On 13/Nov/2006, at 9:05 PM, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
For examples of applications which have programmers working on features rather than performance, see MS Windows, MS Office, Open Office, GNOME.
All darned good projects, I say. You can work your bottom off, mopping up performance, but that's not what users pay for. Users pay for features, plain and simple. It's only recently that Apple's taken everyone by surprise by emphasising simplicity over features, and winning over users with it. But make no mistake, Apple's simplicity does not mean they're on the performance side. If anything, it means even more features, but with tight integration of the experience. Apple's products perform rather poorly too (look at the memory consumption of OSX vs XP, for similar usage patterns), and yet, that's not what most users think of when they think of Apple products.
Performance: 0 Features: 1 -- Kiran Jonnalagadda http://jace.seacrow.com/
