An architect should code. Period
-
Link to Original[^] Peter's Gekko public Blog MyNotepad : Imho An architect should code. Period This has been said over and over again, but as long as it keeps happening it just has to be said again. A very common career path in IT "promotes" a coder over the years to a program manager with architect responsibilities. And being an architect they stop writing code themselves. The thing I see over and over again is that these people keep living in the programming environment in which they grew up. They did loads of work in VB 6 or classical ASP. When a new piece of software has to be designed, which quite often is supposed to do something similar to the things they built themselves in their heydays, they grab their old projects to demonstrate what they have in mind. Right now I'm facing an ASP.NET site which has to build dynamic pages on the fly based on dynamic sets of data. And the lead architect bases his ideas on an ancient asp site he built years ago. Given the tools of those days it is a well crafted product but in nature it is just plain old asp spitting out html top to bottom. Given today's tools we can write far clearer, more powerful and better maintainable code building an asp.net control tree and leave the rendering of the html to the framework. But our lead architect doesn't know this framework. The good thing about my lead is that he is very open minded and eager to learn about today's tools. But it would be so much better if working and coding with them would be part of his work. How can you be a good architect when you don't know your building materials or construction tools?
-
Link to Original[^] Peter's Gekko public Blog MyNotepad : Imho An architect should code. Period This has been said over and over again, but as long as it keeps happening it just has to be said again. A very common career path in IT "promotes" a coder over the years to a program manager with architect responsibilities. And being an architect they stop writing code themselves. The thing I see over and over again is that these people keep living in the programming environment in which they grew up. They did loads of work in VB 6 or classical ASP. When a new piece of software has to be designed, which quite often is supposed to do something similar to the things they built themselves in their heydays, they grab their old projects to demonstrate what they have in mind. Right now I'm facing an ASP.NET site which has to build dynamic pages on the fly based on dynamic sets of data. And the lead architect bases his ideas on an ancient asp site he built years ago. Given the tools of those days it is a well crafted product but in nature it is just plain old asp spitting out html top to bottom. Given today's tools we can write far clearer, more powerful and better maintainable code building an asp.net control tree and leave the rendering of the html to the framework. But our lead architect doesn't know this framework. The good thing about my lead is that he is very open minded and eager to learn about today's tools. But it would be so much better if working and coding with them would be part of his work. How can you be a good architect when you don't know your building materials or construction tools?
ednrgc wrote:
An architect should code. Period
An architect should design buildings, not code. Period.
-
ednrgc wrote:
An architect should code. Period
An architect should design buildings, not code. Period.
There's an Onion article in there somewhere, just waiting to be written! :)
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
Link to Original[^] Peter's Gekko public Blog MyNotepad : Imho An architect should code. Period This has been said over and over again, but as long as it keeps happening it just has to be said again. A very common career path in IT "promotes" a coder over the years to a program manager with architect responsibilities. And being an architect they stop writing code themselves. The thing I see over and over again is that these people keep living in the programming environment in which they grew up. They did loads of work in VB 6 or classical ASP. When a new piece of software has to be designed, which quite often is supposed to do something similar to the things they built themselves in their heydays, they grab their old projects to demonstrate what they have in mind. Right now I'm facing an ASP.NET site which has to build dynamic pages on the fly based on dynamic sets of data. And the lead architect bases his ideas on an ancient asp site he built years ago. Given the tools of those days it is a well crafted product but in nature it is just plain old asp spitting out html top to bottom. Given today's tools we can write far clearer, more powerful and better maintainable code building an asp.net control tree and leave the rendering of the html to the framework. But our lead architect doesn't know this framework. The good thing about my lead is that he is very open minded and eager to learn about today's tools. But it would be so much better if working and coding with them would be part of his work. How can you be a good architect when you don't know your building materials or construction tools?
I disagree. A good architect in any discipline is knowledgeable of current and emerging standards as well as design and construction methodologies. They work with the builders and project supervisors to ensure their ideas are feasible within a budget framework. The blog simply describes architects who aren't bothering to do their jobs. That's nothing new and happens in many disciplines. Cheers, Drew.
-
I disagree. A good architect in any discipline is knowledgeable of current and emerging standards as well as design and construction methodologies. They work with the builders and project supervisors to ensure their ideas are feasible within a budget framework. The blog simply describes architects who aren't bothering to do their jobs. That's nothing new and happens in many disciplines. Cheers, Drew.
Just to play word games, we don't call any of these people in other disciplines "architects". In other words, if I build cabinets, or build motorcycles, or create pottery, or compose music, at no time am I ever referred to an an "architect". So to call computer programmers who design software, which typically has few, if any established standards, and usually doesn't even work well, "architects" seems a bit of a stretch. It's always seemed like simple ego stroking to me.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
Just to play word games, we don't call any of these people in other disciplines "architects". In other words, if I build cabinets, or build motorcycles, or create pottery, or compose music, at no time am I ever referred to an an "architect". So to call computer programmers who design software, which typically has few, if any established standards, and usually doesn't even work well, "architects" seems a bit of a stretch. It's always seemed like simple ego stroking to me.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
Jim Crafton wrote:
Just to play word games, we don't call any of these people in other disciplines "architects".
I agree. Titles in general tend to be more for ego than anything else.
Jim Crafton wrote:
In other words, if I build cabinets, or build motorcycles, or create pottery, or compose music, at no time am I ever referred to an an "architect".
Sure. The point is that a good designer will have up-to-date knowledge of the standards and processes in order to come up with a good plan. He doesn't have to actually participate in the execution (building) of the plans to be a good designer though. Cheers, Drew.
-
Link to Original[^] Peter's Gekko public Blog MyNotepad : Imho An architect should code. Period This has been said over and over again, but as long as it keeps happening it just has to be said again. A very common career path in IT "promotes" a coder over the years to a program manager with architect responsibilities. And being an architect they stop writing code themselves. The thing I see over and over again is that these people keep living in the programming environment in which they grew up. They did loads of work in VB 6 or classical ASP. When a new piece of software has to be designed, which quite often is supposed to do something similar to the things they built themselves in their heydays, they grab their old projects to demonstrate what they have in mind. Right now I'm facing an ASP.NET site which has to build dynamic pages on the fly based on dynamic sets of data. And the lead architect bases his ideas on an ancient asp site he built years ago. Given the tools of those days it is a well crafted product but in nature it is just plain old asp spitting out html top to bottom. Given today's tools we can write far clearer, more powerful and better maintainable code building an asp.net control tree and leave the rendering of the html to the framework. But our lead architect doesn't know this framework. The good thing about my lead is that he is very open minded and eager to learn about today's tools. But it would be so much better if working and coding with them would be part of his work. How can you be a good architect when you don't know your building materials or construction tools?
-
-
Link to Original[^] Peter's Gekko public Blog MyNotepad : Imho An architect should code. Period This has been said over and over again, but as long as it keeps happening it just has to be said again. A very common career path in IT "promotes" a coder over the years to a program manager with architect responsibilities. And being an architect they stop writing code themselves. The thing I see over and over again is that these people keep living in the programming environment in which they grew up. They did loads of work in VB 6 or classical ASP. When a new piece of software has to be designed, which quite often is supposed to do something similar to the things they built themselves in their heydays, they grab their old projects to demonstrate what they have in mind. Right now I'm facing an ASP.NET site which has to build dynamic pages on the fly based on dynamic sets of data. And the lead architect bases his ideas on an ancient asp site he built years ago. Given the tools of those days it is a well crafted product but in nature it is just plain old asp spitting out html top to bottom. Given today's tools we can write far clearer, more powerful and better maintainable code building an asp.net control tree and leave the rendering of the html to the framework. But our lead architect doesn't know this framework. The good thing about my lead is that he is very open minded and eager to learn about today's tools. But it would be so much better if working and coding with them would be part of his work. How can you be a good architect when you don't know your building materials or construction tools?
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
Just to play word games, we don't call any of these people in other disciplines "architects".
I agree. Titles in general tend to be more for ego than anything else.
Jim Crafton wrote:
In other words, if I build cabinets, or build motorcycles, or create pottery, or compose music, at no time am I ever referred to an an "architect".
Sure. The point is that a good designer will have up-to-date knowledge of the standards and processes in order to come up with a good plan. He doesn't have to actually participate in the execution (building) of the plans to be a good designer though. Cheers, Drew.
Drew Stainton wrote:
Sure. The point is that a good designer will have up-to-date knowledge of the standards and processes in order to come up with a good plan. He doesn't have to actually participate in the execution (building) of the plans to be a good designer though.
I don't think that standards and processes are enough. A cabinet designer should have at least built a few cabinets before, but designing cabinets for 50 year old materials and building practices won't transfer over directly to designing cabinets with modern materials and design. You have to build some yourself to get a feel for and understanding of the techniques. So while the architect doesn't have to work on the products the design, they should at least build something with the tools and materials that they are designing with to stay current, even if they are throw away sample projects.
This blanket smells like ham
-
ednrgc wrote:
An architect should code. Period
An architect should design buildings, not code. Period.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
An architect should design buildings
Right. The civil and mechanical engineers are responsible for making it happen. Or telling the architect his design is full of shit and can't be done. :laugh:
Compassionate Conservatism is an Oxymoron. Bush is just a Moron.
-