[Closed] 'I have never yet come across an engineer who can turn his hands to business'

Stop trying to troll PeterPoddy

Sorry, it's too easy. Plus I'm right and they know it. The sooner they accept that, the better I think you'll find. 🙂

TTFN
Got a 1.5+ hr drive home now, I've been educating you lot when I could have been on my way home! 🙂

Sorry, it's too easy. Plus I'm right and they know it. The sooner they accept that, the better I think you'll find.

I'm on "their" side 😛

So he would be a 'software mechanic' then?

Dunno, maybe.

Sorry, it's too easy

It would be if it wasn't so transparent. You're clearly not a Trolling Engineer 🙂

My last job title was Sales Engineer. How does that work then?

My last job title was Sales Engineer. How does that work then?

When you sell your soul to "sales", Satan can call you what he likes!! 😉

Depends how much scheming and manipulation you had to do 🙂

My last job title was Sales Engineer. How does that work then?

Simple that one

You sell the customer what they want regardless of whether it's possible or even exists.

You sell the customer what they want regardless of whether it's possible or even exists

Jebus, that's so true..... 😆

😆

Here's a genuine question to Pete.

If you take the example of a Typhoon fighter jet. The design of the jet is aerodynamically unstable whereby a pilot would not be able to control the plane with conventional hydraulically actuated controls.

It needs alot of software code to keep the thing in the air, so the machine has lots of carefully designed moving parts working in conjunction with lots of carefully designed software. Both of which were not designed and built in isolation of one another. They are were both designed in conjunction, so the software code becomes a component of the machine.

So the question is where does the "real engineering" start and end for such a machine?

I'd say that an engineer is someone who applies engineering principles to a technical problem. You work out what's required, design a solution, inplement the solution and test it. That can be done for a variety of technical problems, yes, including software ones.

Plus as jimmers points out, in many areas the dividing line between fields is so blurry. Why are the people who designed the electronics for a smart phone be engineers while the softies who designed its firmware are not?

I would expect a Aero or Civil engineer to be able to rock up at my desk and we'd be, conceptually, talking the same language

the skill-set for engineering engines and bridges is broadly similar. Designing, optimising and implimenting software is a broadly different skillset - as, perhaps, a crass example, if I asked you to predict the fatigue life of an engine component, would your technical qualifications allow you to do that?

Yeah.. it's all about designing and making things that work, and do things or hold things up. Solving technical problems in a rigorous way.

Having done a general engineering degree I'd have a good go. The question is, could you design a transmission line, a computer chip or an antenna? Or do you consider electrical, electronic and communication engineering also "not engineering"? Maybe you're just a bit of a specialist in the same way a software engineer is.

Two questions there - have been part of teams engineering RF and microwave antennas and, large very high voltage electrical equipment (think electric ship projects etc). The electrical theory is beyond me, but all I need is the input to do the electrical/mechanical interaction calcs. Electrical/electronic engineering is still part of most engineering degrees, so - at the interface - we still had the common language.

The other part - for the unis that I have input on - applications for electrical/electrionic/comms engineering arerapidly dwindling, so beyonds course units in either comp science or the other engineering subjects it could, unfortunately, be a nul-question soon 🙁

The wikipedia blurb makes sense to me, as a non-engineer:

'An engineer is a professional practitioner of engineering, concerned with applying scientific knowledge, mathematics and ingenuity to develop solutions for technical problems. Engineers design materials, structures, machines and systems while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, safety and cost.[1][2] The word engineer is derived from the Latin root ingenium, meaning "cleverness".[3]

Engineers are grounded in applied sciences, and their work in research and development is distinct from the basic research focus of scientists.[2] The work of engineers forms the link between scientific discoveries and the applications that meet the needs of society.[1]'

Non-comparision - you didn't engineer the cambelt, you followed the instructions on how to do it. Likewise, I blindly follow the help manual like any fool when knocking up bits of code.

That approach stops working when you're working on bigger more complex systems - in much the same way that bridge building by putting a bigger plank across a stream stops working somewhere before you scale it to take trains over the Forth...

On the original point, I wonder if SAS would consider [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bordan_Tkachuk ]somebody with an HND in computer science who started off as a computer programmer[/url] not to be an engineer, and what his distinction is?

as an engineer myself-I can only add that Helen is fit.

The electrical theory is beyond me

Let's dig into this a little more - would you consider somebody designing the test protocols to ensure the components you design perform how they're supposed to an engineer? Somebody in charge of taking the parts you design and manufacturing them an engineer?

10^2

yay!

[url= http://www.old-computers.com/history/detail.asp?n=8&t=1 ]Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard.[/url]

Both electrical engineers. Built a multi-billion dollar company up from just the two of them in a garage. Hugely savvy business men, with an innovative management style decades ahead of anyone else.

Making software is not engineering, and certainly not science.

As the conceptualisation of an abstract form that reflects reality, its clearly an ART.

I am a software artist

Real Engineering here: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Custom-made-BMX-/190545729426?pt=UK_Bikes_GL&hash=item2c5d691792

Real engineers drive at least 20 year old Landrovers. Software engineers drive Mondeo's.

End of.

You're all shit , we should have been on mars by now you lazy ****s. Get back to work!

Can an engineer make a good businessman?

Engineers tend to be 'thinkers' (Check out NLP)

Thinkers weigh up the risks involved with starting a business, throwing their house/ relationships/ money into a 'hair-brained' scheme and most will turn away from that, preferring a little more security.

Entreprenuers, on the other hand may be 'entertainers' ignoring the risks and not caring about the facts in order to make their idea a reality. If the idea works, they become successful businessmen, and even if they dont they will likely try again.

I tend to agree with the Sugar.

And also Peter Poddy.
Engineers make stuff you can touch.
Software designers copy and paste.

bristolbiker - Member

Yeah, but you are applying the principals of strucural analysis/solid mechanics/materials science/thermodynamics/fluid dynamics/etc that are the key features of any engineering degree, using software as a means to an end - software engineering is something different, and of it's own right, that has (unfortunately, IMO) adopted 'engineering' as part of the description.

Engineering is about abstraction, and if you don't understand that then you're not engineering.

Electrical/electronic engineering is still part of most engineering degrees, so -at the interface -we still had the common language[ /quote].

So is programming. If I met with a bunch of people I was writing firmware for, and they were hardware engineer types, they probably wouldn't be able to do the actual firmware, but we'd have a common language relating to where our bits stuck together.

So
a)most engineers are like you, specialists, who can work well on one particular area, and can also keep up enough understanding to interface with areas where they need to. So are programmers.
b) the functionality of many products is 90% defined by software nowadays eg. Take the original ipod - nice shiny design, not very much innovative engineering, very elegant software, 90% about software, 10% product design, then hardware 'engineers' stuck some commodity components in a box. The big reason Apple consumer products are so popular is because they didn't have the idiot engineer / software divide, whereas if you look at a lot of stuff, it isdesigned first by 'proper engineers' with the software fitted into what the engineers build (a lot of old Sony stuff really suffered from this, and I've seen this in action in some other big companies with a rigid hardware/software divide ).

Given that so much 'hardware engineering' is really just sticking a processor in a box, it's futile to argue that there's any real difference any more.

 

You're all missing the point. Software Engineers are all geeks. And soft.

I don't care what they call me as long as they pay my rate 🙂

I would say some some software is written by engineers using engineering principles and some is not.

A control control system lid a PID controller could need an understanding of 2nd order differential equations much like would be needed to control something in a mechanical way. The analysis would be pretty much the same as if you were to solve the problem mechanically with a mass, spring and damper solution. I think this would most definitely be an engineering exercise.

Engineering is about abstraction, and if you don't understand that then you're not engineering.

I think I'd like to add to / edit that.

Engineering is about abstraction, and if you don't understand that and the consequence of that then you're not Engineering, you're following a recipe.

I'd like to edit that too 🙂
Engineering is not about abstraction, but about the utilisation of it.
Mathematics is about abstraction.

Engineering is not exclusively design based.
That's just a claim spouted by prima donna designers to make themselves feel special.
Just check the dictionary.

Software designers copy and paste

Yeah, but WHAT do we copy and paste? 🙂

That's like saying engineers cut metal and pour concrete.

Engineering is not about abstraction, but about the utilisation of it

To be a good Engineer you still have to understand and know the limits of the abstraction you are using.

Software designers [s]copy and paste[/s] reuse existing good solutions.

I presume when engineers design an engine or a bridge they start from scratch every time?

Alan sugars a first class knobber anyway, couldn't give a stuff about what he thinks. Apprentice is all bollox anyway, done for good viewing - this weeks task being a prime example. No way in the world they could come up with an idea, run it past a focus group which happened to be ready, settle on an idea, develop it, design it, get it artworked, proofed and copies printed in the allocated time slot, especially given that none of them have particular expertise. It's amusing to watch though 🙂

Amstrad - nuff said

I have a degree in Engineering Systems
I'm Chartered
I have specified, designed, coded and tested may software systems that operate radar, radios and spacecraft worth millions.

Don't tell me I'm not an Engineer.

But Sugar may be on something 😉

Technician - follows instructions to get something fixed... like a car repair manual, or guide on how to install some software.

Engineer - has the ability to think creatively when the above doesn't work. i.e. milling a part to fix the car, or hacking the registry to enable the software installation. The engineer actually designs a solution for the problem.

ould you please tell that ot our HR department? Our engineers seem to think they're clever when all they can do is order and specify new equipment whereas a lowly tech I can make vintage equipment work in the freezing cold in the dead of night with just a hammer and some PTFE tape*

As regards the OP - that'll be why Amstrad's products are so diabolically ropey and have such a dreadful reputation then?

(*PTFE which the Engineers allowed the safety people to ban.)

right, I've had a few beers so I might get a little carried away, but here goes.
I'm an engineer. Mechanical to be specific. As I mentioned earlier, I've a masters degree and am slowly working towards being chartered. I've had a varied career, working with an awful lot of people in different industries and I've come to the conclusions that engineers tend to be bl00dy good at their jobs and tend to be held back by idiot management, production monkeys and marketing f'ckwits.
BUT engineers who sell out and move into management themselves, tend to be good businessmen/women. So, Alan Sugar is a n0b and clearly wrong.

and don't get me started on the technician/engineer argument. Poddy seems to have done that himself.

'I have never yet come across an engineer who can turn his hands to business'

The Engineer'sanswer:

"An engineer is a professional practitioner of engineering, concerned with applying scientific knowledge, mathematics and ingenuity to develop solutions for technical problems,"
Ref: [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineer ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineer[/url]

"A businessperson (also businessman or businesswoman) is an entrepreneur or someone who is involved in the management of a company esp as an owner or executive"
Ref:[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Businessperson ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Businessperson[/url]

Sugar is a ****

Hmmm. Well my stepdad was (is) a distinguished engineer specialising laterally in ROVs, hyperbaric stuff, mini-submersibles and general sub-sea spannering.

He was promoted to office work (project manager or somesuch) and so far as I could tell, he absolutely hated it - difficult to say as ex-navy types are even more emotionally retarded than most of the rest of us.

When he finally 'retired' a few years ago, he set up a down-pipe patent business and does very well indeed out of it, satisfying long supressed legal urges and making the most of his background and experience. Mr Sugar is just an expert at producing soundbites IMO...

....and good for him.

Unlike Mr sugar who gave up on business and turned to soap opera

As an engineer, I'd respond to Sir Alan's comment with 'I never met a person in business who could dial a number on a telephone without someone telling them how to do it.'

HTH Mr Sugar.

Tom Peters (in search of excellence) Civil Engineer

Jack Welch (youngest ever and most successful CEO GE) Chemical Engineer

Michael Porter (marketing guru) Aerospace Engineer

work out what's required, design a solution, inplement the solution and test it

hallelujah - verging on the waterfall model

Tom Peters (in search of excellence) Civil Engineer

Jack Welch (youngest ever and most successful CEO GE) Chemical Engineer

Michael Porter (marketing guru) Aerospace Engineer

Let's not forget Lord (Paul) Drayson
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Drayson,_Baron_Drayson ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Drayson,_Baron_Drayson[/url]

nuff said...

And following my last post ^^^

cheez0 - Member
Can an engineer make a good businessman?

Engineers tend to be 'thinkers' (Check out NLP)

Thinkers weigh up the risks involved with starting a business, throwing their house/ relationships/ money into a 'hair-brained' scheme and most will turn away from that, preferring a little more security.

Entreprenuers, on the other hand may be 'entertainers' ignoring the risks and not caring about the facts in order to make their idea a reality. If the idea works, they become successful businessmen, and even if they dont they will likely try again.

I tend to agree with the Sugar.

I also agree with this to a degree... I am a show-off barsteward with the analytical thinking qualities of a slug - I just happen to have been lucky enough to hit upon a business idea which 'makes my idea a reality' and pays the bills. Had I sat down and properly thought about it, I'd never have got off the ground.

Maybe for every ten chancers who end up begging for food at Charing Cross, there's one guy who makes it.

Engineers are rarely allowed to get to the point where they can risk everything, their first day on the job is usually enough time to determine if they're talking sense, or out their arse. The latter, aren't engineers.

ir_bandito - Member
I'm an engineer. I've had a varied career, working with an awful lot of people in different industries and I've come to the conclusions that engineers tend to be bl00dy good at their jobs and tend to be held back by idiot management, production monkeys and marketing f'ckwits.
Alan Sugar is a n0b and clearly wrong.

Yep that's me as well.

Funny thing is our US operation promote engineers as they understand how the business operates on many layers.
Yet in the UK unless your in sales... bugger all chance of promotion???

With engineering comes responsibilty. Engineers aren't chancers

Spare us a quid for a cuppa mate? There but for the grace of God go I 😉 And on a 10-1 chance too!

Entreprenuers, on the other hand may be 'entertainers' ignoring the risks and not caring about the facts in order to make their idea a reality

...great if youv'e got a clown face and a unicycle!

Well, I do happen to own a uni.... Lidl special....

EDIT; and as a wedding photographer with a conscience and proper training, I don't dare take risks either - must have got that from my engineer stepdad!

But it makes good telly, innit. I don't watch it.
I have a cnc milling machine. When I write code for it I am a techie. The person who did the operating system for it was an engineer. The cad model I use was made by a cad designer, who was following the brief of an engineer.
The engineer is the person who decides how the thing is going to work, what material and all that kind of thing.

"100 idiots make idiotic
plans, and carry them
out. All but one justly
fail. The hundredth idiot
whose plans succeeded
through pure luck, is
immediately convinced
he's a genius."
—Iain Banks, Matter

I have a mate who is as well: He's currently building his second MTB frame, welded up in a jig he made himself, with tubing from a pipe bender he made himself becasue commercial ones are rubbish. He has lathes and a pillar drill in his garage, and swarf on the floor. THAT'S engineering!!

Sounds more like a school metalwork class.

Both engineering and business are skills, ones that can be learned by a wide range of people with a reasonable level of intelligence, common sense and time. A degree of aptitude benefits both, but I know people who toil away at both without any and get by. I do both, I find both hard, but I'm successful at both. If I had my choice I would probably do neither as the levels of stress and responsibility are too high.

I have no time for the technician/engineer debate. If that is the most important thing you have to worry about in your job you are doing ok, believe me. As for chartered engineers, well, fair play for making the effort to get the qualification, but it's just a series of tests and you can train a fresh graduate to pass them if you want to, so it means nothing to me, get over it. I only value track record on the job.

Transferring from engineer to manager or engineer to businessman [u]or the reverse[/u] can be very hard as different skills are required. If people are unwilling or unable for whatever reason to learn the skills then they will probably do a poor job, naturally. There is nothing unique in engineers in this regard.

Make of that what you will.

Recommended read - Jeff Schmidt "[url= http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciplined_Minds ]Disciplined Minds[/url]"

[i]Sounds more like a school metalwork class.[/i]

Yeah, but if you can't use a lathe, you're just a product designer rather than a proper engineer 😀

You're all shit , we should have been on mars by now you lazy ****.

Believe me, if there were rare and valuable minerals on Mars, we'd be there by now - think Avatar.

But it's a frozen dustbowl that's only of interest to science - science not considered important enough by the public to fund that kind of exploration.

Engineering has many sub-disciplines, but they all involve aspects of both creative and methodical thinking/design. While there are often hands-on aspects, these are not defining.

Re Software - do you imagine that 2-5 people could successfully engineer software, ~280,000 lines of code over 5 years, to operate a 3 billion Euro safety-critical multi-satellite system, without a high degree of imagination and technical rigour?

All of my engineering courses so far have had a module in business or industry. I doubt business courses touch upon the rudiments of engineering.

[i]Re Software - do you imagine that 2-5 people could successfully engineer software, ~280,000 lines of code over 5 years, to operate a 3 billion Euro safety-critical multi-satellite system, without a high degree of imagination and technical rigour?[/i]

Indeed. I don't think that's in dispute (well apart from say the Ariene 4 to 5 cut n paste special). However other professions also have those qualities, but for instance we don't call creative accountants fiscal engineers.

we don't call creative accountants fiscal engineers

"An engineer is a professional practitioner of engineering, concerned with applying scientific knowledge, mathematics and ingenuity to develop solutions for technical problems,"

Re Software - do you imagine that 2-5 people could successfully engineer software, ~280,000 lines of code over 5 years, to operate a 3 billion Euro safety-critical multi-satellite system, without a high degree of imagination and technical rigour?

a key difference is though, that you have to be a chartered engineer with the imeche (or equilvelent for civil eng etc) where as in software in the past people have worked on high level and safety critical projects without being a member of a professional institution...

the BCS exists but you can be a software engineer without being a memeber or having any involvement with it

cant do that as a Doctor or Engineer

So there were no engineers before any of the professional engineering bodies were formed?

So you'd be happy to go under the knife by someone who calls themselves a Dr, as opposed to someone who the BMA call a Dr?

So you'd be happy to go under the knife by someone who calls themselves a Dr, as opposed to someone who the BMA call a Dr?

...depends on the circumstances.

a key difference is though, that you have to be a chartered engineer with the imeche (or equilvelent for civil eng etc) where as in software in the past people have worked on high level and safety critical projects without being a member of a professional institution..

This is quite right. Software is engineering with no regulation, recognised training or experience, and the people paying for it have no idea if it's any good or not.

Which is why on any project you get some good people and enough idiots in high enough positions to wreck it... Unfortunately.

Turn it on its head. The number of bizniz people who've managed to transition into successful engineers? Square root of nack-all. End.

Square root of nack-al

Have you investigated the limit of the square root of nack-al? If so which direction are you tending to nack-all from?

Gosh, this is all a bit worrying.
I studied software and electrical engineering.
Last I looked I'd done alright.
Haven't met Lord Sugar though.
He sounds like a d1ck.

Nzcol, but are you as successful as AS? See, he has a point 🙂

4 pages of posts discussing something Alan Sugar said?

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Noyce ]Robert Noyce[/url]
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_E._Moore ]Gordon Moore[/url]
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Grove ]Andrew_Grove[/url]

Haven't done too badly out of engineering.

True , good point well made

There are engineers and engineers. As has been said if you wan't to have medical treatment you want a Dr accredited by the BMA.

Proffessional Engineers are accredited by the Engineering council.

The skills I need to be a Charterred Engineer are as below...

http://www.ice.org.uk/mgn3

Note that its not all teckie, I have to have commercial and leadership skills to. That is the difference between a proffesionally qualified engineer and .... well an engineer. No disrespect to Engineers as we all do a craxcking job.

If Al Sugar had said he's never met a engineer that can turn his hand to buissness, well for some engineers that may be true (although I doubt it would be a fair comment). To say that a proffessionally qualified engineer can't turn his hand to bussiness is ridiculus ...as that is what we are trained to do (as well as the teckie stuff!)

like the x factor - its about the T.V. Show not the outcome

we need to remember they're T.V. shows! they're not about the apprentice or finding a pop star - they're about ratings

Gordon Moore