I don't think it's about education. It's just that software isn't what hardware people mostly work with and you only get experienced in what you mostly work wit

I don't think it's about education. It's just that software isn't what hardware people mostly work with and you only get experienced in what you mostly work with. And when you're experienced, you gain some insight into how things will work. I know some basics of EE but I have no gut feeling of how to build or analyze any hardware for real. It's just something I've read and made my mind to understand but it's not something I know. Conversely, I've been writing software on the lowest to highest levels for decades and I have a hunch of how to start building something that will eventually grow really big and complex. I don't know exactly how I do it but depending on what I want to achieve I have, already at the very beginning, a quite strong sense of what might work and also what will definitely NOT work. My take on hardware is that it's mostly a black box that usually does most of what's advertised (but workarounds are regularly needed, and I guess it must be really difficult to build features into silicon and have it work 100% as designed), and these quirks had better be encapsulated in the lowest levels of the driver so that we'll get some real software building blocks sooner. This would be no basis to design hardware. I would make such a terrible mess out of it that even if I managed to design a chip and make it appear to work somewhat, it would fail spectacularly in all kinds of naive cornercases that a real EE would never have to solve because s/he would never venture to build any of them, just because s/he would know better from the start already.