Well, if you can do it, do it. But in my experience, using an analog computer is nothing at all like digital. I used to have to maintain one when I worked at the University of London, back in the very early 80s (basically making sure plug-board wires hadn't gone bad). Programming one (if you can call it that) required a bit of mathematical nous (which I didn't have enough of, though I was pretty sharp at digital), and the academic I worked with (who did) used to spend a lot of time saying "f*ck" as he tried to set up things like predator-prey simulation demos for the students.
The author is not talking about using an "analog computer"; they are talking about designing analog circuitry:
> Among them are IoT nodes, sensors and front-ends, actuators including motors, test and measurement instrumentation, boards and interconnects, line drivers/receivers, motor drivers, physical-level wired/wireless links, MEMS devices, RF functions, power sources and systems, EMI, noise, thermal extremes…and that’s just a partial list. These roles and functions are not going away as long as the laws of physics, as we know them, remain in place.
(I also think it's misleading to use the term "computer" for things like differential analyzers, just as it's misleading to call a person who adds up numbers a "computer", even though both usages were well established before the invention of the inherently digital devices we call "computers" today. But that's a different discussion.)
I think the real point of the article is a job of occupation (even just writing code to support analog design work), not necessarily going all the way back to the wonders of using analog computers.
But that's a very cool story.. do you remember which model of an analog computer that was?
Linn? They used to make electronic drum kits and briefly dabbled in computer design. Byte Magazine (I think) had a cover story on them but as I recall it, their system was object oriented, not analog.
It seems as though analog doesn't mean what it used to mean. It seems as though it is a stand-in for physical these days. The physical thing you make may be analog, yet it could very well be digital. The important thing is the product is physical, rather than being a bundle of bits that you ship to someone else who takes care of the hardware it runs on. The tone of the article leads me to think that this is what the author is talking about.
The author is explicitly talking about designing analog electronics:
> Among them are IoT nodes, sensors and front-ends, actuators including motors, test and measurement instrumentation, boards and interconnects, line drivers/receivers, motor drivers, physical-level wired/wireless links, MEMS devices, RF functions, power sources and systems, EMI, noise, thermal extremes…and that’s just a partial list. These roles and functions are not going away as long as the laws of physics, as we know them, remain in place.
