your downmod. Go away troll.

Re:Discrete Math's not a requirement?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic here? No. Impersonating apk didn't work either.

Leaders don't matter

[Seeteufel]

The leader of a program is not important. What matters is the service to the machien. What matters is that the professionals who do the job feel productive and that no lamers stand in their way. Microsoft has ements of an anti-software professional culture. They hate open standards. They rarely talk coding. Developers have a low status. Microsoft fails to inspire their developers. They are not treated with dignity.

Re:Leaders don't matter

[kwerle]

I don't think that the folks at apple would [have] agreed with you.

Re:Leaders don't matter

[Seeteufel]

Steve Jobs was a professional presenter able to sell visions. He treated his teams very inhumane. His corporate policies were clearly anti-developer. Jobs is dead and Apple a brand.

Re:Leaders don't matter

[afgam28]

I've heard this opinion expressed a lot, but I'm a bit skeptical because I've never seen it work in practice. If it works so well to have leaders who are just there to serve the machine, where are these great companies that have good engineers and subservient "leaders"?

If you look at all the big successful tech companies, they all seem to have strong leadership with a clear vision. For example Amazon, Facebook and especially Apple are all built around what are almost cults of personality. Even Google's leadership is taking stronger control over the direction of the company (take for example the recent push into social media with their Google+ mandate).

Big groups need leaders. In a small company it matters less, because if the CEO or whatever is not leading, one of the engineers will. But once a company gets large, if the leaders aren't taking control then people from below will try to fill the power vacuum. You end up with a lot of political infighting as senior engineers try to build their empires, rather than work together towards a common goal.

Re:Leaders don't matter

[Seeteufel]

You don't really know whether a product was actually developed under Jobs or marketed under their brand. Many "leaders" are just persons on the propaganda layer. They are the presenters, the puppets. Design and investment decisions are taken by others.

Nominal differencs vs. actual difference

[davidwr]

The nominal difference is application vs. theory.

An engineer is concerned with making things work in a given situation.

A scientist is concerned with understanding how things work.

The actual difference boils down to the individual person and that individual's background. I can have a degree in software engineering from a heavy-engineering-emphasis school, but if my mind is more concerned with theory than application, at my heart I'm a scientist, not an engineer. Likewise, if I went to a heavy-science school and got a degree in computer science but my heart is on making well-built software, then I'm a software engineer.

There are of course other "kinds" of programmers. If a computer scientist is comparable to someone who studies building design and an engineer is comparable to an architect, a master coder is roughly equivalent to a master builder. The architect may not know the exact best grade of steel to use in a particular situation or the exact best local supplier of that steel, but a master builder will either know or know how to find out. Likewise, a good software engineer may not know the exact best library or function call for a given situation, but a master coder who is working in his area of expertise will.

At the low- and medium-ends of construction, you have less-than-master-level tradesmen. Some of these tradesmen may have small areas of extreme-zen-guru expertise, but their overall experience and expertise isn't nearly that of a master tradesman and they generally lack the high-level understanding of an architect and the theoretical understanding of someone who has made his life's work studying building design.

Likewise, in computer programming circles you have people who are relatively inexperienced and who have relatively little "big picture" or "deep theory" knowledge, but who - if their boss is very lucky - are zen masters in their own small domain. Over time, these people tend to realize "hey, if I want a job and I'm not both good at selling myself and lucky, I'll need a degree" and within a few years they have a 4-year technical degree of some type. Many adopt a mind-set of engineer or computer scientist, but some find that their calling is that of a zen-master programmer who happens to have some engineering or CS training.

Software engineer, computer programmer, or something else? It's time to look beyond the labels.

Re:Nominal differencs vs. actual difference

[Samantha Wright]

For what it's worth, this story is from the "distinct-vs-difference dept." The topic of conversation supposed to be about the impact Larson-Green will have on MS's future, particularly given the differences in education, but alas the submitter is far too incisive to actually prompt any incision.

Re:Nominal differencs vs. actual difference

[iamagloworm]

we are in trouble if we start thinking that slashdot article's departments actually mean something other than the editor doing their best to coin a witticism.

Re:Nominal differencs vs. actual difference

[Samantha Wright]

Well, it occasionally indicates complicity in miscommunication, such as this case. Or reveals a bias.

This is actually a question?

[PragMalice]

Both obviously involve software, however, CS formally focuses on the study of capabilities and refinement of digital circuitry and the software written on top of it whereas SE formally focuses on the study of the process of writing software.

A Computer Scientist doesn't need to know about a Software Engineer's design patterns, even if it might improve the quality of the software. Likewise a Software Engineer doesn't really need to know the computational differences between various sort algorithms so long as one of them fits within his functional and technical specs and can be written in a well-documented, easily maintainable, easily testable, and easily replaceable manner. One might say that the best programmers for the workplace are going to be those that study both disciplines, and to be sure most school's definitely take steps to have a significant portion of shared curriculum between the two even if the lion's share is otherwise not directly related. On the whole, I'd lean towards most businesses preferring an SE skillset over a CS skillset.

figureheads

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think academics and/or achievements are priority qualifications for "leaders" of western institutions for a long time now.
Ballmer, Carly Fiorina, Meg Whitman, Marissa Mayer, Steven Sinofsky, Julie Larson-Green, Obama, GW Bush, Bill Clinton...
Nuff said.

Re:figureheads

[feedayeen]

I don't think academics and/or achievements are priority qualifications for "leaders" of western institutions for a long time now.
Ballmer, Carly Fiorina, Meg Whitman, Marissa Mayer, Steven Sinofsky, Julie Larson-Green, Obama, GW Bush, Bill Clinton...
Nuff said.

Lawrence Tech, UCLA, Princeton, Stanford, Cornell, WWU, Harvard, Oxford... You sure picked an odd list.

Re:figureheads

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing that's "odd" how these cadre of underachievers continuously get promoted into "leadership" positions.

The institution of matriculation no longer has relevance in these arguments.
It's not an exaggeration that any college will hand you a toilet paper diploma for the cost of tuition.

OT: Mech. Eng. requirements

[davidwr]

I for one don't understand why mechanical engineers have to pass dynamics, thermodynamics, and differential equations just to draw gears and hinges all day (which, admit it, is what most mechanical engineers do).

Dynamics is very important for mechanical engineers, especially once those gears start moving, and even more so if fluids are part of the design, such as in some automobile brakes.

As for thermodynamics, my guess is that there are enough employers out there who have jobs that require both thermodynamics and a mechanical engineer that it makes sense to keep it as part of the curriculum, even if the vast majority of graduates will never use it again once they leave school.

As for Differential Equations, it can give another way of looking at the math behind the engineering besides "lower" math like calculus or trigonometry. Having more than one way to look at a problem usually increases the likelihood of understanding it.

Oh, and then there's the cynical reason why most 4-year degree programs have classes that students will never use after graduation: It puts a "you have to be THIS smart and work THIS hard to graduate with a FOUR-YEAR-DEGREE from OUR-SCHOOL. And oh by the way you also had to be THIS-RICH or THIS-HARD-WORKING-IN-YOUR-PART-TIME-JOB to afford tuition or THIS-MUCH-SMARTER or PLAY-SPORTS-VERY-WELL to get a scholarship."

The less cynical reason is that a 4-year degree is more than just a trade school. A bachelor's degree really is meant as a general education of 4 years beyond high school with a concentration in a particular area of study sufficient to prepare the student for graduate school in that area of study.

Re:OT: Mech. Eng. requirements

[HornWumpus]

Can't do dynamics without DiffEq. The math is a pre-requisite/co-requisite for good reason. Dynamics is the same math as Circuits II in the EE track. Control systems is usually taught in both departments as a next class (but differently IIRC). A couple or MEs took digital controls in EE with me (back before we had lawns).

It's pretty hard to stack up the classes in less then 8 semesters. 3 of calculus and physics, 1 of DiffEq, circuits 1 and 2, control systems, digital controls. Without exposure to digital control systems (once they've got the math, robotics class early to set the hook) the kids education would be week. Might as well be a CS and skip all the 'hard math' and such.

I'm not sure

[headhot]

But,
I think the difference should be similar to a physicist and a engineer. When the engineer specializes in practical application of the science, and the physicist researches the science.

A computer scientist researches and develops sorting algorithms. A software engineer knows which one to use when.

Schooling's what YOU make it though

[Anonymous Coward]

"Her degrees are from "fluff" schools which you go to after failing to get into at least University of Washington." - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17, @04:04PM (#42014447)

Could be, but... I felt (since I have the B.S. in Business Administration with MIS concentration/minor + AAS CSC gone long by, & into 90/120 credit hours of B.S. CSC currently in the NY State SUNY system here) school is what YOU MAKE IT, per my subject-line above.

I saw folks there "just for the paper" - most 'dropped out' in their 1st-2nd yr. of the major if they weren't "into it" & "living it" (true nerds/geeks - who have it right by the by, doing that. It's how you excel & have the drive to keep @ it + learn more).

No - along with your schooling studies, you should be an "auto-didact" & learn on your OWN also! Makes you, stronger/better!

---

"Take it from someone who worked there for almost a decade: Larson Green will drive Windows (further) into the ground." - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17, @04:04PM (#42014447)

That's what I am worried about. For instance - I've heard tell she is an "interface expert"? WTF is that?? It's not 'interfaces' in the classic sense, as in programmatic classes &/or units-modules to hook into a library, but rather, GUI fronts... personally?? I don't consider that "heavy duty", & anyone with 1/2 a braincell can do THAT much!

---

"For all intents and purposes Julie has no engineering experience at all. She's never been an engineer. She's never even worked closely with engineers." - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17, @04:04PM (#42014447)

THAT IS NOT GOOD! To lead men, ESPECIALLY MEN, you had to have "walked a mile in their shoes"... just to earn their RESPECT & TRUST!

I mean - personally, I always had a difficult time taking orders from an "alleged 'superior'", if they truly were NOT my superior & never did the job!

That happened a LOT over my time in the computer sciences... guys who had never done the job "hands-on, in the trenches" running coders, abounded by the truckload & were leading actual programmer-analysts (none of us respected them).

Give me the RIGHT leader, one whom I know KNOWS what he's talking about? I'd follow him into the gates of hell, since I know he'll get me back OUT again... since he HAS BEEN THERE/DONE THAT!

---

"Her most recent (and only, as far as I can tell) accomplishment is taking someone else's idea for the Ribbon and passing it off as her own. " - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17, @04:04PM (#42014447)

THAT IS WHAT SCARES ME, along with the STUPID FOR A PC DESKTOP "metro" interface...

---

"Now she's being put in charge of an org well over 5000 people strong." - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17, @04:04PM (#42014447)

That she can probably manage well enough by "delegating authority" & passing it down thru the chain-of-command, IF she hired well for her immediate subordinates...

---

"She's way out of her dept, both organizationally and knowledge-wise. You can't run an organization (let alone an organization of this size and complexity) if you can't see whether people are BS-ing you. And she can't." - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17, @04:04PM (#42014447)

Oh, I absolutely AGREE, 110%, per my statements above!

APK

P.S.=> If you answer back - how was working @ MS? Yes, I am assuming you are being truthful (since you post as ac, many would doubt you, but I will take your words @ face value + accept them as truth for now @ least)...

... apk

USA in the same time-frame

[davidwr]

In America in the late 1990s some accredited (4-year degree from a reputable institution) CS-only and Software-engineering-only programs did very little hardware design unless you took those courses as elective. You probably got to play with AND, OR, and NOT gates but it wasn't geared to teaching you how to design circuits beyond a minimal level of complexity.

Other CS and SE programs were really computer-engineering or computer-science-engineering programs under a different name and they got the hardware elements you mentioned.

I haven't kept up with the times, so I don't know what the current program requirements are at reputable, degree-granting institutions today.

Quit "projecting" your own "'StRaNgE' tastes" and

[Anonymous Coward]

Take your own advice (since you enjoy "the flavor" (lol)), troll...

* LMAO, @ U...

APK

definition of a scientist

[davidwr]

. Unless you're exploring the limits of knowledge, coming up with and testing new ideas, you're not a scientist.

So the lawyer at Apple who came up with a new way to patent page-turning is a legal scientist? Who knew?

--

--

--
Yeah, I know "Unless A then not B" doesn't mean "if A then B," but we are talking about a guy who is a proven expert at twisting meanings around.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, computer scientists understand all unsolved problems but can't prove them :P

Survey of employee names in Green's dept?

[davidwr]

Now she's being put in charge of an org well over 5000 people strong.

How many of them have the initials "A. C."?

Re:Quit "projecting" your own "'StRaNgE' tastes" a

[Anonymous Coward]

Disregard this comment, it is not the real APK. This (http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014641) is the real APK.

CS is not helpdesk / system admin / desktop

[Joe_Dragon]

CS is not helpdesk / system admin / desktop.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much this, and they make the same money - sometimes less because they sense of algorithmic philosophics prevent them from delivering on time/in budget/on target. If you have a CS background and are in software development ur doing it wrong (overpaid for your education).

Reminds me of the king's toaster

[Jim Hall]

While not a perfect match to the above, I think the story of the king's toaster is a good example of the difference between an "engineer" and a "scientist". I originally saw this on USENET in the 1990s, so the technology is a little dated:

A great king summoned two of his advisors, and showed them both a shiny metal box with two slots in the top, a control knob and a lever. "What do you think this is?"

One adviser, an engineer, answered first: "It is a toaster," he said.

The king asked, "But how would you design an embedded computer for it?"

The engineer replied, "Using a 4-bit micro-controller, I would write a simple program that reads the darkness knob position to one of 16 shades of darkness, from snow white to coal black. The program would use that darkness level as the index to a 16-element table of initial timer values. Then it would turn on the toaster and start the timer. At the end of the time delay, it would turn off the heat and pop up the toast. Come back next week, and I'll show you a working prototype."

The second adviser, a computer scientist, immediately recognized the danger of such short-sighted thinking. He said, "Toasters don't just turn bread into toast, they are also used to warm frozen waffles. What you see before you is really a breakfast food cooker. As the subjects of your kingdom become more sophisticated, they will demand more capabilities. They will need a breakfast food cooker that can also cook sausage, fry bacon, and make scrambled eggs. A toaster that only makes toast will soon be obsolete."

The adviser suggested a future-oriented embedded computer innovation, with a forward-ready platform: "Specifically, we need an object-oriented language with multiple inheritance. Of course, users don't want the eggs to get cold while the bacon is frying, so concurrent processing is required, too.

"We must not forget the user interface. The lever that lowers the food lacks versatility and the darkness knob is confusing. Users won't want the product unless it has a user-friendly, graphical interface.

"Having made the wise decision of specifying the software first in the design phase, all that remains is to pick an adequate hardware platform for the implementation phase. An Intel 80386 with 8MB of memory, a 30MB hard disk and a VGA monitor should be sufficient. If you select a multitasking, object oriented language that supports multiple inheritance and has a built-in GUI, writing the program will be a snap."

The king had the computer scientist thrown in the moat, and they all lived happily ever after.

Re:Reminds me of the king's toaster

[Anonymous Coward]

I think your anecdote describes two different types of engineer.

A true computer scientist would present the king with a paper that proves the toaster is a specific solution to a special class of problems having a property called "Breakfast Completeness".

Why technical expertise helps

[davidwr]

If you are a manager with good tech skills, it's easier to detect technical BS and to ask the tough questions that will get you the information you want quickly.

If you don't have the right skills, you need someone you trust who does at your side to fill this role.

Now, at the 5000-person level, you do have a point. If she trusts everyone who reports directly to her not to BS her OR she has someone at her side who can ferret out BS, then she doesn't need a technical background. But if she isn't that lucky, she does.

To put it another way:

[Chris Mattern]

Computer Science is Physics

Software Engineering is Mechanical Engineer/Eletrical Engineering.

Re:To put it another way:

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you meant that as an analogy, but computer science actually a branch of mathematics.

Software engineering should be to computer science what structural engineering is to material science, but we have a long way before we get there.

Re:To put it another way:

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not seeing how you made this connection. What mechanical engineering does a CS person do? and isnt physics basically inherent in all of engineering?

The Women Behind Windows

[westlake]

Julie Larson-Green will be promoted to lead all Windows software and hardware engineering. Tami Reller retains her roles as chief financial officer and chief marketing officer and will assume responsibility for the business of Windows.

Isn't the more important story here the rise of two women to senior positions in management and engineering at Microsoft?

The software and semiconductor sectors have the lowest percentages of women among the five highest-paid executives in a company, with 4.4 percent and 2.7 percent

Where Are the Women Executives in Silicon Valley?

Julie Larson-Green is no slouch when it comes to logging the years and time at Microsoft. She joined the company 19 years ago as a program manager for Visual C++ and has worked her way up through the ranks.

Larson-Green worked hand-in-hand with Sinofsky on Microsoft Office. Before that she worked on Microsoft SharePoint and Internet Explorer. She actually led one of the most dramatic redesigns at the company when she worked on the so-called ribbon interface in Office.

The Woman Behind Windows

''I don't even know how to explain how amazing and exciting that is to every woman who works in tech right now and probably in business across the board,'' said Michele Weisblatt, executive vice president for Women in Technology International.

''It"s not just about (the company) putting them over a division, it's about them leading the flagship product --- the money-making, revenue piece for Microsoft. It's just phenomenal.''

Women hold just a quarter of computing and mathematical jobs in the U.S., according to a 2008 report on women in technology from Catalyst, a nonprofit research organization.

''Microsoft's move is important because of its visibility as a technology and corporate giant, so girls in school who see women like Larson-Green and Reller move into such high-profile roles will carry that with them for a lifetime,''said Jenny Slade, a spokeswoman for the National Center for Women & Information Technology.

Women rising in the ranks at tech companies

What theoretical "nonsense?"

[betterunixthanunix]

CS theory is not "nonsense" by any stretch of the imagination, even if you are only interested in doing "real world" work. The point of theory for professional programmers is to think about software in unusual ways; this broadens your ability to solve problems. The trend in programming languages over the past few decades has been towards the use of concepts that are common in theoretical CS; if that trend continues (and I suspect it will), theoretical courses will be more relevant as time goes on.

Even C++ now has lambda expressions. Introspection was once a theoretical topic (e.g. Turing machines that can read their own description). Type theoretic concepts (type constructors, dependent types, etc.) are probably going to become more mainstream in the near future.

engineers and scientists

[crutchy]

engineers take responsibility for the work they do (and cop the flak when it goes wrong)

scientists just make shit up and if it goes wrong... well its all in the name of science

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Lumpy]

Computer Scientists create things like linux.
Software Engineers create things like Windows 8.

Not trolling, This is a complete fact. Far more high level CS degrees are working on linux and OSS than Windows 8.

What Makes a Good Software Engineer?

[twasserman]

I have always found that the best software engineers are those people who have a solid background in computer science. That knowledge is valuable throughout one's career and enables one to participate effectively in discussions and reviews of architectures, data models, and more even after being promoted to a position that doesn't include writing code. To me, the two areas are complementary.

Side note: I'm mystified at how someone with a Bachelor's degree in business can earn an MS in Software Engineering. Yes, management skills have an important role in an SE curriculum, but not to the exclusion of the technical skills.

Re:What Makes a Good Software Engineer?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know excellent developers that have degrees in wide ranging areas such as psychology and those with no degree. I'm sure that, if you are a good developer with experience, have a four year degree, test well on a GRE, and take some remedial classes (e.g. information structures and algorithms), one could get into an MSE program.

Note that there are other universities than SU that also have MSE programs, such as http://mse.isri.cmu.edu/software-engineering/web3-programs/MSE/index.html.

There is a great deal of overlap between the two MSCS and MSE, but I would suggest they have a different emphasis. CS tends to focus on algorithms, compilers... SE tends to focus on structure and technique... SEs tend to be generalists. CSs tend to be specialists.

Thus, for most medium/small projects or IT groups, I would tend to hire a couple of CS types to figure out core algorithms and hire the rest as SE types to create/lead a well structured/maintainable system. If i were hiring to create an OS, it would probably a little more heavily based on CS devs.

Re:What Makes a Good Software Engineer?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm mystified at how someone with a Bachelor's degree in business can earn an MS in Software Engineering. Yes, management skills have an important role in an SE curriculum, but not to the exclusion of the technical skills.

Your bachelor's degree doesn't matter for your master's program. I've known several CS master's students who didn't have a CS bachelor's degree. But they handle it by taking basic CS courses before they're allowed in the master's classes.

Re:What Makes a Good Software Engineer?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm mystified how you forgot to mention she also has nice tits.

Re:What Makes a Good Software Engineer?

[Anonymous Coward]

Side note: I'm mystified at how someone with a Bachelor's degree in business can earn an MS in Software Engineering

That seems to be one of the mysteries of the US education system.

Re:What Makes a Good Software Engineer?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have always found that the best software engineers are those people who have a solid background in computer science.

At my alma mater, the best students in software engineering which also have tons of internships experience (co-op program) sign up for as many CS courses as they are allowed to, more than in fact the supposed SE experts require them to.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

No, computer scientists create things like the internet, LISP, and object-oriented programming.

Software engineers create products like Linux and Windows 8.

Another application of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"

[Anonymous Coward]

".KPA laer eht si )]gro.todhsals[ 14641024=dic&5028523=dis?lp.stnemmoc/gro.todhsals.srepoleved//:ptth( sihT .KPA laer eht ton si ti ,tnemmoc siht dragersiD" - by Anonymous Coward ANOTHER "ne'er-do-well" /. OFF-TOPIC TROLL on Saturday November 17, @04:40PM (#42014707)

"???"

Uhm... Could we get a translation of that off-topic "troll-speak/trolllanguage" of yours, please?

---

* And, you're an off-topic troll - no questions asked...SEE MY SUBJECT LINE ABOVE!

APK

P.S.=> Yes, it must have just have been another off-topic done nothing of significance with his life troll spewing his off-topic b.s. again & not contributing to the ongoing conversations. Oh well - No biggie!

("ReVeRsE-PsYcHoLoGy", for trolls - Courtesy of this code by "yours truly" in less than 1 second flat):

---

#TrollTalkComReversePsychologyKiller.py (Ver #2 by APK)

def reverse(s):
    try:
        trollstring = ""
        for apksays in s:
        trollstring = apksays + trollstring
    except:
        print("error/abend in reverse function")
    return trollstring

s = ""
print reverse(s)

try:
  s = "Insert whatever 'trollspeak/trolllanguage' gibberish occurs here..."
  s = reverse(s)
  print(s)
except Exception as e:
  print(e)

---

... apk

Semantics.

[Pugwash69]

It's the same thing, probably. My degree was in Computer Science with Information Engineering. Unless you knew every module I did you'd be none the wiser. My first job title was Junior Programmer. Just words.

Re:CS vs Engineering 30 years later

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, one of these "guys" that you refer to doesn't even have a penis. Do you know why? Well, it's because Julie Larson-Green is a woman.

Difference

[Murdoch5]

A software engineer will complain about the structure of a comment, how you name varibles and functions. A computer science major just programs.

a C pRoGrAm 4 U

[Anonymous Coward]

#define SUCK void
#include <stdio.h>
#define MY main()
#define DICK {
#define DUMB printf("fuck you);
#define BITCH }
#define FUCK SUCK MY DICK
#define YOU DUMB BITCH
FUCK YOU

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[master5o1]

Over paid for your education is doing it right.

Derp

[localtoast]

In my experience, comments make sweeping generalizations while the articles promote cognitive dissonance.

why does that matter?

[kenorland]

The problem Microsoft has is neither with computer science nor with software engineering; their problem is with design, usability, and functionality.

Re:why does that matter?

[retchdog]

exactly. for the purposes of this role, the variation of individuals within each group is much greater than the variation between the groups. i doubt that the type of degree was the top factor in decision.

Re:why does that matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Design (both UI and internal architecture), usability, and functionality should be at the core of software engineering. Would you build a road system and leave it up to the road painting crew to decide how it should be marked and divided into lanes of traffic?

Sorry, I was trying for a car analogy, and that was the best I had. Seriously, though, engineering isn't something that should just happen on the back end - when the user experience sucks, your software sucks. From what I have seen of the software on the market, there is a whole lot of sucking going on out there.

Re:why does that matter?

[cpghost]

I guess their main problem is rather one of (bad) internal management.

Re:why does that matter?

[Anonymous Coward]

The biggest problem with MS (apart from all their general evil) is the way they manage to produce mostly-decent software, then screw it up with some incredibly lousy flaw. For example, the terrible file formats used by Word, even with plenty of examples of sane document formats, or how long it took them to get things like automatic TOC and reference handling sorted out, things that had been solved for years before Word 1.0 was released.

A "C program"? LOL - NOT! Lmao @ U, troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

That won't even compile (much less run), troll... lmao!

* Poor little off-topic troll... #defines & an #include won't cut it by themselves, see subject-line above!

(Try a strrev function instead, fool - it'll @ least do what I did in Python, albeit for YOU, in C!)

APK

P.S.=> You really, Really, REALLY need to get your CSC degree...

... apk

Computer Science includes Sofware Engineering

[David_Hart]

Computer Science is the overarching term for everything to do with computers. This includes computer science theory, hardware engineering, software engineering, networking, etc. A good Computer Science program covers the theory required to build a computer from scratch (circuitry, microchips, firmware, software, etc). A good Software Engineering program provides practical skills to develop applications, games, etc.

Engineers have a license

[Anonymous Coward]

There are circumstances where only an engineer will do. An engineer's signature is necessary on designs where public safety is an issue.

stains become a warning

[Anonymous Coward]

thoughts aquire speed
lips aquire stains
stains become a warning

sorry about that copyright violation - I could not stop

If I may paint with a really broad brush

[Just Brew It!]

"Software Engineering" implies a more practical focus, with emphasis on using real teams to create working systems with real-world applicability. "Computer Science" implies a more theoretical approach, perhaps a bit removed from practical application. Both have their place, and there's huge overlap (one institution's Comp Sci program may even be more "practical" than another's Software Engineering program), so it is hard to make snap judgements.

But in general, putting someone with the Software Engineering degree in charge sounds like a good idea to me, as long as their are competent Comp Sci people working under her.

A Classic Treatment

[ios and web coder]

This is a story that I got from the Internet (pre-Web), many moons ago:

THE TOASTER

Once upon a time, in a kingdom not far from here, a king summoned two of his advisors for a test. He showed them both a shiny metal box with two slots in the top, a control knob, and a lever. "What do you think this is?"

One advisor, an engineer, answered first. "It is a toaster," he said. The king asked, "How would you design an embedded computer for it?" The engineer replied, "Using a four-bit microcontroller, I would write a simple program that reads the darkness knob and quantizes its position to one of 16 shades of darkness, from snow white to coal black. The program would use that darkness level as the index to a 16-element table of initial timer values. Then it would turn on the heating elements and start the timer with the initial value selected from the table. At the end of the time delay, it would turn off the heat and pop up the toast. Come back next week, and I'll show you a working prototype."

The second advisor, a computer scientist, immediately recognized the danger of such short-sighted thinking. He said, "Toasters don't just turn bread into toast, they are also used to warm frozen waffles. What you see before you is really a breakfast food cooker. As the subjects of your kingdom become more sophisticated, they will demand more capabilities. They will need a breakfast food cooker that can also cook sausage, fry bacon, and make scrambled eggs. A toaster that only makes toast will soon be obsolete. If we don't look to the future, we will have to completely redesign the toaster in just a few years."

"With this in mind, we can formulate a more intelligent solution to the problem. First, create a class of breakfast foods. Specialize this class into subclasses: grains, pork, and poultry. The specialization process should be repeated with grains divided into toast, muffins, pancakes, and waffles; pork divided into sausage, links, and bacon; and poultry divided into scrambled eggs, hard-boiled eggs, poached eggs, fried eggs, and various omelet classes."

"The ham and cheese omelet class is worth special attention because it must inherit characteristics from the pork, dairy, and poultry classes. Thus, we see that the problem cannot be properly solved without multiple inheritance. At run time, the program must create the proper object and send a message to the object that says, 'Cook yourself.' The semantics of this message depend, of course, on the kind of object, so they have a different meaning to a piece of toast than to scrambled eggs."

"Reviewing the process so far, we see that the analysis phase has revealed that the primary requirement is to cook any kind of breakfast food. In the design phase, we have discovered some derived requirements. Specifically, we need an object-oriented language with multiple inheritance. Of course, users don't want the eggs to get cold while the bacon is frying, so concurrent processing is required, too."

"We must not forget the user interface. The lever that lowers the food lacks versatility, and the darkness knob is confusing. Users won't buy the product unless it has a user-friendly, graphical interface. When the breakfast cooker is plugged in, users should see a cowboy boot on the screen. Users click on it, and the message 'Booting UNIX v. 8.3' appears on the screen. (UNIX 8.3 should be out by the time the product gets to the market.) Users can pull down a menu and click on the foods they want to cook."

"Having made the wise decision of specifying the software first in the design phase, all that remains is to pick an adequate hardware platform for the implementation phase. An Intel 80386 with 8MB of memory, a 30MB hard disk, and a VGA monitor should be sufficient. If you select a multitasking, object oriented language that supports multiple inheritance and has a built-in GUI, writing the program will be a snap. (Imagine the difficulty we would have had if we had foolishly allowed a hardware-first design strategy to lock us into a four-bit microcontroller!)."

The king had the computer scientist thrown in the moat, and they all lived happily ever after.

Re:A Classic Treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

The one issue that I have with the story about "THE TOASTER" is that a Computer Scientist would not expand the usage beyond toasting toast and similar breaded type foods (waffles, pop tarts, etc.). Expanding the usage to all breakfast foods (eggs, bacon, etc.) is what users and "managers" do and it is called "scope creep". A Computer Scientist would include other conditions such as frozen waffles, someone sticking a metal knife or fork in the toaster to unjam something, pop tarts, etc. Conditions missed by the software engineer, because they were only told to design for toast.

A software engineer would have the toaster making great toast, but subjects would die due to electric shock (unhandled exception: fork in toaster) and would have 3rd degree mouth burns when eating pop tarts. Not the rosy ending painted by the story... But hey, the story was obviously written by a Software Engineer... (grin)

Re:A Classic Treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

Those both sound like software engineers. A computer scientist would look at the toaster as a gold-plated heat transfer mechanism that is in all ways inferior to a stick dangling over a fire.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[BeakersBro]

Computer scientists understand what P=NP means and software engineers try to make people think they are smart by talking/acting as if they know means.

yeah! because the average programmer deals with P=NP problems every day! (not)

Personal Experience

[EmperorOfCanada]

My personal experience would be that computer engineer is a better place to start a career and then start sprinkling computer science more and more. The CS majors (the worst being the graduate ones) blah blah all the time about big O yet somehow never master the career basics such as SQL or Linux administration. I find that they get bogged down with Big O and other analysis on problems where O^8 will still take nearly zero time and O just doesn't matter.

Yet on the other end I find that many computer software engineers tend to master something like Java and then just wail away at every problem with their one mastered skill set. Then after a while they get a second skill set such as SQL and as time goes by they end up with a sort of vertical integration of skills. But where they don't usually progress is when you do have to look at a problem as a system and start doing discrete math, working out the nodes, connections, and so on. This is where computer software engineers will implement a cryptographic library but do it really badly leaving elephant sized holes.

So I would say CS is often too pedantic, CE is too much like a plumber, but a CE with strong math and a good dose of CS can generate art. Sort of like Escher; he could draw quite well and had a good understanding of math, he combined the two into something incredible.

BIOS?

[MacGyver2210]

Frankly, I find it confusing when the word 'biographies' is shortened to 'bios' - especially when dealing with a CS subject.

In answer to the question posed:

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

More "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy" for a troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

".efiw sih dekcuf I elihw em mir KPA dah ecno I :yrots eurT" - by Anonymous Coward ANOTHER "ne'er-do-well" /. OFF-TOPIC TROLL on Saturday November 17, @07:24PM (#42015861)

"???"

Uhm... Could we get a translation of that off-topic "troll-speak/trolllanguage" of yours, please?

---

* And, you're an off-topic troll - no questions asked...& your "StRaNgE-PhaNtaSiEs"? Please... give us a break!

APK

P.S.=> Yes, it must have just have been another off-topic done nothing of significance with his life troll spewing his off-topic b.s. again & not contributing to the ongoing conversations. Oh well - No biggie!

("ReVeRsE-PsYcHoLoGy", for trolls - Courtesy of this code by "yours truly" in less than 1 second flat):

---

#TrollTalkComReversePsychologyKiller.py (Ver #2 by APK)

def reverse(s):
    try:
        trollstring = ""
        for apksays in s:
        trollstring = apksays + trollstring
    except:
        print("error/abend in reverse function")
    return trollstring

s = ""
print reverse(s)

try:
  s = "Insert whatever 'trollspeak/trolllanguage' gibberish occurs here..."
  s = reverse(s)
  print(s)
except Exception as e:
  print(e)

---

... apk

Re:More "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy" for a troll... apk

[crutchy]

hahahaha you still haven't fixed that bug on line 5... can you at least indent it so you don't look like a total douchebag rather than pasting the same bug-ridden formatting in every one of these posts

Re:More "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy" for a troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic once? No. The code works (shown 5 times in this exchange).

Re:Time for "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy", lol... apk

[crutchy]

hahahaha you still haven't fixed that bug on line 5... can you at least indent it so you don't look like a total douchebag rather than pasting the same bug-ridden formatting in every one of these posts

Re:Incorrect: You're an off-topic troll... apk

[crutchy]

hahahaha you still haven't fixed that bug on line 5... can you at least indent it so you don't look like a total douchebag rather than pasting the same bug-ridden formatting in every one of these posts

Re:A "C program"? LOL - NOT! Lmao @ U, troll... ap

[crutchy]

APK is too stupid to see the bug in his own code as posted everywhere, and even when pointed out to him previously he still hasn't fixed it lol.

also, his beloved code that he spouts on about can be replaced by this much more efficient code:
s = 'abc'
s = s[::-1]
print s

more entertaining APK commentary may be found here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3058625&cid=41142547

Working code != buggy... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

You're using a prebuilt function I'm well aware of. I did mine by hand... more fun that way, & looks cooler too imo!

Lastly - See subject-line above, & "argue with success...". The code works enough to dig you "outta the woodwork" as yet another trolling roach, lol!

APK

P.S.=> My PyThon code just works, what can I say? You must be (lol) "CrUtChy" lmao - the infamous troll who 'stalks' me here, periodically, based on your link signed off as 'CrUtChy' (lol, look yourself) - Same b.s. as usual!

"CrUtChy" - listen: If Jesus Christ himself came into a room, based on your critique of working code not precanned/prebuilt stuff? You'd have told HIM to get a haircut I bet... lol!

...apk

Re:Working code != buggy... apk

[crutchy]

hahahahaha so the "great" APK still can't see the bug in his posted code.... now that's funny right there :)

Re:Working code != buggy... apk

[crutchy]

I did mine by hand... more fun that way, & looks cooler too imo!

lmfao does that one work when you're applying for programming jobs that actually pay!? hahahahahahaha....

...cos we all try to write code that "looks cool" and you know, writing code that functions and easy to debug is all of secondary importance... and stuff :)

what a dipshit

Re:Working code != buggy... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange that's been shown clearly).

Re:Working code != buggy... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange that's been shown clearly). Your "code" lacked error trapping, noobie.

Look everyone: It's 'CruTcHy', the troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat"there (lol) 'CruTcHy' -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016363

* You KNOW there's "evil in the air", lmao, when ole 'CruTcHy' comes "shambling outta the /. walls" like the trolling roach he truly proves himself to be, rotflmao!

APK

P.S.=> By the way, in case you hadn't noticed? Working Code != Buggy... not even a nice try!

... apk

Re:Look everyone: It's 'CruTcHy', the troll... apk

[crutchy]

hahahahaha so the "great" APK still can't see the bug in his posted code.... now that's funny right there :)

Re:Look everyone: It's 'CruTcHy', the troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you on topic? Have you been on topic here even once?? No.

'CruTcHy' (lmao) - may I ask you a question?

[Anonymous Coward]

Answer this: Is code that works 'buggy'? Hasn't bugged out on me yet... lol! Does work to squash trolling BUGS like you though, lol, everytime... you surface, thus, that question.

* See - I ask since I question your sanity..., lol!

Especially since that code's worked for me vs. trolls, for... oh, I don't know - around a year or more here maybe, every single time, giving trolls what They NEED...

(Cuz that's all I'm really, all about since I'm such a nice guy, & all that of course, & that was what?)

A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy", that's all... lol!

APK

P.S.=> "Onwards & Upwards" as trolls like (lol) 'CruTcHy' come crawling outta the woodwork, lmao (chuckle/snicker)...

... apk

Re:'CruTcHy' (lmao) - may I ask you a question?

[crutchy]

hahahahaha so the "great" APK still can't see the bug in his posted code.... now that's funny right there :)

Re:'CruTcHy' (lmao) - may I ask you a question?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic once? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange).

Science=Academia, Engineering=Real World

[Anonymous Coward]

eom

East vs. West then?

[drwho]

So you've got Seattle on one hand, and Massachusetts on the other. Massachusetts has a reputation of being more theoretical about engineering, as opposed to cheap and practical like west-coast people. Massachusetts-made thinks like DEC's VAX were big, expensive, heavy, tough, and polished. Seattle has...well ...MSDOS. Quick, dirty, gets the job done, ultimately Microsoft flourished and DEC withered and died. BUT concepts live on, as NT was done by ex-DEC people. West Coast is more hack, East Coast is more engineering. Personally, I am from Massachusetts and would like to think the Yankee 'craftsman' approach is better than the west-coast hippie 'hack', but the truth is, that the distinction isn't always easily made, and that elegant design needs some pragmatism as well. But, I think it's an interesting intellectual exercise when think of East Coast CS craftsmen vs. West Coast CE hackers.

Re:Works for me everytime though... apk

[crutchy]

hahahahaha so the "great" APK still can't see the bug in his posted code.... now that's funny right there :)

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[jcr]

That's a very harsh indictment of software engineers.

-jcr

The Poorest Scientist

[SuperKendall]

Computer scientists can't write code, and they really shouldn't.

It's a poor "scientist" that only thinks and never experiments.

Real computer scientists need to also be adept programmers, because it turned out The Last One really wasn't and there is still code between thought and program.

Also if your field of interest was computer languages it would be foolish indeed to try and design language features without understanding the pitfalls and benefits of said features in whatever languages they have appeared in.

A computer "scientist" who does not program well is about as useful as a brick without mortar. All you can really accomplish is breaking other peoples structures while building nothing of your own.

The Real Difference

[mlw4428]

People keep getting it wrong. Both are math heavy and all that jazz, but what differentiates the two is that Computer Science is about THEORY. It is learning, understanding, and developing new theoretical approaches to development. Engineering is the application of theories into reality. Both have their uses, but for some reason Computer Science has been made into this "catch-all" degree that is interchangeable with Software Engineering. They're not interchangeable because the minds that have been properly taught those degrees should approach the same problem totally different.

Is this a dupe?

[SpasticWeasel]

Seems like we have this argument every couple of weeks now.

Re:CS vs Engineering 30 years later

[Anonymous Coward]

This. Neither has anything to do with this role at Microsoft, which is a management position.

from a more system point of view

[Anonymous Coward]

With a Ph.D in the "system" side of Computer science (versus the more "theory"-oriented directions), and now working as a software engineer in a "system" company (think Cisco), I would say they don't actually differ that much. It's all about building systems and making them work.

CS system research focuses more on proving certain novel scheme indeed works and understanding why it works, while SE emphasizes on building rock-solid systems that don't fail even if you modify all the inputs in all sorts of random ways. But again, you usually need novel schemes to build a truly competitive product, and you need to care about reliability and manageability even if you are just building a "research" system.

There isn't a clear line between them, and your skill sets can certainly be carried over.

A funnier fact (lol), 'CruTcHy'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Works just fine here, 'CruTcHy' (lol) -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

* :)

APK

P.S.=> See any "bugs" there, 'CruTcHy'? I don't - the output's just fine for my purposes, & those are?

Well, like I said - just giving trolls, LIKE YOU, just what they needed:

A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy', lol...

... apk

Re:A funnier fact (lol), 'CruTcHy'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe you should actually take a lot at the 5th line of code that you keep posting (example here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649 )

go on i dare you... forget about what you actually run in your python interpreter. just have a look at your posted code

the statement after the for loop declaration requires an indent (two spaces) for your posted code to interpret without error

i don't know how much clearer i can make it, but then you are such an arrogant dipshit even this probably won't sink in

CruTcHy

Funnier fact still 'CruTcHy':

[Anonymous Coward]

Works just fine here, 'CruTcHy' (lol) -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

(Yet again for a 2nd time here...)

* :)

APK

P.S.=> See any "bugs" there, 'CruTcHy'? I don't - the output's just fine for my purposes, & those are?

Well, like I said - just giving trolls, LIKE YOU, just what they needed:

A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy', lol...

... apk

Re:Funnier fact still 'CruTcHy':

[crutchy]

you are a fucking idiot. if you actually read what i posted, i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter.... i'm talking about the code that you post on slashdot not that you'll understand that either, being as thick as you are

Re:Funnier fact still 'CruTcHy':

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe you should actually take a lot at the 5th line of code that you keep posting (example here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649 )

go on i dare you... forget about what you actually run in your python interpreter. just have a look at your posted code

the statement after the for loop declaration requires an indent (two spaces) for your posted code to interpret without error

i don't know how much clearer i can make it, but then you are such an arrogant dipshit even this probably won't sink in

CruTcHy

Re:Funnier fact still 'CruTcHy':

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you on topic? Have you been on topic here once?? No. The code works and is shown to do so 5 times in this exchange already.

Re:Funnier fact still 'CruTcHy':

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic here once? No. The code works. It's shown doing so 5 times in this exchange already.

Re:Funnier fact still 'CruTcHy':

[crutchy]

try copying and pasting the code from here into your interpreter:

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

...and the C code you like to refer to (despite not being able to take credit for it myself) was obviously (to anyone else but you anyway) not meant to represent anything functional but was a poke at your rediculous posts... as in who the fuck would post such a pointeless (and buggy) piece of shit code as your "TrollTalkComReversePsychologyKiller.py" anyway? who does that, especially on slashdot? it doesn't make you sound like some kind of "professional" programmer or anything. it makes you look like a desperate noob. your code can be replaced with a single line. no professional programmer would reinvent the wheel if the existing wheel (ie s = s[::-1]) is more efficient. are you deliberately trying to make yourself look bad or something?

and your code wasn't that cool because it was written in python (an inherently "uncool" langauge to begin with). if you want to look "cool", try rewriting your function in assembly or in hexadecimal with opcodes. at least then your bugs wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb.

Then, this is even FUNNIER, (lol) 'CruTcHy':

[Anonymous Coward]

My PyThon script code works just fine here, 'CruTcHy' (lol) -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

(For the 3rd time in this thread too, vs. trolls JUST LIKE YOU! Probably are you posting as ac replies since you came outta the woodwork "suddenly"... lol, loved your "C Program" (lol, not)).

* :)

APK

P.S.=> See any "bugs" there, 'CruTcHy'? I don't - the output's just fine for my purposes, & those are?

Well, like I said - just giving trolls, LIKE YOU, just what they needed:

A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy', lol...

... apk

Re:Then, this is even FUNNIER, (lol) 'CruTcHy':

[crutchy]

hahaha i'd love to know what "c program" you're talking about now (particularly since i don't program c)... got a bit punchy with the paste button there i see

...and you are a fucking idiot. if you actually read what i posted, i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter.... i'm talking about the code that you post on slashdot

not that you'll understand that either, being as thick as you are

Re:Then, this is even FUNNIER, (lol) 'CruTcHy':

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange).

Funny it works perfectly then, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy'

[Anonymous Coward]

My PyThon script code works just fine here, 'CruTcHy' (lol) -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

(For the 5th time in this thread too & hundreds of others, vs. trolls JUST LIKE YOU! Probably are you posting as ac replies since you came outta the woodwork "suddenly"... lol, loved your "C Program" (lol, not)).

* :)

APK

P.S.=> See any "bugs" there, 'CruTcHy'? I don't - the output's just fine for my purposes, & those are?

Well, like I said - just giving trolls, LIKE YOU, just what they needed:

A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy', lol...

... apk

"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat" (lol), 'CruTcHy'...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42017741

* :)

APK

P.S.=> Ahem (again for the 6th time now): My python script code worked JUST FINE here in this thread alone 5x (and 100's of others in the past year here too, not "bugging out" even ONCE in that timeframe)!

Just for giving trolls like you JUST what they needed - which is, of course, just a dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy'... lol!

... apk

The difference is mostly naming

[ashelton]

When I did my CS degree computer science was part of the science stream, was expected to be primarily a tool for the advancement of science and to have lots of scope for development in its application.

It was only later people realised the scope of computer use is a whole lot wider and that the main problem is dealing with the complexity of the systems. So it became less about the micro of clever algorithms and code and more about the macro of trying to get the product of large numbers of people to work cheaply and reliably.

In practice I suspect there's little difference beyond the name and self image. I'd expect CS people to understand the issues of large scale software development (as much as you can in a Uni). I'd expect SE people to understand the materials they work with and why software isn't reliably reproducible like stuff made from bolts and girders.

Re:"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat" (lol), 'CruTcHy'.

[crutchy]

you are a fucking idiot. if you actually read what i posted, i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter.... i'm talking about the code that you post on slashdot

not that you'll understand that either, being as thick as you are

Silly question due to title confusion

[dbIII]

The problem here lies that it is no more traditional engineer than it is traditional architecture but instead just a title to mean doing something specific with software. It's not the other way around and doing something specific with engineering.
People seem to like the false impression of a software engineer being a professional engineer that does something with software, but that's as much of a mistake as expecting a Doctor of Religeous Studies to take a medical approach to their work.

Anyway, I doubt there is any difference in mindset due to the studies since one course would be a few electives away from being identical with the other.

Re:Funny it works perfectly then, eh (lol) 'CruTcH

[crutchy]

hahaha i'd love to know what "c program" you're talking about now (particularly since i don't program c)... got a bit punchy with the paste button there i see

...and you are a fucking idiot. if you actually read what i posted, i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter.... i'm talking about the code that you post on slashdot

not that you'll understand that either, being as thick as you are

Re:Funny it works perfectly then, eh (lol) 'CruTcH

[crutchy]

hahaha i'd love to know what "c program" you're talking about now (particularly since i don't program c)... got a bit punchy with the paste button there i see

...and you are a fucking idiot. if you actually read what i posted, i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter.... i'm talking about the code that you post on slashdot

not that you'll understand that either, being as thick as you are

*MA is all that matters

[sxpert]

Julie Larson-Green will be able to bullshit her superiors about the advancement of the projects she supervises like no other !

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

you should think about it.
Simple example: Two choices for a clustering algorithm. One clusters on different scales (edges, triangles, etc. between data centers), one just clusters using edges, then searches for cliques of edges to find for example triangles.

you would assume the second one is faster, because it does less clustering. But the clique-problem is np-complete.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Cederic]

Two people in the world are needed to determine which approach is faster, and one of those is just error-checking the results of the other.

Software engineers can then use that knowledge to build working software.

Computer scientists don't make the best programmers. (Physicists do).

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer scientists don't make the best programmers. (Physicists do).

Sorry, but this is complete BS. I've had a dozen or so physicists work for me and they all write GOTO code with not an inkling of architecture or design.

Yes, they can think straight, as do mathematicians, but they lack the principles of good software design.

5x correct output here shows otherwise... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

"forget about what you actually run in your python interpreter. just have a look at your posted code" - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 18, @04:21AM (#42017839)

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so here)

Yes... Considering its outputs are PERFECT above - because it puts out such NICE work translating "off-topic illogical 'trollspeak/trollanguage'", giving trolls JUST WHAT THEY NEED (since I am such a nice guy & all that):

And what's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

APK

P.S.=> Yea - I absolutely LOVE to get 'CruTcHy' to "dance" for us on this one, lol... Hey - he NEEDS the exercise, the man's on crutches (keeps him from atrophying)...

... apk

Re:5x correct output here shows otherwise... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

even when i point out exactly where the bug is in the code you repeatedly post (5th line) and tell you what the bug is (python indentation bug) and tell you how to fix it (add two spaces before the line proceeding the for loop declaration) you still can't read and understand what i mean

either that or you can read and do understand but can't admit that there's a bug

i shouldn't be surprised

in any case, you may or may not see the bug, but i know its there, and others will see it too. you can't hide your stupidity when you repeatedly plaster it all over the place

ignorance must be bliss

CruTcHy

Re:5x correct output here shows otherwise... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you on topic? Have you been on topic ever here even once?? No. The code works and was shown to do so 5 times in this exchange already.

'CruTcHy' - 5 links here show my code's fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:05AM (#42017807)

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so here)

Yes... Considering its outputs are PERFECT above - because it puts out such NICE work translating "off-topic illogical 'trollspeak/trollanguage'", giving trolls JUST WHAT THEY NEED (since I am such a nice guy & all that):

And what's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

APK

P.S.=> Yea - I absolutely LOVE to get 'CruTcHy' to "dance" for us on this one, lol... Hey - he NEEDS the exercise, the man's on crutches (keeps him from atrophying)...

... apk

Re:'CruTcHy' - 5 links here show my code's fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

is it possible that you can really be THAT ignorant that you can't even see a bug in your posted code even after its been pointed out to you?

noob

Re:'CruTcHy' - 5 links here show my code's fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic here once? No. The code works. It's shown doing so 5 times in this exchange already!

Re:'CruTcHy' - 5 links here show my code's fine...

[crutchy]

i'm sorry you can't read, and that you can't see the bug in your posted code, but what more can i expect from such a moron as yourself

'CruTcHy' (lol): 5 perfect runs & no errors?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:04AM (#42017803)

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so here)

Yes... Considering its outputs are PERFECT above - because it puts out such NICE work translating "off-topic illogical 'trollspeak/trollanguage'", giving trolls JUST WHAT THEY NEED (since I am such a nice guy & all that):

And what's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

APK

P.S.=> Yea - I absolutely LOVE to get 'CruTcHy' to "dance" for us on this one, lol... Hey - he NEEDS the exercise, the man's on crutches (keeps him from atrophying)...

... apk

Re:"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat" (lol), 'CruTcHy'.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:00AM (#42017793)

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so here)

Yes... Considering its outputs are PERFECT above - because it puts out such NICE work translating "off-topic illogical 'trollspeak/trollanguage'", giving trolls JUST WHAT THEY NEED (since I am such a nice guy & all that):

And what's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

APK

P.S.=> Yea - I absolutely LOVE to get 'CruTcHy' to "dance" for us on this one, lol... Hey - he NEEDS the exercise, the man's on crutches (keeps him from atrophying)...

... apk

'CruTcHy' (lol) - you're blind (5 perfect runs)

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter"by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:03AM (#42017801)

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so, too, here on /.!)

Yes... Considering its outputs are PERFECT above - because it puts out such NICE work translating "off-topic illogical 'trollspeak/trollanguage'", giving trolls JUST WHAT THEY NEED (since I am such a nice guy & all that):

And what's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

APK

P.S.=> Yea - I absolutely LOVE to get 'CruTcHy' to "dance" for us on this one, lol... Hey - he NEEDS the exercise, the man's on crutches (keeps him from atrophying)...

"hahaha i'd love to know what "c program" you're talking about now (particularly since i don't program c)" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:03AM (#42017801)

Yes... I could tell (lmao) as far as the "C Program", look to your ac posts here:

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015023

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015039

lol!

... apk

'CruTcHy' (lol) - 5 perfect outputs say otherwise

[Anonymous Coward]

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

---

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:02AM (#42017797)

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

---

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so here too vs. trolls like yourself, in just "giving them what they need", lmao...)

---

Yes... Considering its outputs are PERFECT above - because it puts out such NICE work translating "off-topic illogical 'trollspeak/trollanguage'", giving trolls JUST WHAT THEY NEED (since I am such a nice guy & all that):

And what's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

APK

P.S.=> Yea - I absolutely LOVE to get 'CruTcHy' to "dance" for us on this one, lol... Hey - he NEEDS the exercise, the man's on crutches (keeps him from atrophying)...

"hahaha i'd love to know what "c program" you're talking about now (particularly since i don't program c)" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:03AM (#42017801)

Yes... I could tell (lmao & SO COULD OTHERS) as far as the "C Program", look to your ac posts here:

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015023

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015039

lol!

... apk

Science vs Engineering

[LeopardMechanic]

I see it as the difference between science and engineering. Science – let your interests motivate you to make new discoveries. Engineering – Build the systems that your customers want.

Re:Science vs Engineering

[LeopardMechanic]

BTW – Interestingly, my degree is officially Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. And for context I earned it in 1992. So yeah - I'm a dinosaur.

I work with CS grads...

[nerdyalien]

As a web-dev... I work day in day out with CS grads. As an engineering major, what my observation is, they are pretty bad at seeing the "big picture", and more often, very bad team players.

I attended a top-8 Australian university. In the engineering major, the mantra from day one is "be a team player, look at the big picture, plan ahead and well in advance". In my undergrad years, I have done many group assignment, presentations. These kind of activities will train undergrads to horn their communication and planning skills.

As far as my understanding, if you fail to communicate well, be a team player and plan projects well ahead i.e. see the big picture; you are pretty much doomed when you have to work in professional environments and have to handle big projects.

Re:I work with CS grads...

[drew_eckhardt]

As a web-dev... I work day in day out with CS grads. As an engineering major, what my observation is, they are pretty bad at seeing the "big picture", and more often, very bad team players.

Your CS grads don't do so well because they're inexperienced at such things and most of their post-pubescent life was spent where distraction by the big picture and being a team player had negative effects. Assuming you've done a reasonable job filtering out defective personalities in the interview process with a little mentoring they'll outgrow those problems and get back to sharing and being team players like they were in pre-school.

Exams and projects revolved around a relatively small set of facts and shallow
generalizations (it doesn't take much to wax eloquent for an hour or so). Any attention to the "big picture" which isn't covered detracted from time spent on the things which get you grades, college credit in high school via AP exams, admission to good schools, and scholarships. This was especially true once they got to college where accrediting organizations credit hour allowance is way out of whack with the amount of work some professors expect.

The few joint projects through that time period generally involved two people doing about the same thing (like alternating cuts on a rat) at the same time for a day. Outside those projects collaboration would have negative effects on the grading curve.

My computer science program only required one group project (three people where expected to spend a year doing something real for a company in industry) and that was unusual.

slashdot trolling slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

I get the impression that this article was intended to be a grenade in a crowd.
Congrats.

Answering the question

[bladesinger]

Disclaimer: I am a software engineer, and this information will be useful to prospective college students. I believe a debate about engineering vs science is not necessary here and will not be of use to prospective students.

CS degree: Is a branch (some would say spinoff) of Mathematics, mixing discrete mathematics, algorithms, computability ("new" 20th century topic), and practical programming (also "new" topic). Some would say Computer Science is not a true science. My physics professor would say, "Mathematics and Computer Science had a divorce and Computer Science got all the children."

Software engineering: A career path that applies computer science in the design and implementation of software systems. A software engineer is typically aware of different processes for software development and knows how to work in a team.

Important:

Why do I call software engineering a career path? For two reasons. One, you will find very few accredited Software Engineering *Bachelor's* programs. You will find many accredited Software Engineering *Master's* programs.

Two, to become a software engineer, you typically graduate with a Computer Science degree and then join a company that is doing software product development. This likely accounts for a vast percentage of today's young "software engineers", like me. Note this may change as time goes on.

To become a computer scientist, you can say you graduated with a CS degree. However, a true CS "job" would likely be in a research setting where you apply the full breadth of theoretical knowledge which is more often than not, not required for a software engineering job. You might be working at a research center with supercomputers, where your job is to do basic or applied research. Hence something like Physics vs Applied Physics is similar to Computer Science vs Software Engineering.

Computer Scientist can't write code

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer Scientists leave writing the actual code to CS students, who don't earn big salaries. Guess where all that Open Source software originally came from.

You mean Maurits Cornelis Escher??

[Anonymous Coward]

M.C. Escher was an illustrator who mastered lithography and other graphic art forms, famous for his meticulous precision. He started drawing mediterranean landscapes and still lives, and later produced mostly abstract art. The latter was a favourite of maths teachers, but he lacked formal training in mathematics.

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[minstrelmike]

re: Computer scientists don't make the best programmers. (Physicists do). I believe it is mathematicians who make the best programs (which are nothing but applied algorithm).

Math - the real different

[daniel_l_mills]

SWE is light wrt. when it comes to how much advanced mathematics is required.

Sing along with monkey boy!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Developers developers developers!!!!...

wipe you bum bum

[fonitrus]

Degree in CS or SE makes a good paper to wipe your bum with unless you have the experience to back it up or were lucky enough to gain a graduate placement.
No one will employ you without some experience so any graduate who graduated and never worked even part time in the industry they want to work in will find it hard to compete with all the other graduates who did part time work even if that was callcentre desktop support.

The name of the degree doesnt matter as all graduates would be lucky to be part of a development team straight after uni. Most end up in shitty jobs like desktop support callcentres to 'build up experience' for 2 years or so they can have the necessary experience to be part of a roper team.
Others end up maintaining code and fixing bugs. After few years they might get on the development team and by then the stuff they learned at uni is only general knowledge considering how quicky technology moves so they would likely be specialist in the stuff their company does but if they lost that job they would be once again behind the tech curve and would need to keep up.

At the end its all about what uni does what and how they approach and name things. The CS ones are ones with stronger ARTS framework and you end up doing alot of general stuff like Philosophy and Logic, alot of Electronics and hardware and heavy Statistics classes coupled with some crazy math you will rarely use as a programmer and if you had to use it likely it was already automated in someone elses library of functions or yo9u just google the formula and copy paste. :)
the SE unis are the ones with more industry contacts that do specific programming courses to get you ready for the job, they will likely have an internship with said 'sponsors' and you wont have to suffer through a 2 year help desk job to build up your experience.

if all else fails CS students should not be discouraged, they can come work with me in the warehouse as a labourer and load/unload containers all day. they 'good' computer skill will come handy with clerical paperwork and they will be a clerk for the rest of their carreer :) shit pay but at least you get undisturbed access to Slashdot :) :)

Skills

[NewYork]

Writing software != Selling software
Both need mutually exclusive skills

computer sciens end software enengiering

[Anonymous Coward]

computer sciens you can devolpe hardware sutch as mainbords en cards IC's end processors etc. etc. software engeniering is write in this case microsoft software end is goes farther then applications sutch as C++ whit assably code in it for kernal end services etc. etc. microsoft always says thats verry dangerous because you know then to mutch of the system

Both are adequate

[Shred303]

Both degrees require you to solve problems using programming languages and techniques; both are adequate in preparing you for solving real world software problems. I prefer the CS curriculum because having intrinsic knowledge of how systems work from the CPU register, memory access and beyond shapes the way you look at and understand systems as a whole. This is the kind of insight you may never gain from working on the job. Otherwise computes and compilers will be always some mystical black box that you can't quite comprehend.

It is definite YOU don't see the "issue"

[Anonymous Coward]

Think about it - 1st, since my code runs fine (no disputing that)?

I paste in my code, verbatim, into a /. post - showing it's doing its job 5x here alone shown in links below, & perfectly... THAT is your "clue"!

---

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

---

* So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

---

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:02AM (#42017797)

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

No, lol, I think it's funny how well it runs then!

---

(No bugs 5x above, & 100's of times before it the past year or so here too vs. trolls like yourself, in just "giving them what they need", lmao...)

---

* Can't you SEE what the "issue" is here? It's not my code (it runs perfectly, shown 5x above, & 100's of times this past year or more vs. trolls like you too - where it merely "gives trolls what they NEED"!)...

What's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

---

THIS was "classic funny" from you too:

"hahaha i'd love to know what "c program" you're talking about now (particularly since i don't program c)" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:03AM (#42017801)

Yes... I could tell (lmao & SO COULD OTHERS) as far as the "C Program", look to your ac posts here:

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015023

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015039

lol!

APK

P.S.=> Heck - I might as well just "give it away" @ this point... The REAL QUESTION here, is:

Are you "too thick" as you put it, to identify the issue (with working code no less) you're having?

Apparently so!

I think it's FUNNY... lol!

... apk

Re:Time for "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy", lol... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you on topic? Have you been on topic ever here once?? No.

Re:Incorrect: You're an off-topic troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you on topic? Have you been on topic here even once?? No. The code works and was shown to do so 5 times in this exchange already.

Re:Works for me everytime though... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you on topic? Have you been on topic here even once?? No. The code works and is shown to do so 5 times in this exchange already.

Re:Quit "projecting" your own "'StRaNgE' tastes" a

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. Go away troll.

Re:A "C program"? LOL - NOT! Lmao @ U, troll... ap

[Anonymous Coward]

Your code lacks error trapping. Not even a nice try.

Re:"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat" (lol), 'CruTcHy'.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange that's been shown clearly). Your "code" (using prebuilt functions != coding, it is noobie level use of others' code) lacked error trapping, noobie.

Re:Funny it works perfectly then, eh (lol) 'CruTcH

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange that's been shown clearly). Your "code" (using prebuilt functions != coding, it is noobie level use of others' code) lacked error trapping, noobie. We saw your C Program too, and we knew you couldn't program in C.

Re:Funny it works perfectly then, eh (lol) 'CruTcH

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been on topic? No. The code works (5 times in this exchange that's been shown clearly). Your "code" (using prebuilt functions != coding, it is noobie level use of others' code) lacked error trapping, noobie. We saw your C Program too, and we knew you couldn't program in C!

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer Scientists create things like linux.
Software Engineers create things like Windows 8.

Not trolling, This is a complete fact. Far more high level CS degrees are working on linux and OSS than Windows 8.

Nice made up assumption. You have no sources to back any of this do you?

Re:"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat" (lol), 'CruTcHy'.

[crutchy]

"error trapping" won't make syntactically buggy code interpret... moron

Re:Funny it runs perfectly, eh? LMAO... apk

[crutchy]

DULL BRAIN of yours

if i can find a bug in your posted code that you can't see (even when its spelled out to you here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42017839 and you think my brain is dull, how dull then must your brain be?

poor apk, the wannabe programmer noob

'CruTcHy', no errtraps != maintainable code

[Anonymous Coward]

No, YOUR "CODE" lacked error trapping here -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016197 (if you call using prebuilt functions coding, that is - more like a kid using legos, lol!)...

---

Additionally - Didn't YOU say THIS also, in regards to
coding:

"...cos we all try to write code that "looks cool" and you know, writing code that functions and easy to debug is all of secondary importance" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @02:55AM (#42017605)

FROM -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42017605

"?

QUESTION - Where's YOUR code that functions AND is easy to debug?

---

It isn't - LMAO: You write code like a NOOB does, completely omitting error trapping... and the proof's right in that 1st link above!

APK

P.S.=> Lastly/Again - Funny my code ran 5x perfectly here too, eh?

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

(As well as 100's of times the past 1.5-2 yrs. now using it vs. trolls like yourself... perfect, every single time!)

* Care to EXPLAIN those PERFECT OUTPUTS, (lol) 'CruTcHy'?

So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

---

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:02AM (#42017797)

Man - First of all - You can't even write ENGLISH properly - sentences begin with capital letters

Perhaps it's MY FAULT here, lol (not)... How on EARTH could I expect you to write maintainable code WITH error trapping?

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code of MINE'S providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

What's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

... apk

'CruTcHy': No errtraps != good code... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

YOUR "CODE" lacked error trapping here -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016197 (if you call using prebuilt functions coding, that is - more like a kid using legos, lol!)...

---

Additionally - Didn't YOU say THIS also, in regards to coding:

"...cos we all try to write code that "looks cool" and you know, writing code that functions and easy to debug is all of secondary importance" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @02:55AM (#42017605)

FROM -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42017605

"?"

QUESTION - Where's YOUR code that functions AND is easy to debug?

---

It isn't - LMAO:

* You write code like a NOOB does, completely omitting error trapping... and the proof's right in that 1st link above!

APK

P.S.=> Lastly/Again - Funny my code ran 5x perfectly here too, eh?

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

(As well as 100's of times the past 1.5-2 yrs. now using it vs. trolls like yourself... perfect, every single time!)

* Care to EXPLAIN those PERFECT OUTPUTS, (lol) 'CruTcHy'?

So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

---

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:02AM (#42017797)

Man - First of all - You can't even write ENGLISH properly - sentences begin with capital letters!

Perhaps it's MY FAULT here, lol (not)... How on EARTH could I expect you to write maintainable code WITH error trapping?

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code of MINE'S providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... lmao!

What's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

... apk

'CruTcHy' (lol): No errtraps != good code

[Anonymous Coward]

YOUR "CODE" lacked error trapping here -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016197 (if you call using prebuilt functions coding, that is - more like a kid using legos, lol!)...

---

Additionally - Didn't YOU say THIS also, in regards to coding:

"...cos we all try to write code that "looks cool" and you know, writing code that functions and easy to debug is all of secondary importance" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @02:55AM (#42017605)

FROM -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42017605

"?"

QUESTION - Where's YOUR code that functions AND is easy to debug?

---

It isn't - LMAO:

* You write code like a NOOB does, completely omitting error trapping... and the proof's right in that 1st link above!

APK

P.S.=> Lastly/Again - Funny my code ran 5x perfectly here too, eh?

---

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014943

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42016015

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42014957

http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3258205&cid=42015649

---

(As well as 100's of times the past 1.5-2 yrs. now using it vs. trolls like yourself... perfect, every single time!)

* Care to EXPLAIN those PERFECT OUTPUTS, (lol) 'CruTcHy'?

So much for this "tidbit" from you, eh (lol) 'CruTcHy':

---

"i have never been talking about the code that you actually run in your python interpreter" - by crutchy (1949900) on Sunday November 18, @04:02AM (#42017797)

Man - First of all - You can't even write ENGLISH properly - sentences begin with capital letters!

Perhaps it's MY FAULT here, lol (not)... How on EARTH could I expect you to write maintainable code WITH error trapping?

Clue/New NEWS/NewsFlash: That's the code of MINE'S providing WHAT YOU NEED shown in the links above (& for others like you, as trolls, probably you posting again as ac)... rotflmao!

What's THAT kids? Oh, yes - that's right: You GUESSED IT - A dose of "ReVeRsE-PsyChoLoGy"... lmao!

... apk

Re:Engineer is better fit to lead product developm

[Anonymous Coward]

[citation needed]

Re:Funny it runs perfectly, eh? LMAO... apk

[drkstr1]

Stop responding to him. He doesn't care about any "bug." He's just having a laugh at your expense. Trust me, there is no "winning" with APK. Any response results in more trolling.