Comp. Sci. Theoretical/Hands on.

akvareli · 08-02-2007, 09:23 PM

Hi!
I just have a question about computer science. Well, I am planning on majoring in comp sci; right now though, I'm only a junior in HS, but to get to the point, I was wondering what is the exact difference between a more theoretical comp. sci classes or straight hand's on comp sci classes.
When I asked an adcom from Cornell about their CS program, she said that the program was more theoretical. Is that bad/good? I'm not exactly sure what to think.
Thank you

ehiunno · 08-03-2007, 10:27 AM

It depends on what you are interested in.

Hands on comp sci is stuff like programming, comp architecture, practical algorithms, and software development.

Theoretical comp sci (or as I like to call it, the fun part), is more along the lines of limits of computing, limits of turing machines and multitape turing machines, P, NP, NP-Hard and NP complete theory, lots of number theory and discrete math, theory of algorithms and what problems they could be used to solve.

its neither bad or good. if you want to go to grad school in CS, your going to need the theory. If you want a good job, your going to need a solid mix of both. Any good CS program is going to have enough theory and math to get you a good job or grad school.

Oh, and theory is much harder. but think of it this way: Strong background in theory + general knowledge of hands on (you'll get that at Cornell) means you will get a good job. All hands on means your going to be a code monkey. Dont be a code monkey.

ehiunno · 08-03-2007, 10:29 AM

I just realized how I started that by saying it depends, and then ending it by saying theory is better.

It does kind of depend, if your not into the theory then its cool, but if you don't take a lot of it you wont have near the opportunities of someone who does.

look up stuff about "the halting problem" and "the traveling salesman problem" if you go "ooh! This is cool!" you will LOVE LOVE LOVE theoretical comp sci.

NJ113 · 08-03-2007, 11:02 AM

Good advice ehiunno. I used to hear this about engineering programs as well when I was in college many eons ago. I went to a school that had a more theoretical bent. The approach was that the theory wouldn't change, but the applied stuff would so if you get a good grounding on the theory, you can change and learn as the technology changes.

I have been involved professionally with software for quite some time. I prefer hiring people with a solid background in theory rather than a specific knowledge of a particular software package or language because if you understand the theory, you're smart enough to learn a new language or anything else.

pearlygate · 08-03-2007, 04:07 PM

I second ehiunno, the caveat is CS theory is much more difficult than hands-on knowledge. Personally I think theory can't be learned as well as hands on knowledge are, it depends on how clever and creative you are, for example: it's hard to teach someone how to design a totally brand new algorithm to solve a problem even though you may show them all known algorithm to solve similar problems but some genius may be able to design a good algorithm without learning all other known algorithm first.
On the other hand, hands on knowledge like learning how to code an O.S is "easier" in a sense that you can succeed if you invest enough time working on it rather than coding it cleverly.

ehiunno · 08-03-2007, 04:15 PM

Pearlygate is right, but look at it this way: certainly, its easier to learn to code an OS than to, say, write a compiler/assembler for a turing complete language that you came up with that does something original, or its a lot easier to learn how to use say, the bellman-ford algorithm than to come up with it, but look at it this way, who would you rather hire? The first guy, or the second one? I know I would rather have a few brilliant people that I have to shell out big bucks for than a slew of the former for cheap.

Or I could put it like this, which kind do you think Google hires? IBM even? Its not the first kind, its the second.

So in conclusion. Theory = win. But just be warned, a lot of theory isn't really applicable, its just good to have. CSists call it getting weaned off of theory when you get a real job as a CSist.

akvareli · 08-03-2007, 06:59 PM

Thank you guys for the input. I now clearly understand the difference, and theory does sound fun. I like most aspects of programming, so I believe I'd enjoy theory as well as more applied CS classes.
Thank you for clearing the question up!

Does any one know by any chance if there are ranked CS/Engineering undergrad schools besides the ones on USnews? I'm trying to find more safeties/matches.

ehiunno · 08-03-2007, 07:33 PM

post your stats and I can give you an idea, but other than that, there aren't any rankings of undergrad CS programs. The EE and CE rankings will give you an *idea* but nothing solid.

akvareli · 08-03-2007, 08:08 PM

haha. I'd be glad to. I haven't taken my SAT yet. I'm planning to in the Fall though. I'm expecting 700+ math and the rest will probably be in the 600's, but this is my junior year and this is when I am going to do most of my Ap exams,SATs,and SAT II. Although I did take bio sat..got 730 M, but that doesn't help much.
Do you mind if I message you when I take SAT and get results back?

ehiunno · 08-03-2007, 08:54 PM

not at all, i love to help