Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!husc6!ut-sally!im4u!milano!mcc-pp!calhoun
From: calhoun@mcc-pp.UUCP (Myron Calhoun)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: EE classes a waste to CS
Message-ID: <1681@mcc-pp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 16-Sep-86 07:45:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: mcc-pp.1681
Posted: Tue Sep 16 07:45:22 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Sep-86 11:34:42 EDT
References: <690@sdcc12.UUCP>
Organization: MCC, Austin, TX
Lines: 58

> Keywords: Wake up to reality!
> 
> I am expert computer scientist specializing in systems management,
> software engineering, and communications interfacing.  I have
> been in the field for 8 years and know 6 languages
> (Fortran, C, Pascal, Basic, Assembly (z-80, 8088, PDP-11/lsi,
> cal 16d) and ada), have worked with everything from unix to mdos, 
> and in addition have built (and partially designed) a variable
> ten-step waverform polyphonic synthesizer.  I have written
> everything from video games, to word processors, to missle
> simulations, to 3-d graphics, to real time energy control.
> 
> Having stated a few of my qualifications I would just like
> to say "WAKE UP", you don't need hardly any electronics or
> engineering classes to be an expert programmer.  The two
> fields can easily be seperately defined and in many fields
> can be mutually exclusive.  Although most engineering students
> will need the aid of computers in their work, it is highly
> doubtful that computer scientists will need engineering classes
> such as Electricity and Magnetism, circuit design or whatever
> wherever they may go.  I was the soul computer scientist for
> a group in Radar Defense at Teledyne Ryan Electronics.  At the
> time I only knew the concept of a battery and how to make a
> lightbulb work by connecting it to the battery's two poles.
> I was promoted with a substatial raise after two months with
> the company, strictly due to my performance.  The point is
> not to be arrogant but to offer proof that you don't need
> to know hardly anything about electronics to be a "hot"
> software engineer.  If you want to design computers, FINE,
> GET A DEGREE IN COMPUTER ENGINEERING!  Computer Software
> is a ligimate field, and anyone who doesn't think so has
> a strict problem with reality.  You will very rarely need
> hardware skills in the computer field as a software 
> designer.  You can easily understand io devices and how
> to optimise data communication links with very little 
> hardware knowledge (you can study the manuals of the
> hardware you are concerned and learn all you need to know).  
> 
> Now being quite good with electronics (evidence: my synthesizer)
> I still insist that the knowledge helps very little for such tasks
> as disk i/o optimization, program optimization, and certainly not
> systems management.  Hardware is for hardware people.  PLEASE
> DON'T INSIST THAT EVERYONE WITH AN INTEREST IN COMPUTER
> SOFTWARE ENGINEERING BE STUCK STUDYING BORING PHYSICS, 
> Circuit design, or even Chemistry (as with UCSD CE program).
> Dr. Kenneth Bowles, designer of the UCSD P-system and now
> with Telesoft, Inc. holds this same view.  Computer Science
> is a ligitimate field and should not be confused with EE.
> Those of you who want to know more about electronics and
> every nor gate, or cmos chip device, the more power to 
> you.  BUT STOP INFLICTING YOUR IDEAS OF WHAT COMPUTER 
> SCIENCE PEOPLE MUST DO BEYOND SOFTWARE.  Software engineering
> is intensive enough without having to analyze the magnetic
> fields present a transformer.  Allowing software people 
> to really learn and practice software necessitates many
> years of just software practice.
> 
> Frank Bellucci (UCSD Energy Management, st122@sdcc12)