I used to work in software development in the mobile industry, and now I develop software at a camera module company. We make camera modules for smartphones and industrial devices. The core of the product is hardware — lenses, sensors, mechanical design — and software's role is to make that hardware work or to develop test programs.
Working as a software engineer in this kind of environment, you run into some unique situations. Things that would be hard to imagine at a pure software company (though, to be fair, I've never actually worked at one, so I can't say for sure). Here are a few experiences I've put together.
"We Can't Change the Hardware, So Fix It in Software"
This is the phrase you hear the most as a software engineer at a hardware company.
Once, the hardware team physically mounted a display in the wrong orientation. With assembly already complete, tearing it off and reattaching it didn't make sense in terms of cost or time. So the request that came to software was simple: "Just flip the display output direction in software."
This wasn't a one-time incident. When problems come up in hardware design, the cost of fixing them is high, so it's an everyday occurrence for the fix to land on software's plate. From software's perspective, work that was never part of the plan suddenly appears. And yet, the deadline doesn't change.
An Organization That Treats Software Like Hardware
The opposite pattern exists too.
Sometimes a fix that would clearly take just a few lines of code gets met with: "That's already been finalized, so changes aren't possible." Hardware-centric organizations tend to be very conservative about changes after design sign-off. Recutting molds or redesigning boards costs real money, so the mindset itself makes sense.
The problem is when that same standard gets applied to software. Software's essential strength is its flexibility — but when you lock it into the same process as hardware, inefficiency follows. Instead of a straightforward fix, you end up adding workaround logic or tacking on extra features. The code gets more complex with every iteration.
When Hardware Is Delayed, It's the Software Schedule That Shrinks
Product development has deadlines. Delivery dates promised to clients don't move easily.
The development sequence is usually hardware first, software second. You need the sensor and mechanical parts ready before you can load firmware, and tuning and validation have to happen on actual hardware — so this order makes sense.
But when the hardware phase gets delayed due to design changes or component issues, the overall deadline stays the same while the time given to software shrinks. Once the hardware team finishes their part, their stance becomes: "We've handed it off, so figure out the rest within the remaining time." (Or, as mentioned above, it becomes: "Just find a way to fix it in software.")
A software development period that was supposed to be a month can turn into two weeks. But the amount of work doesn't shrink. If this happened once or twice, you could push through with overtime. But when it repeats on every project, it just starts to feel normal.
So Is This Environment All Bad?
I'm not trying to just list complaints.
Working in this kind of environment, you naturally become a software engineer who understands hardware. You learn to read circuit diagrams and develop an instinct for designing software on top of physical constraints. I think that's an experience that's hard to gain in a pure software environment.
And when you keep responding to requests like "solve this hardware problem with software," the range of your problem-solving ability grows. Implementing defined requirements and creatively working around physical constraints are two different kinds of skills.
Being a software engineer at a hardware company is uncomfortable, but it's also a uniquely rewarding environment for growth.
I develop software at a camera module company. I write about real experiences from the field.
Top comments (0)