"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"

[Lynn McGuire]

"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"

https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."

Um, no.

Lynn

[Jens Stuckelberger]

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

[Wouter Verhelst]

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

"SQL is this great new language that allows even managers to just query
the database directly! No need to write software anymore!"

Make something idiot proof, and someone will just find you a better idiot.

[James Kuyper]

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

I've heard that something similar was said about FORTRAN itself, by
comparison with assembler.

[Robert Wessel]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:08:27 -0400, James Kuyper

Post by James Kuyper

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

I've heard that something similar was said about FORTRAN itself, by
comparison with assembler.

And Cobol. And of course we had the whole 4GL fad. But yes. The end
of programmers has been predicted about as many times as Jennifer
Aniston has been reported pregnant by the tabloids.

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Post by James Kuyper

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

I've heard that something similar was said about FORTRAN itself, by
comparison with assembler.

Maybe I wasn't clear -- that's what I meant. I can't cite the original
FORTRAN paper (in CACM?) since I can't find the copy I used to have, but
my recollection is the claim was made in that paper. It also (IIRC)
made the claim that it would virtually eliminate programming errors, and
the professor (this was when I was in grad school, roughly 1980) made
the comment that "virtually" means "doesn't". That's a definition that
has stuck with me over the decades.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by James Kuyper

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

I've heard that something similar was said about FORTRAN itself, by
comparison with assembler.

Maybe I wasn't clear -- that's what I meant. I can't cite the original
FORTRAN paper (in CACM?) since I can't find the copy I used to have, but
my recollection is the claim was made in that paper. It also (IIRC)
made the claim that it would virtually eliminate programming errors, and
the professor (this was when I was in grad school, roughly 1980) made
the comment that "virtually" means "doesn't". That's a definition that
has stuck with me over the decades.

I can remember the dog and pony show IBM put on when they introduced
FORTRAN. I do not remember them claiming to eliminate programming
errors. They did mention reducing the number of programmers needed.

[s***@casperkitty.com]

Post by David Kleinecke
I can remember the dog and pony show IBM put on when they introduced
FORTRAN. I do not remember them claiming to eliminate programming
errors. They did mention reducing the number of programmers needed.

If there were no demand for computers to do anything more than they could do
before the invention of FORTRAN, the number of programmers required would be
very small. What happens is that as it becomes practical to write more
complex programs, the tasks which computers are called upon to do become
likewise more complex.

[Chad]

Tell that to the people that created the following engineering wonder....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mashable.com/2018/02/01/internet-of-dildos-hackers-teledildonics.amp/

[David Kleinecke]

Post by s***@casperkitty.com

Post by David Kleinecke
I can remember the dog and pony show IBM put on when they introduced
FORTRAN. I do not remember them claiming to eliminate programming
errors. They did mention reducing the number of programmers needed.

If there were no demand for computers to do anything more than they could do
before the invention of FORTRAN, the number of programmers required would be
very small. What happens is that as it becomes practical to write more
complex programs, the tasks which computers are called upon to do become
likewise more complex.

The number of programmers was indeed reduced. Primarily because
scientists and engineers started writing their own programs.

Nothing similar happened in the business world and COBOL did not
have the same effect FORTRAN had.

[Robert Wessel]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 21:34:05 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by James Kuyper

Post by Joe Pfeiffer

Post by Lynn McGuire

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-

embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743

Post by Lynn McGuire
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.
Lynn

I remember hearing, in the late 80s, that software development,
as a job, would soon disappear on account of the projection that
applications would be, more or less, automatically generated by the
interested parties. This a bit like religious fundamentalists and their
ilk, predicting the Rapture "real soon now" on a regular basis.

So far as I can determine, this prediction has been made on a regular
basis ever since FORTRAN was first released....

I've heard that something similar was said about FORTRAN itself, by
comparison with assembler.

Maybe I wasn't clear -- that's what I meant. I can't cite the original
FORTRAN paper (in CACM?) since I can't find the copy I used to have, but
my recollection is the claim was made in that paper. It also (IIRC)
made the claim that it would virtually eliminate programming errors, and
the professor (this was when I was in grad school, roughly 1980) made
the comment that "virtually" means "doesn't". That's a definition that
has stuck with me over the decades.

Of course there's no question that HLLs have eliminated a great many
low level programming errors in practice. Which unfortunately appears
mainly to have freed up a lot of programmer's time so that they can
concentrate on making high level programming errors...

There's an old saw that programmers generally write about the same
number of LOCs per unit time, no matter what language they're
programming in (the number varies by programmer, of course). There
appears to be at least some truth to that.

It's been my observation that the number of errors produced per unit
time is fairly constant as well.

[Richard Bos]

Post by Lynn McGuire
"The Soon-to-Be-Extinct Embedded Software Engineer"
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/soon-be-extinct-embedded-software-engineer/39152617858743
"Embedded software engineers of the future will have a very different
skillset from their traditional predecessors. They’ll know how to call
an API to make the hardware do something, but they won’t know why or how
it does it."
Um, no.

Libraries like Bootstrap mean that a humble web programmer can now
design a software front-end, and the emergence of 3D printing means that
even the end user can design a physical object. Designers, those
overpaid men-in-the-middle whose main purpose was to ensure planned
obsolesence by emphasising the looks of the product over it getting its
job done, will therefore sooon be extinct. And the sooner, the better.

Your turn, Design News.

Richard

[jacobnavia]

Post by Richard Bos
Designers, those
overpaid men-in-the-middle whose main purpose was to ensure planned
obsolesence by emphasising the looks of the product over it getting its
job done, will therefore sooon be extinct. And the sooner, the better.
Your turn, Design News.

You haven't the foggiest idea what design is.

Design is "planned obsolesence"?

Wrong. Those are bad designs of course.

"Emphasizing the looks of the product over it getting the job done"?

Wrong. That is still a bad design.

And your opposition of the plain guy who uses software "better than
designers" do is also wrong, since that guy is designing its object!

We all do design. Some better than others, you mind.

But we all do it. Design is getting the idea into a concrete object.

[Malcolm McLean]

Post by jacobnavia

Post by Richard Bos
Designers, those
overpaid men-in-the-middle whose main purpose was to ensure planned
obsolesence by emphasising the looks of the product over it getting its
job done, will therefore sooon be extinct. And the sooner, the better.
Your turn, Design News.

You haven't the foggiest idea what design is.
Design is "planned obsolesence"?
Wrong. Those are bad designs of course.
"Emphasizing the looks of the product over it getting the job done"?
Wrong. That is still a bad design.
And your opposition of the plain guy who uses software "better than
designers" do is also wrong, since that guy is designing its object!
We all do design. Some better than others, you mind.
But we all do it. Design is getting the idea into a concrete object.

Planned obsolescence isn't socially very useful, but it is often very
useful to the company selling the product, as it generates another sale
some years down the line. The fashion industry of course doesn't even
pretend that this isn't the case.

As for appearance, that can be very important. My mother clamped down
on an ugly printer that was kept in the living room. It had striking
yellow flashes for edging. She said she just couldn't tolerate it, so
it had to go back to be replaced by a more muted one. That was
legitimate - the living room isn't an office, computer equipment
can't dominate.

[s***@casperkitty.com]

Post by Malcolm McLean
Planned obsolescence isn't socially very useful, but it is often very
useful to the company selling the product, as it generates another sale
some years down the line. The fashion industry of course doesn't even
pretend that this isn't the case.

Planned obsolescence can sometimes be socially useful if it helps lead
toward unification of the primary marketplace, but does not preclude
use of vintage equipment and applications when appropriate. A key part
of making planned obsolescence socially useful is to deprecate old
features after providing replacements that are superior to the old ones
*in nearly all cases*. Deprecation of a feature can't remove the need
for it unless or until a suitable replacement exists.

[Richard Bos]

Post by jacobnavia

Post by Richard Bos
Designers, those
overpaid men-in-the-middle whose main purpose was to ensure planned
obsolesence by emphasising the looks of the product over it getting its
job done, will therefore sooon be extinct. And the sooner, the better.
Your turn, Design News.

You haven't the foggiest idea what design is.
Design is "planned obsolesence"?
Wrong. Those are bad designs of course.

It is bad design from the user's perspective.

It is poor design from a design theory perspective.

It is very good design from the vendor's perspective.

It is very, very common.

Post by jacobnavia
"Emphasizing the looks of the product over it getting the job done"?
Wrong. That is still a bad design.

It is bad design from the user's perspective.

It is poor design from a design theory perspective.

It is very good design from the vendor's perspective.

It is very, very common.

Post by jacobnavia
And your opposition of the plain guy who uses software "better than
designers" do is also wrong, since that guy is designing its object!
We all do design. Some better than others, you mind.

We all write English (well, most of us here), but not all of us are
writers.

Post by jacobnavia
But we all do it. Design is getting the idea into a concrete object.

But that's not the design Design News is meant for. It's to professional
designers as an HTML file from Frontpage is to professional programmers.

Richard

[Rosario19]

Post by Richard Bos

Post by jacobnavia

Post by Richard Bos
Designers, those
overpaid men-in-the-middle whose main purpose was to ensure planned
obsolesence by emphasising the looks of the product over it getting its
job done, will therefore sooon be extinct. And the sooner, the better.
Your turn, Design News.

You haven't the foggiest idea what design is.
Design is "planned obsolesence"?
Wrong. Those are bad designs of course.

It is bad design from the user's perspective.
It is poor design from a design theory perspective.
It is very good design from the vendor's perspective.

if that 'disegn' is not good in general, out of all possible level: it
is wrong even for vendor

i remember the story someone that make gold all that he touched: but
the gold can not be eat
"Re Mida" king Mida

[Malcolm McLean]

Post by Richard Bos

Post by jacobnavia
"Emphasizing the looks of the product over it getting the job done"?
Wrong. That is still a bad design.

It is bad design from the user's perspective.
It is poor design from a design theory perspective.
It is very good design from the vendor's perspective.
It is very, very common.

Architecture? Cars?

[Richard Bos]

Post by Malcolm McLean

Post by Richard Bos

Post by jacobnavia
"Emphasizing the looks of the product over it getting the job done"?
Wrong. That is still a bad design.

It is bad design from the user's perspective.
It is poor design from a design theory perspective.
It is very good design from the vendor's perspective.
It is very, very common.

Architecture? Cars?

Amongst many others, yes.

Richard