>>>But we know how to build software, the client doesn't.
>
>That point is debateable.

If the client knew how to build software himself, he wouldn't be my client. :-)

>To say we know how to build software, the client does not to me borders on arrogance.

Not at all- it is my job to listen to the clients requirements, and even his UI ideas, and take that and turn it into what I think is a practical, usable app. Usually, it's a cycle, the client tells me what he likes/doesn't like, and I fix or expound as necessary. It often takes several cycles. The end result may or may not remotely resemble what the client originally had in mind, but if he is not happy with the result, I have not done my job.

> Therefore, what does it mean that a client does not know how to build software?

I mean that a client need only know his requirements, I need only know how to build software that provides for those needs. If he knew how to do what he needed, he wouldn't have hired me. (FWIW, there are clients that know how to build software but simply need someone to do grunt work- I don't take on those jobs).


>The question is whether the "alleged" software developer knows how to build software - correctly. The fact is, the vast majority of development is done by trial and error. The vast majority of software developers have very little discipline, put forth very little in the way of design and analysis. I have seen too much crap code in my career and have seen and bailed out far too many failed projects to think otherwise.
>
>I have met some truly gifted people in this business. Sadly,they are the exception, not the rule.
>
>The best of the best can both articulate the theory and put it into practice. I have seen and heard great theorists who have little to show for in the real world as far as real applications are concerned. And, I have seen people crank out code faster than anybody to get something up and running. However, what was cranked out is far from optimal as far as design goes. The best of course, fit right in the middle. They don't let theory get in the way of delivery. At the same time, the don't let delivery compromise good solid design.

Valid points, all- but I don't know how they are relevant to the issue.