Men and women, hawks and doves ...
Hw and Sw are like the ying and yang of the information revolution. Of course, all dualities hide a continuum and literally one cannot live without the other.
People think they understand hw (maybe they do), but I'm pretty sure they do not understand sw (I doubt I do either).
This entry tries to enumerate differences and synergies among both.
Sw predates Hw (in the sense of sw-running hw). Seems perplexing but it is true. It took some time to realize the minimal hw needed for sw to run on it. It is great that (finite) Turing-like hw is enough to run any computable sw.
Hw employs a minimal fragment of the people sw employs.
Hw produces a millionth of the different products sw produces.
Hw evolution has been consistently macro-predicted, the latest models of sw release take fixed points in time with no sure prediction of achieved functionality (but we get some).
Hw mistakes can destroy manufacturers. Sw mistakes have to be labeled as features.
A mistake in a hw piece requires its replacement. A mistake in a sw piece requires a patch write.
We have 2 centuries of experience with mass-produced goods, but only a few decades of sw quality evaluation.
A faulty Hw piece is easy to identify. A faulty Sw piece can take millions of people years to identify.
It is extremely expensive to produce 1 new piece of hw, a mass-market is needed. It is relatively inexpensive to produce a non-complex piece of sw, but it is extremely expensive to grow from it.
Hw duplication is expensive. Sw duplication is almost free.
Hw is Sw that has solidified too early. Sw is Hw that has not been fully debugged yet.
There is not such thing as a bug-free (non-trivial) sw.
Hw platforms change slowly. New sw platforms are developed every few years. (Understand platform as ecosystem, integration ...)
MS is a closed sw platform builder that owns an open hw platform. Apple is a closed hw platform builder that owns a (semi-)open sw platform. Linux is an open sw infrastructure to run sw on multiple hw platforms. (see open/closed, here open can be semi-open)
You can build Hw by componentization, duplication ... You can try to build sw by piling up stuff, but you usually just get a big mess.
Current Hw is no longer execution-predictable. Current sw no longer fits into one's head.
You cannot easily start again with a Hw architecture. You'd do better redesigning your sw architecture (and emulating the old one if needed).
The barriers to entry into Hw are colossal. A monkey with a PC could create good sw.
You can educate a Hw engineer predictably. Education alone cannot produce good Sw engineers.
A Hw engineer can plan his career. A Sw engineer considers himself lucky if he can plan his vacation.
When hw is badly done, only publicity can save you. When sw is badly done, you can get away with murder.
Good Hw guys usually were good mechanical tinkering children. Good Sw guys usually were insufferable philosophical kids.
Hw is provided as is but has full warranty. Sw is tailored to death, but has no warranty whatsoever.
Hw guys are to surgeons as Sw guys are to psychologists.
...
