>>In the old days, the developer had only one meaning: it was the base solution used in the first phase of the development of the negative (or positive) image on film or paper emulsion, followed by a fixer (or three fixers, in some color processes).
>>
>>So anything with programming, preferably.
>
>I disagree. In the corporate world, programmer can denote a 'workerbee.' Many of the first level development positions are 'programmers.' While more technically demanding positions are often referred to as 'application developer,' 'software deverloper,' etc...

Among other things, corporate world has screwed up the language and meaning of words. We called such positions "projektant", i.e. something between an architect, designer and developer, someone in charge of building a project. There was also analyst, who was generally involved in requirements gathering and design (drawing the forms, as it were) but didn't have to be versed in actual code at all.

We also had a job designation called "technologue". That was the engineer in charge of the production process - whether it was chemistry, food, textile or a foundry. Then there was a job ad from our old brewery looking for five "beer technologues" - a bit odd, knowing that these guys don't exactly grow on trees, there were actually two colleges for that altogether, and they'd churn maybe a dozen such guys a year to supply twenty or thirty breweries, plus all the wineries and other beverage plants. So, what was the catch? These guys job denomination was changed to "beer technologue", but they actually were to load the trucks with cases of beer. Now if some such messing with the language was common in self-managed socialism, imagine what games with language are played at high corporate level.