I'll tell you as a web developer who is a CS grad: CS students are terrible at programming and software development when compared to someone who does it for a living. It takes more than participation in a course to develop a skill.

I understand the distinction: CS students get geared up to understand algorithms, languages, and theory. A web developer understands his tools, his workflow, his practice, and people's needs.

I remember my final project in my CS master's degree very fondly: I delivered a barely working piece of software in a totally arcane problem domain with a very complex set of instructions which enabled it to work, sort of, in one specific environment. My supervisor was delighted.

In comparison with my battles to get something to work in both Firefox and IE6 a few months later in industry (in order to ship something that people's jobs actually depended on), it was an absolute walk in the park.

Anecdotally, on my year around 75% of students were there just because CS was supposed to bring money. They've started CS studies while not knowing how to program, knowing nothing about operating systems or caring. For them it was a 9-17 future job, nothing more.

First time I've ever heard a 9-5 job called a "9-17" job. Decided to Google it to see how common it was, and all the results are for the Bible verse Job 9:17 -

> He would crush me with a storm and multiply my wounds for no reason.

Seems appropriate for some "9-17" jobs.

17 is 5pm expressed in 24-hour time. :)

I like your interpretation as well, though.

Far more appropriate than Job 9:5:

> He moves mountains without their knowing it and overturns them in his anger.

That quote is amazingly apt. Working in software can definitely be a "9:17 job".

It doesn't help that there is this confusion that if you want to get a job as a programmer, you need to study CS, even though CS is not necessarily the best path to doing web development or writing iOS apps! This explains some of the frustration many students suffer, which makes them claim CS is detached from the real needs of programmers. This also explains articles like "the perils of Java schools" -- a "Java school" is by definition NOT teaching CS! CS is a theoretical field which has applications for the software industry (otherwise it wouldn't be very interesting), but it is "researchy" and theoretical first. It is the foundation of computing, kind of like applied maths, and not supposed to be training for your next job. Unless, of course, your next job actually requires a scientist or someone with a good understanding of the theory.

This unfortunate conflation of "CS" and "programming" is so common it's starting to become the mainstream definition of CS, much to my annoyance, and soon it will no longer make sense to push back against it :(

Well people come from different backgrounds. I went to UIUC having taken the only programming class my High School had, QBasic. I was in wayyyy over my head in my first C class slinging pointers all over (and then LISP - whoah).

Other people came in after programming as a part time job for a few years. I think it's a little quick to say someone came in for the money because I came in not knowing a ton of programming. On the other hand if course I look at salaries when picking majors. Otherwise I would have been a sci-fi writer :) Programming is better than writing now that I learned it...

I don't have any idea which side of the divide you'd fall on, but when I was in school there was definitely a group of people more likely to say "I'm taking X because it sounds really interesting" and a group of people more likely to say "I'm taking Y because I heard it's an easy A".

Given the timing (tail end of the last bubble), I always thought of the second group as "there for the money".

As with any generalization, it breaks down in plenty of specific cases.

Not saying I agree, but there is this notion that "proper" CS students are interested in CS for its own sake - they're meant to find algorithms and data structures and programming paradigms inherently fun and interesting. Web developers are expected to be interested in the end-game, not the process - having a cool feature that works cross-browsers is something to be passionate about, the fact that it uses websockets is just plumbing.

I hasten to add that I hold no official position on the matter and merely wanted to help you see how it's possible to consider CS graduates and web designers as too distincts sets.