I ran across this article this morning and wondered what
others of you think.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bestjobs/

Dave,

Dave Boland wrote:
Laboratory tests have proven conclusively that research causes cancer
in rats.

When sufficiently redacted, all information is meaningless.

larwe wrote:

Not very insightful. This the best you can offer?

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 12:59:28 GMT, Dave Boland
<NODARNSPAMdboland9@stny.rr.com> wrote:


"Engineer" rates #17, below chiropractor and physician assistant and
technical writer.

Imagine hacking code, rubbing backs, or editing manuals 40 hours a
week for the rest of your working life. That would be like joining the
Living Dead to me.

The best thing about occasionally programming an embedded app is that
I know it will soon be over, and I can get back to real engineering.
I'd sink into despair if I knew that, after this one was done, there
was an infinite train of additional programming tasks lined up...

John

John Larkin wrote:

John,

I so get what you are saying! However, I also get so tired
of trying to find parts that actually work the way the
specs. say they should (been burned by this a few times), or
getting parts from companies that seem to produce more
specs. than actual parts, then having to design a card
because the days of the easy to use DIP are over, etc.

The advantage of software is that I don't have to by "If"
statements and the like, nothing on back-order for nine
months, and they don't wear out. Sill, as you say, making
something move, blink, or even smoke, is a rewarding feeling!

Dave,

Dave Boland wrote:

Pretty much. You point to a Reader's Digest view of the world, expect a
Reader's Digest answer. You're showing mass-consumer media articles to
a technical audience.

I just finished writing a book on how to be an embedded engineer. I
think it's a much better job than being a pure software guy, especially
in the sense those clowns meant it. Hanging your career on app-level
shrinkwrap crap is pretty much painting an outsourcing target on your
back.

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 07:11:21 -0700, John Larkin

What do you consider to be "real engineering"?

In comp.arch.embedded Dave Boland <NODARNSPAMdboland9@stny.rr.com> wrote:
That's easy:

1) you crossposted without limiting F'up2

2) Any "study" searching for the N "best" of any type things is bogus
almost by definition.

3) Any study published in a URL that contains "money" twice is
almost guaranteed to be phony, biased, or incorrectly
reported --- most likely all three combined.

4) Any study trying to compare jobs "objectively", without relation to
the person doing them, is an exercise in futility --- a job is a
*much* too personal thing to be qualifiable like that.

Every year, in every country of the world, pupils and students see
such "studies" and, taking them at face value, make breathtakingly bad
decisions based on them, causing floods of students in certain fields,
and shortages in others. IMHO a law against publishing such "studies"
wouldn't be the worst of all possible ideas. Adequate punishment: the
publisher owes everyone who believed them a job, for as many months as
passed between that study and the next one of its ilk.

--
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker@physik.rwth-aachen.de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:17:51 -0500, Gary Reichlinger
<reichln@navix.net> wrote:


Discovering a unfilled need; contacting potential users and getting
their opinions on what they'd like; researching the competition;
researching the literature for theory and techniques; researching and
testing available parts; conceiving/brainstorming a hardware/software
architecture; writing the spec sheet and the preliminary manual;
getting user opinions again; design; pcb layout and packaging; fpga
and firmware design; putting it together and making it work; test sets
and test procedures; final datasheets and manuals; press releases and
web pages; tweaks; next project.


The "design" bit is my favorite part.

John

In article <1145025976.903496.155890@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups .com>,
larwe <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> writes
I would agree. Especially when the definitions are very vague. It's not
just a mass market survey to a technical audience. put the same survey
in front of any specialist forum and they will knock holes in it re
their own area of expertise.

It also depends on who the sample was. Ask in New-York, San Francisco,
Seattle and Memphis and you will get 4 completely different sets of
answers.

Ask in some parts of "Hillbilly" land USA* and Pig farmer will be Heaven
judging by the film Deliverance :-)

*Not sure which part of the US the hillbillys etc reside.


It depends on many things. I know many software engineers (who don't do
hardware) who only work in the embedded field and vise-versa. I know
many who would refer to themselves a "programmers" (mind you that is
mainly in the PC field).

On the other hand what is an "engineer" in 17? Many who call
themselves Engineers are mechanics there are many branches of
"engineering"

This survey is rather pointless.

Again that depends on your view. Programmer is a very secure job... lots
of foreigners keep coming here with projects for us to do :-)

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In article <47fv32pjghigi07ke25kgi71gnbjddd7jd@4ax.com>, Gary
Reichlinger <reichln@navix.net> writes
Now there is the question!

fixing cars
building bridges
making aeroplanes
designing aeroplanes
using a lathe

Most of my fathers engineering involved a lot of mathematics and very
little else. (designing gas turbine blades)

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
On that note, where are there such shortages? Only ones I know of are
in pharmacy and nursing. Maybe also a shortage of physicians,
especially in areas that don't pay so well, but then again, the med
schools are already at maximum capacity anyhow (and maybe even the
pharmacy schools)...

Regards,

Mike

In article <4a9sr3Fs6s7bU1@news.dfncis.de>, Hans-Bernhard Broeker
<broeker@physik.rwth-aachen.de> writes
5 Any study that does not define its terms before use is bogus. when
"everybody knows" the meanings few do

6 Any study that does not analyses the respondents is bogus (and publish
the analysis.

Asking at Lourdes for a view on abortion is not going to give the same
result as the same survey in an average metropolis.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

mrdarrett@gmail.com wrote:

Depens on where "there" is, geographically and politically, and on
when you need the information. Not much point discussing that in an
international newsgroup.

--
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker@physik.rwth-aachen.de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

On Friday, in article
<ITN%f.1166$kz3.92@twister.nyroc.rr.com>
NODARNSPAMdboland9@stny.rr.com "Dave Boland" wrote:

Considering, the mile wide paintbrush that has be used to pigeon hole the
categories, any answer is just as meaningless. Software can mean anything
to those doing the survey from script files, to complex scientific
multi-processor algorithms to decipher the CERN linear accelerator.

No doubt the engineer category covered

Mechanical (including garage mechanics called engineers)
Civil
Electronic
Electrical
Plumbing and sewage
Plant engineer (as in factories)
plus many other categories.

These surveys are as meaningless as the recent headlines about
"Twice as many children taking cocaine", as a ROUNDED up figure changed
from 1% to 2% which actually was a difference between 1.3% and 1.85%,
nearer a third. Considering the statistical accuracy and the subjects
it is a meaningless change more like noise on a measurement.

Very simplified stats in magazines/newspapers and news are no use to
anybody. Even a simple 20% is meaning less without knowing the total
quantity, as in five people and one causes a 20% change in some survey.

--
Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
<http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 & mailing list info
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate

CNN is 99% bullshit and 1% news.


"Dave Boland" <NODARNSPAMdboland9@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Q0N%f.47525$Da7.11828@twister.nyroc.rr.com...

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:39:03 +0100, Chris Hills wrote:

Mayberry. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GAT(E P) dpu s: a++ C++@ P+ L++>+ !E W+ N++ o? K? w-- !O !M !V PS+++
PE Y+ PGP- t 5+++)-; X- R- tv+ b+ DI++++>+ D-? G e+$ h+ r-- z+
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

On 2006-04-14, Gary Reichlinger <reichln@navix.net> wrote:
Driving a train.

Woooo-wooooo!

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Hold the MAYO & pass
at the COSMIC AWARENESS...
visi.com

On 14 Apr 2006 08:43:37 -0700, mrdarrett@gmail.com wrote:

You can add anyone with experience or training in exploration or
production of oil and gas. However, about six years ago, those people
might have been sleeping on park benches.

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:30:56 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

I would rate at least half of those tasks as less interesting
than embedded programming. None of them would be possible without the
program.