4 ms·
I disagree with most of the points you made (mainly because I think the analogy is very weak). But I'm waiting for your next part before commenting more. For a
by NhanH 12y ago
I disagree with most of the points you made (mainly because I think the analogy is very weak). But I'm waiting for your next part before commenting more. For a few short notes:
- Software, nowadays, are both services and products. And we are already providing the services to a much larger numbers of customers than developers.
- It could be said that "build" would be a good description too. But "build" as in "we build a company", rather than "we build a wall". There are big multinational corps as well as mom & pop shop, and there are big distributed programs as well as simple CRUD apps. We'd have the industrial revolution in software when we have one in starting a business (which some may argue is happening too, actually).
- And finally, "engineer" would be an apt description too, we're merely engineering the program, with all the declarative programming and what not :-). The compilers & co are our factories. Luckily in our case, no sweatshop is involved in manufacturing.
- chton 12y agoThanks for the input! For the purpose of this post, I didn't make the distinction between services and products, since at their most basic level, they are the same. The difference is in business model, not implementation or process. 'build' a in company is a very interesting avenue of thought. It might imply different ways to work on software. Food for thought :) Compilers as factories are something I considered, but for software they are a part of the creation process, not the manufacturing process.
- chton 12y agoFYI, Part 2 just went up on http://www.scaletheplanet.com/post/the-industrial-revolution-part-2 http://www.scaletheplanet.com/post/the-industrial-revolution...