whatever pal, i know nothing in your books. I think I might just be able to live with that assertion on your part.
as for me not knowing what the real world or practise is like - you have no idea who i am or my background, yet you're quite happy to tell it like you see it, with insults to boot! as for architects not being able to work without architectural technologists - absolute, utter, total BS - I have worked in a 40under40 practise where there's not a architectural technologist in sight, and I've worked for a self-employed sole practioner (but with projects up to £1m he's working on alone) - again - no sniff of a technologist. Its kind of hard to win anything like that unless you're an ARCHITECT - and - guess what - unless you've got your ARB you can't call yourself one. So please, pretty please, stop trying to make out that they are interchangeable titles with rivalry between. We don't train for 7+ years to get the help of someone who's spent 2 or 3 years doing the equivalent of an HND (or indeed, I've noticed, an HND - you can get them in Architectural Technology I see from fine institutions like... napier). People on this board are generally wanting to be running projects with design freedom, and to be doing that they need to be doing K100. Please don't try to muddy the water with your ill-informed, slightly bitter sounding reply. We don't spend 7 years doing this because we're all a bit thick and need that long to assimilate what people doing AT can pick up part time in 2 years, you realise? I detect you might be a little cross, probably get this a lot and feel undervalued - from the way you've gone off against all undergraduate architects as being 'pretentious', and 'head-in-the-clouds'. I think maybe if you'd spent 7 years studying something you might be entiltled to think you knew a bit more about it than someone who'd done a 2 year HND. Perhaps?
Also, in case you hadn't noticed, salaries aren't a massive status symbol or driving force behind what we are aiming for, though from the way you write it clearly means an awful lot to you and you measure importance and expertise by the monthly pay cheque. People doing architecture are generally concerned about improving the built environment, enhancing society and human interaction through their work. That's one of the reasons the course takes so long and why AT and K100 are not interchangeable qualifications.
But I'm guessing there's no real arguing with you, as you say, I know nothing, you clearly know it all.