I recommend to restructure the whole article to a more contemporary/state-of-the-art view. First of all, fault tolerance is not graceful degradation. I would like a critical counter-reader to discuss this matter.
"fault tolerance is not graceful degradation" Agreed. Furthermore, the term graceful degradation is used only once in the article, within the anti-aliasing example. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:38, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
For several reasons, incremental improvements are almost always more successful than a rewrite. Instead of proposing to restructure the article, find one thing in the article that you can improve and WP:FIXIT. Repeat. ~KvnG 13:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Since software does not "wear out" in the same way that hardware wears out, is there a better article on this sort of graceful degradation in software that those two articles should link to, rather than linking to this article that focuses on hardware?
Or is the concept of "fault tolerance" broad enough to include both techniques to mitigate hardware wearout and also the above software concepts? --DavidCary (talk) 03:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)