I must admit I have more faith in the air travel industry (in spite of 737max) than I do in the software industry. Though we are capable of building 'bridge quality software', a lot of current software to me more resembles a western movieset town. In particular, modern frontend frameworks are more akin to paris fashion week than to bridgebuilding.

The auto industry seems to produce fairly good stuff, but I guess their techniques for low-level code don't scale upward into HOLs ? Or am I OTL ?

The numerous delayed vehicle launches and removed executives over an inability to effectively deliver software solutions, combined with the unending stream of software related recalls, provides some potential counterpoints.

except if you care about security. my favorite car infotainment systems are just a screen and controls for a phone.

So the publishers behind IEEE Software asked the authors of The Golden Age of Software for any advancements in software architecture that had occurred in the 2.5 years since they published that book. Mostly, they talked about platform thinking, SOA, OOP, and quality metrics. This was fourteen years ago. Since then, I believe that software architecture has advanced a lot in terms of process and methodology. https://martinfowler.com/articles/scaling-architecture-conve... does a good job of covering these advancements.

https://www.infoq.com/podcasts/architecture-advice-process/ is a follow up interview of the author behind that article.

Software Architecture is a bad name it's too general.

A better name is Web infrastructure technology.

Software Architecture implies axiomatic theory or empirical science, none of which is generally part of what we call "software architecture". When an engineer does "Software Architecture" they aren't doing any science and they aren't doing anything theoretical. They are doing something more akin to carpentry... it's a skill with very specific ways of doing things.. it's not a field of science or theory.