> There is just sweat. Unless you're a junior developer you should be able to do more than just grunt work. If you think grunt work is all there is to software

> There is just sweat. Unless you're a junior developer you should be able to do more than just grunt work. If you think grunt work is all there is to software development, you frankly don't know what you're talking about. I've worked with software developers in tech companies that plan and fine-tune code and data formats based on metrics like memory use and performance -- exactly the calculations you claim aren't involved in software. The difference between software and physical objects is that the resource cost of producing software is zero so the difference between implementation and simulation is often non-existent. So unlike physical engineering where you necessarily need to run calculations because testing is expensive, you have a tight feedback loop that allows you to tweak a system under test in ways physical engineers could only dream of -- and even so, better simulation tools are already saving physical engineers a lot of number crunching. > Engineer is a high ranking title In your opinion. You already stated crane operators are called "engineers" too. That's the standard you need to compare "software engineers" to. Is software development more like engineering than operating a crane or less? > done by programmers who listen to a manager grunt. No true Scotsman, much? You're not seriously claiming engineers are never constrained by decisions from superiors, are you? The only difference I can see is that (like lawyers and accountants) engineers have skin in the game that disincentives following certain orders -- exactly what has been asked of software developers in the fallout of the VW scandal.