Compilers for C# and Java count if they are the professional versions.
Could you expand on that? Working with VS Enterprise Architect at work and using the Standard Edition at home I notice no difference in my ability to write code in C#. I certainly don't qualify a compiler as professional or not. That is counter intuitive to me.
Other than a few rad features not being present or compiler optimisations being crippled there is not baby/professional version of the language merely the IDE. So the IDE for the standard version cost me 80quid. At the time the Enterprise Architect version would have cost 1600quid. There are one or two code generation templates and integration tools missing - but nothing that stops me being a programmer.
Well - in my opinion :).
The machine itself will be bigger and probably have the server versions of software installed.Is there a server version of C or Perl? How about Python or Ruby? Ok, I know what you mean but thats an overly simplified metric to use. It also only really applies to windows desktops that I can see.
As to your middle ground, I understand your point but I don't agree with how you have put it. Surely, at some point, you will always be assembling areas of prebuilt software. Thats the whole point. Because you install the binary of some application rather than compiling yourself doesn't make you any less worthwhile or technologically (ad/in)ept than your colleague.