This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Systems: Systems engineering High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the field of Systems engineering.

I doubt the German reference is talking about the same subject, can somebody confirm and fix this? Erik78 (talk) 10:36, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relevance of the first citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.28.41.227 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a disambiguation page for "Systems Integration" or there should be a separate article for "Systems Integration (Information Technology)" because there is "systems integration" which is not IT based.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent J Ree Jr (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 22:36, December 3, 2007.

The quality of this article is low and there is a lack of citation throughout. I've moved an entire section here:—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.89.0.118 (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 21:32, June 12, 2008.

This article needs a lot of work. Very limited in content one section also appears to have bias towards use of Enterprsie Service Bus for Horizontal Integration -- ESB has no shortage of costs and administration built into it and is certainly not the only Horizontal Integration approach. Gulliver001 (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under "Required skills" there is a statement about an "Eric Wick", who "developed a matrix template in 2010 to assess the capabilities of integrators interested in pursuing careers in the field." No reference, no citation... Besides this being an insider reference, this information is of no use... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.118.59.201 (talk) 21:32, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The areas of employment are many and varied, with the increase in 'connectivity' the employment opportunities are now across the board.

A major employer of the system integration engineer is the defence industry; the military are driving the whole discipline of 'connectivity'^{[citation needed]}. The need for information, or more usefully, 'wisdom' is an insatiable need. Different levels of information are needed by different levels of military commanders, from the broad strategic information needed by senior military commanders to the localised knowledge needed by the front line soldier.

A major measure of the information is its 'currentness', information more than a couple of minutes old is often useless, not only is information needed about what is happening now, information is needed about what is likely to happen at some point in the future.

In recent years the job description of 'System Integration Engineer' has become very broad. Any system that connects to another could be defined as a system that needs integration and, therefore, a System Integration engineer. This trend is likely to continue with the growth of the Internet and the utilities that use it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.89.0.118 (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 21:32, June 12, 2008.

I found this article to be rather Information Technology orientated when I was expecting the article to detail the work of systems integration in control engineering. Although the two are obviously related, my experience is that an S.I. is someone involved in software/hardware control systems, typically programming a SCADA system to deal with PLCs in industry.

This is obviously very POV-ish because I work in control engineering, but I was expecting to find an article that was either more orientated towards what we do, or written in more generalist terms. Am I alone in this opinion? Or am I assuming too much importance to the control engineering branch? SheffGruff (talk) 10:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There realistially should be a broad systems oriented article and then specific ones for engineering, information technology and other disciplines. Even for IT, it is still a very large topic which encompasses much more than is currently represented. 12.111.8.194 (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]