Daniel Pittman wrote:
Jeff Waugh <[email protected]> writes:
<quote who="Ken Foskey">
Hmm discounts all my work. In one company a mere 2,000 employees got
to see it.
Hey if my software is used by tens of people but the results are seen
by millions does that count? Nope I guess not really.
I am wandering away depressed that I have squandered my life
programming meaningless applications...
Not sure it makes too much sense to review your life's work on
Daniel's very literal argumentation... :-)
Colour me bitter, but the standard that Robert set seems a touch
dismissive by placing a bar that almost no software every achieves.
Anyway, that aside, I would be interested in your answer to the question
about what level of use you consider a "real" deployment as opposed to
experimentation.
I would suggest that a useful metric of "mainstream" might be when a hardware
vendor bundles the software with their hardware.
Then last year's eeePC with Open Office and Xandros would parallel if not match
the IBM/PC with DOS in the 1980s, and a myriad of PC Clones and a number of WP
and Spreadsheet package in the subsequent years.
The ultimate accolade of a piece of software - though not necessarily of the
code but the functionality would be when it is implemented in the hardware.
Marghanita
--
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
