Well I would say a "Software Architect" must be an order of magnitude higher than a "Software Engineer", given the lowly status of engineering in NZ.
Todd. > Steve > > As my father was fond of saying (When we agreed ) "Great minds think > alike" followed by "Fools seldom differ" > > Thanks for clarifying the "Software Architect" could also be "Software > Bigot" or "Software Supplier Patsy" or my favourite > "Software smartass employed at great expense to force fit application > selected by drunken board members at the club to serve company" > > Again offtopic this is an enjoyable watch (also lamblasts Architects) > > http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/james_howard_kunstler_dissects_suburbia.html > > Neven > > >> "cunning bastard" - must have that printed on my cards. >> >> Must be something to do with age as they say that "Wisdom comes with >> age". But someone once told me that "Sometimes age comes all on its >> own". I find it never pays to ask if that's happened with me :o) >> >> As for the "Software Architect" title that started this thread (it all >> eventually runs in a full circle). That is normally someone who knows >> an ERP system (e.g. SAP / PeopleSoft / Microsoft Dynamics Navision / >> JD Edwards / et el.) so well that they can design the interfaces >> between the various ERP components and external functionality in big >> diagrams on a whiteboard. >> >> Essentially however, I much prefer the description given earlier that >> corresponds to the "What is an expert" description - someone brought >> in from another city and wearing a suit and carrying a briefcase. >> >> Steve >> http://stevepeacocke.blogspot.com/ >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Neven MacEwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> >> Steve >> >> Thats because your a cunning bastard that has worked out telling the >> masses its easy never pays.. >> >> This is appropo to the Software Architect Question...whatr the f%k >> is a >> Software Architect? >> Sounds like a title looking for a salary >> >> Neven >> >> >> > Its never "that other 5%". My favourite saying is explaining >> that the >> > main problem with most programming is that last little wee 95%. >> > >> > :o) >> > >> > Steve >> > http://stevepeacocke.blogspot.com/ >> > >> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Neven MacEwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>> wrote: >> > >> > Steve >> > >> > So what we need is OO RAD? Where you define classes and they >> > 'instantly' >> > appear on your palette (and are dynamically updated) >> > And a O-R framework is part of the language? >> > >> > The problem has been of course that the Table Row = Business >> > Object is a >> > 95% accurate solution and so the Delphi IDE >> > has basically delivered in 95% of situations >> > >> > That other 5% is a bastard though >> > >> > Just a thought >> > Neven >> > > Yea, thanks Conor, >> > > >> > > Sure, in RAD, as it is in any Delphi project, you can >> certainly get >> > > away with simply programming the event handlers in the >> components >> > > (depending on the application). That should not preclude being >> > able to >> > > create, for example, an Application Object that handles >> all your >> > > globals like the logged in user, or the company name and other >> > details >> > > needed at times (e.g.; lbCompany.Caption := >> oApp.CompanyName) - >> > where >> > > perhaps the company name is extracted from the database >> etc. In this >> > > example, oApp knows how to extract the company name, and >> perhaps >> > even >> > > format it for display. >> > > >> > > RAD does not mean ShiteProgramming, or >> NoThoughtProgramming. Its >> > hard >> > > to find a definitive definition (?) for RAD and a quick >> search shows >> > > various descriptions from the tool itself (Delphi or VB) >> to the >> > whole >> > > spectrum of Agile methodologies. >> > > >> > > However, I do disagree with the assertion that RAD does >> not lend >> > > itself to larger apps (or did you mean "Rapid >> Prototyping"). In fact >> > > RAD is an excellent development environment for developing >> even >> > > enterprise level applications. Some years ago I had the >> pleasure of >> > > working in a team of between 3-5 developers where we used >> a RAD >> > > approach (using Delphi) in an iterative and incremental >> development >> > > methodology to produce a very large scale corporate >> application and >> > > can confirm the approach as excellent and the development far >> > > outperforms a team up to 10 times larger using Java/J2EE in a >> > refined >> > > waterfall approach for a similar sized project. >> > > >> > > Steve >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Conor Boyd >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>>> wrote: >> > > >> > > Probably because I don't put the acronym RAD and the word >> > > "programming" together as you have done. >> > > >> > > From my POV, RAD is generally taken to mean what the >> acronym >> > > stands for, Rapid Application Development; i.e. drop some >> > > components on to a form, wire up a few event handlers, >> voila. >> > > >> > > Doesn't mean I don't "do" OOP in event handlers and >> the little >> > > amount of code that is required in such an app, but >> IMHO you're >> > > comparing apples with oranges. >> > > >> > > RAD does not lend itself to larger apps which are >> intended to be >> > > easily maintainable and intended to be worked on by a >> team of >> > > developers. >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > C. >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list Post: delphi@delphi.org.nz Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi Unsubscribe: send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with Subject: unsubscribe
