🚀 go-pugleaf

rshelswe@socs.uts.edu.au (Ryan Shelswell) writes:


>No, Mark brought that (valid) distinction up.  The courses are very different.  The
>first semester was nearly the same, but then the BITs have gone off and kludged
>COBOL for months while we have continued learning new things.

Hmmm you havent done 1st year industrial training eh? Id say 10-15% of our
time in industry at present has been spent on Cobol, if that. No, we have
been learning *interesting* languages such as Clist (?), ISPF dialogue
management, A little REXX ( which is a multiplatform language.. equally suited
to mainframes and PCs alike)

>While getting into management really tightens my balls (sorry just had to), whether
>or not the BIT course achieves that better than Comp Sci (or indeed, well at all),
>or if it just produces a horde of COBOL drones is yet to be proved to my satisfaction.
>Still, what could be more exciting than not only programming COBOl, but mananging a
>whole COBOL-using department!!!!

I dunno... but recently there were some such managers laid off.. voluntary
redundancy.... now $150,000 pa + car + travel + other fringe benefits +
an estimated $500,000 redundancy package (inc super) sounds rather exciting..
especially for someone who has worked with the company for only 15 years..
gee Id be 35 and have enough capital to start my own grahic design business,
and I can hire some of you guys.. since you wont be worried about career
advancement :)


>I hope not.  The soi-disant 'techniques of COBOL' are really just hacks to get
>around the amazing inefficiencies of that language.  The best thing to do 
>would be to forget them and learn some real structured design.  

Yes I agree Cobol is inefficient.... but that also leaves me wondering why
it is used in *alot* of sites where major processing is required? If all
these new languages are so viable then why hasnt industry switched to it??
Cause their benefits do not (yet) overcome their costs perhaps?

> >
> >First year core subjects will not give us the experience to become experienced
> >programmers, analysts, developers or whatever, *no matter* what courses or
> >strands they follow.

>Strange... let us look back at the corridors of flame, to the original Sean-post:

>- >But what are the universities doing about it?? NOTHING! UTS prides itself
>- >on being the most up-to-date with industry.. although where in the
>- >CS course are PCs? Perhaps later in electives, but nothing in first year
>- >subjects at all! A student could tell me how to (theoritically) design
>- >an Accounts Receivable system with pretty DFDs and ER diagrams.. but ask
>- >them how to write a Windows application, or any application, and most would
>- >be lost for words....

>So what exactly are you suggesting?

Hmmm I clarify my last statement in that previous quote... I didnt mean that
students *could* write a windows application or whatever, but rather they
could give me some idea of *how* they would go about it.. where to start...
etc...   could they?

What am I suggesting? That alot of the course content be reviewed!

> > I didnt say that the course structure is perfect. In fact,
> >it leaves alot to be desired. And hey I cant tell you how it should be either!

>So what was the point?  Just a general whinge??  If you complain about 
>something, you should really suggest alternatives, you know.

And what is your suggestion? Just drop cobol from the course cause no-one likes
it?

>university environment.  Give 'em a chance to settle down first.

> >
> >So what is the use of Cobol? To give us *some* experience in programming,
> >problem solving techniques etc. Hey its a awkward language... but look on 
> >the bright side: If we can code solutions in Cobol then shouldnt it make
> >us better problem solvers and coders in your so called "easy languages"
> >If we can learn the hardest language.. then all the languages after this should
> >be a snap to learn! Perhaps Cobol isnt a hard language....

>No no no!  It doesn't work that way!  Thought and expression are inextricably (sfs)
>linked!  It is much better to build your ideas on a sensible, consistent well
>thought out platform.  All you get from COBOL are a load of bad habits.

True - but atleast you get something to fall back on when you get to industy
and find that all those new wonderful OO concepts have not had to time
to sink in yet. 
> >
> >
> >>  They are both based around a business/computing degree, and therefore
> >>  should be electives in a supposed Computer Science degree. Admittedely
> >
> >Business is computing.. computing is business.. who is going to be funding

>What a load of shit.  Business =/= computing at all.  There are many areas of
>computing having very little to do with business.  (In fact the major funder
>of all computing is USA military's DARPA isn't it?  Whether or not that
>is a business, is left for another day :^).  You are confusing your course

Yeah and like an Australian National is really going to get a chance to 
develop shit like that. Perhaps soon when the industry gets its act together
and starts exporting technology instead of importing it we might
have a change to work on some interesting shit like that and not have to
worry about where the next paycheck is coming from

>for the whole of computing.  Your narrow course aims you right for business,
>I agree, but the whole point Mark (and the rest of us) are making is that
>ours shouldn't and doesn't have to.  Pure computing is really applied (and
>not so applied) mathematics.

Then do applied maths and apply it to computing! You have already stated
that both the courses are too "business orientated".. so why did you do
them? Sure it *is* computing science (or supposed to be) but if is not
what you wanted from Uni then why are you here? Did you expect the course
designers to say "OK you are right" and completely restructure the course
whilst you are here? I know that most of what I have said about the course
wont make any difference to the way I finish it.. and nor will any of what
you have said...

I am saying that the course should be reviewed (both of them sorry) but not
cause *I* want this or *I* want that.. but rather cause I think that future
students of the course might benefit.. and hey.. in a few years time *those*
students might be walking in my door looking for a job

Call it bullshit but its vested interest :)

Now go and take some other paragraph of mine out of reference and contradict
me again :)

B
<Blah>

>The preceeding comment has really revealed some underlying attitudes now,
>hasn't it?  What Sean is saying is 'If you want COBOL, go to Uni.  If you
>want an interesting job, (which you can't get), you have to ask someone
>to train you, pay for it, and keep you for ten years'.  Why can't Mark
>expect to get top-quality training in this area from UTS??  'TECHNOLOGY'
>doesn't just mean 'Ancient batch-processed useless boring shit' you know.

Nope... if you want an interesting job.. go to uni.. get your degree.. 4get
everything you have learnt in the previous 3/4 years.. THEN go ask someone
to employ you... employers tend to listen if you have a degree.. they dont
really give a shit if it says "Infomation Technology" or "Computer Science",
cause most of them wouldnt know the difference anyway.

> > Having a degree gets a foot in the 
> >door.. (quoting a recent movie..) what you do after that is up to you. If
> >you can get your foot in without a degree then what are you doing here?
> >

>Look again, Elvy.  He didn't say that.  He is trying to get a degree which
>will make him 'learn' something... you know 'learn', don't you? 

Learn in industry.. they pay you decently there..
(gee thats likely to draw some flak)

Hey sure I want to learn too... even if all the stuff I do learn is not
entirly relavent to my aims in life. You *can* get a decent education at 
UTS.. but you have to take a little shit every now and then... (Shit meaning
irrelavent topics)... We got it alot better here at UTS than a lot of other
universitys.. but someone has already bought up this point I recall


>There is much scope for working on PCs in the Comp Sci course.  Unfortunately
>for you, these electives aren't available.  I guess you sold your soul for
>$9,500 a year and now you're pissed off.
>P

Hey Im not pissed off.. just looking at where there could be some improvements
in both of the courses

We are both in the same boat... both our courses could do with some revision.
Hey perhaps thats why there is so much hatred towards btechers... cause
we are getting paid to be here?

>Yes, graphics and c can be done at this Uni.  Perhaps you should look at what
>is offered before you complain about it.

Hey Im not complaining about it.. just asking.. Im OK about the way the course
is going .. ok the btech course.. but Im sick of ppl winging cause they think
the btechers have it sooo good and the CS ppl are sooo deprived...

OK so you might not think that we have it so good... But if you think the
course is totally useless then how bout a little pity for us and not all
these knife-edge remarks?  We are, after all (and contrairy to popular belief),
all human :)


--
Sean Whiteley -- sdwhitel@socs.uts.edu.au
** What is the original assumption?    **