About CS curricula, OS architecture and driver programming, was Re: Two Rings Good, Four Rin

Call me selfish, but I’m really glad that few people like this sort of
work:

  1. Better jobs; more of them; better pay; let’s me do what I want to a
    reasonable degree. On that nore, as I spend most of time, reverse
    engineering things, I also don’t lament Windows not being open source.

  2. We more or less missed the entire interminably tedious saga known
    as Fourth Generation Languages. Not that they all sucked, and may have
    sucked much less than what came before (I don’t know; well before my
    time), and there most certainly are places for them, but so many kept
    insisting (those with many letters after their name seemed to like to
    write about this) how they were actually more productive (missing (1)
    that what you produced abjectly sucked in a curiously homogenous way, if
    it runs at all with the memory you had; (2) was totally proprietary and
    essentially given to not exist in, say, two years), and, then, when that
    got just preposterously untenable, moved on to the totally absurd idea
    that these massive entities were a great way to right something
    “portably,” and finally on to “safe.” This people most definitely sucked
    a whole bunch. Although to be fair, I suppose it would be accurate to
    say that these languages worked - virtually.

  3. Also mostly missed all the nonsense about the Internet being a
    business advantage (if it qualifies, so does a telephone), and Y2K, the
    later being one of the silliest scams of all time, that while
    profitable, surely must have been the most tedious of work.

  4. While there is much banter on this list about the right and wrong
    way to do things in the kernel, anyone who really thinks that things are
    dire, needs to take a hiatus and hit user mode for a while. Just
    frightening. Mother make it stop. There are a lot of phenominally
    talented people who prefer user mode work, but, there are also a huge
    number of people who take zero pride in their craft, mostly because they
    see what they see themselves as “practical people who like to get things
    done,” and accordingly make statements like “You know, if you learned
    HTML, you’d get more interesting work.” I had someone tell me that. I
    understand why they think we (or at least some of us) are just making
    things needlessly difficult, as they seem to feel that there’s very
    little that can’t be done in an afternoon in, say, Frontpage or Clipper
    Pro, but the part I really don’t get is that they seem to think of us as
    sort of academic.

  5. On a practical note, it gives me an out when I’m on a plane and
    someone feels he needs to tell me about he wrote some word macros on his
    TRS-80 to control the lights in the basement of his mother’s house in
    which he still lives, as an ice breaker to ask how to download a certain
    type of internet content, as it were, at work without getting caught. I
    just say something about being hopelessly impractical, and, in fact,
    useless, because I only know about the kernel or assembler, and, after a
    he kindly offers a little career advice, usually leaves me alone.

Just my thoughts,

mm

>> xxxxx@bitdefender.com 2007-04-04 03:58:48 >>>
lists.osr.com wrote:
> What on earth
> does the typical computer science curricula teach these days?
Visual C#
> .NET and nothing else?
>
>

Since I’m currently working on my Masters in CompSci right now, I’d
like to
report that the language of choice at the school I’m attending
appears to be
Java, followed (way behind) by C. The OS(s) of choice are Solaris
and
Linux.

No classes even exist for anything like Device Drivers, Low level OS

architecture, or Embedded Systems, at least not through Computer
Science.

*sigh*

I’m also very sad about the fact, that low level programming, OS
architecture (NT / Linux,
anything), driver programming and so on are almost entirely missing
from
all CS curricula
in practically all faculties which I know about around me (Romania). It

there is anything,
then that is *very* theoretical and has little to do with real life
practical stuffs.

On the other hand, I taught last year a one semester course for Masters

degree students
about low level processor architecture and programming, basics of the
NT
architecture and
some little NT driver programming. I was deeply sad by the fact, that
even that I was
showing up real life examples most students where just not interested
about the topics.
I got the feedback repeatedly from over 80% of the students, that
databases, Java, C# and
.NET are much more fun and much easier to do than stuffs like ASM, OS
kernel stuffs or
driver programming. Even coding Win32 with C, or concepts like
synchronizations, thread
contexts, semaphores, events and so on tend to be scary for quite a lot

of the students.

Did somebody experienced similar results? Why is that as the years are

passing, it is
more and more difficult to find somebody really interested in low-level

stuffs?

have a nice day,

Sandor LUKACS
Virus Analyst, SOFTWIN
www.bitdefender.com


Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256

To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer

Martin O’Brien wrote:

  1. Also mostly missed all the nonsense about the Internet being a
    business advantage (if it qualifies, so does a telephone), and Y2K, the
    later being one of the silliest scams of all time, that while
    profitable, surely must have been the most tedious of work.

Scams? Y2K was not a scam. When no disasters occurred, the media
blamed professional programmers for making such a huge deal out of
nothing. But in fact, the only reason that disasters did NOT occur is
that professional programmers spent YEARS performing due diligence on
antiquated corporate code bases to make sure the problems were fixed.

Misunderstanding, maybe. Scam, no.


Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.