|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Sofware development too easy
I moved this from the main article, where Jesse60905 had left it:
- Jesse60905 20:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)In my opinion a Software Developer makes plenty of money with SEMI-easy work to make Software Developer the best job there is (with good training and experience of course).
Since when is software development easy? Some is, to be sure, but not all. Ever try to write an RTS with no noticeable latency, despite the fact that all the AIs are running pathfinding algorithms in a continuosly changing topology? — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Jesse60905 again. Lost my pass and cba to retrieve it.We also eat alot of apples. Do you? Don't talk about things you don't know anything about. Sadly you are not aware of the fact I have taught myself quite a bit about programming on my own and sadly I stick to my original comment. Programming is quite easy considering the lack of any actual labor. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm not one to feed the trolls, but I'll respond anyway. "Don't talk about things you don't know anything about." Well, being a game programmer for over 15 years, I do think I know a thing or two about software development. I also worked in Defense for a few years, and the work there wasn't easy either. At any rate, making a statement about what is "easy" or "hard" is purely subjective and has no place in a Wikipedia article where NPOV rules. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 18:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
This page may need to be merged with programmer. Joncnunn 20:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
The single reference here is not sufficient to denote a clear difference between programmers and software developers. In many companies, the terms are synonymous, and the broader scope work is assigned to "programmer analysts" or "engineers". --188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC) Furthermore, there are also people in some "programmer" positions that do much of the work that is applied to software engineers. And thus, I don't feel this specific term carries higher importance than programmer on the level that it requires a separate article. --184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree with the proposal; software in this context usually refers to some end product that is developed according to stipulated requirements of some target audience, be it a specific client or the retail end-user market at large. A land developer is a glorified hole-digger, but land development implies a lot more than just moving bits of dirt around. If anything, the article should be merged into software development, as there isn't much to say about the people that doesn't involve the process. Ham Pastrami (talk) 03:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I quite disagree on merging this article with Programmer. In fact the Programmer article maybe more worthy of revisiting today, being of such high connection to Computer Programming, which in turn can be argued to be an increasingly limited term in comparison with Software development as a large umbrella that can cover both development computers, phones and other growing classes of devices. Thus, IMO, it makes more sense to focus on Software Developer/Development as a more general criteria from which we can link computer programming.
- On the other hand, regarding merging Developer-Development, I rather agree on its benefits to eliminate redundency, much as how Software Tester is only a redirect to Software Testing. However, looking around in WP, I seem notice that this may not be the approach followed so far. Check the dual existence Architect / Architecture, Researcher / Research ..etc, so I think we need more people to weigh on this...--Kgoarany (talk) 03:27, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree with the proposal: although the terms are often used interchangeably, they are used in different contexts. Traditionally programmer and analyst referred to different occupations. The trend to assign the different tasks to the same person led to replace the term with: software developer, software engineer, computer scientist... Glux (talk) 20:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose merge with Programmer: It doesn't have to carry a "higher importance" than programmer to warrant a separate article. It would be oversimplification to merge the two. One doesn't have to be a programmer to develop software. Oicumayberight (talk) 00:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose merge with Programmer: Along the same lines as above, there can be multiple non-programmers involved in development - to state it another way, the programmer(s) may be just one part of many on a larger team during development. It is true that in smaller companies people tend to wear many hats and the "programmer" of a certain company might fulfill all the duties of development, however that doesn't warrant a merge. Programmer and developer should not be merged, but if one wishes a merge, I agree that "software developers" could possibly be merged into a subsection of "software development" as stated above. (although as also stated above there seems to be no standard on merges of this nature throughout wikipedia) 10 April 2008
- Oppose merge with Programmer: Professional software developers are typically insulted by the use of the term programmer to describe their work. A programmer does not have the skills, wisdom, experience, and intelligence of a software developer. Grouping these two professions together is analogous to grouping physicians, NPs, PAs, nurses, and MAs together into a single profession. They are not the same. Dgmjr05 (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose on above grounds It has merit if we would just work on it. Also, how do Software Developters have more intelligence then ordinary programmers. Also, there is no source for that statement and therfor we must assume it is POV.--Jakezing (talk) 02:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose merge with Programmer: The Programmer article says A programmer is someone who writes computer software.... A programmer is not a software developer, software engineer, computer scientist, or software analyst. The Software development article says Software development is the translation of a user need or marketing goal into a software product. I have extended this article's list of development activities to include a wider spectrum to reflect this. - Pointillist (talk) 00:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- Based on the earlier discussions I propose that the lead paragraph be changed from "one or more facets of the software development process" to "facets of the software development process wider than design and coding", and that the "It has been suggested" merge be removed accordingly. I have made these changes - please revert and comment here if you disagree. - Pointillist (talk) 01:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- IMO a 'developer' has to accept all the software development phases and try to work within them, but a 'programmer' can rely on being an expert in just one aspect. For example, if a design requires access to hardware registers, a Java programmer can just say "you can't do that in this environment", but a developer has to find a better response e.g. by questioning the requirement, changing the architecture, costing and recruiting a 'C' programmer, rewriting the documentation etc. Of course, a single developer might not have all the skills needed, but he/she cannot limit responsibility as closely as a programmer can. In some situations the 'programmer' may have an excellent understanding of the real business problem and can imagine very creative solutions. A programmer who is not measured/managed/rewarded for thinking outside the box may (without very subtle seduction by his peers) prefer to maintain the pure 'programming' role rather than accept the uncertain responsibilities of being a 'developer'. - Pointillist (talk) 01:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Eric Sink's definition of "developer": is one man's opinion a definition or an opinion?
I cannot see how a single man's essay is being used as a definition for for differentiating "developers" and "programmers". Is the difference between programmers and developers Wikiality or is it reality? Park3r (talk) 07:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but am highly amused to see classic wordsmithing games still current here.
Some of us know what we do, the rest of you have difficulties with the concepts. May be trying to glorify selves, or methods, or schools, not sure.
Leave the article alone. Let it stay.
Programming since 80, C since 84.
Stop walking on eggshells. Some are just coders, some are Architects like John Galt. Get over it. Individual variation drives evolution, baby.
From a scholarly perspective, merely preserving the cultural differences in the definitions of terms is more valuable than your eventual boring (and likely biassed) concensus.
Question: Merge them all?
I'm very new here so take this for what it's worth...
I know it would make a big article, but would it be most useful to the reader to combine the best parts from all of these into a single article and redirect all of the current ones to it?
As has been stated, there is no widely accepted delineation between programmer, developer, analyst or software engineer. In any given organization, there's a hierarchy in roughly this order but the titles are more of a way of forcing a rigid structure on something that is really rather fluid. That characteristic is important.
Someone looking for career options or a non-IT manager deciding what title to hang on a new IT position they're creating should understand that, at least at this stage of maturity in the industry, responsibilities tend to follow the work flow and individual skills far more than duty assignments. Programmers develop products, analysts engineer complex systems and all of them write programs.
"In software engineering, it is more common to have the architecture, design, implementation, and test functions performed by a single individual."
Actually, the current status is that few companies hire persons for only "programming", "design" and test separately. You have the title "Software Developer" and do the design (with UML), "programming" based on your own design and run some tests for the use case to cover most of your code and functionality (module testing and coverity). It is rare for an individual software developer to "architect" something. Architecting is for the architects and architects don't have time to execute the individual cluster development (or even design) in any larger company.
The "Software Engineer" is just a buzzword to the HR and a legal term (military, health care). Do not mix it up with medical sciences. Medical sciences are much more structured and much more defined. Medicine is based to the study of the human body, which doesn't change much. On the other hand, software development is based on creativity, tools and processess. I.e. the software developer is creating these "bodies" for others to study so it is not that easy comparison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 10:33, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
"This resembles the early phases of industrialization in which individuals would both design and build things."
Actually in practice the total separation of design and development in software R&D is harder than it seems. When you design a bridge, the process is clear. However, when you design a software subsystem, a highly skilled "programmer" might start to see errors in the design in the very early phases.
If we think about Agile development process coupled with strong separation of roles, it might correct some problems in the stiff structure of design and development. However, if we follow the waterfall development process, the "programmers" will happily execute the possibly flawed sketches.
Also in practice you need sketches to model what to be implemented (to save time and effort in the design phase). If you need sketches you also need highly skilled "programmers" how are capable of deep abstract thinking (if you want them to correct the flaws). If you document in too structured way (the waterfall, i.e. bridge designer), you might as well not document it as the code with good comments will be better than the hundreds of pages of code in pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 11:42, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
- Mechanical engineering, civil engineering, and electrical engineering all require a much greater degree of pre and post activity than that demanded of a software engineer (e.g., no need for additional physical materials or components). That's the reason software engineering is more role-inclusive than the other more "mature" engieering disciplines. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 12:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Has anyone considered adding discussion of the lack of unity within the development community? There are growing numbers of local organizations to try and unite developers, but very few on the national level... I find it worth a conversation with all of the privacy conversation right now surrounding apps and no unifying voice to represent them.Wikime720 (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I find about this article that the introduction is too long. I can't change it because my level of English is pretty poor.