This post brought up an interesting rant with me, and that's the term "architect" used in software development circles.
I detest it.
Well, let me clarify that point. I detest the way it's generally used. Like, "oh, I'm an architect, so I don't code. I just have huge, wonderful thoughts in a cube somewhere. I'm too good to code anymore. I know what I'm doing." Or, "I need to make my position seem much better than what it is, so let me stick 'architect' on there somewhere."
If you code, you're an architect. You're constructing solutions, you're creating designs - you're doing the job than an architect should do. Now, with experience comes insight (usually...hopefully!) and those that have been around for a while will usually (hopefully!) design "better" than those who are new to the field. But to me, that's just an experience delta. Even if you're making shitty applications with bad designs at your first job, you're still architecting.
I have one title from Magenic: Principal Consultant. That's it. You'll never see "architect" anywhere around that (or "evangelist"...but that's another for another rant). Actually, now that I think about it, I think I'm going to start calling myself "problem solver". Because...that's really what I do.
* Posted at 10.03.2007 07:53:36 AM CST | Link *