From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (marked as Top-importance).
WikiProject Systems (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Software engineering.

History section[edit]

The history section is totally unsourced, redundant, and contains factual errors. Not sure if we should just remove it for now. W Nowicki (talk) 19:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

From my point of view this section is very poor, specially if compared to the articles about the history of free and open-source software and the history of computing hardware. In logic terms, free and open-source software are a subset of software, and there should be a full article on software history which also included the history of free and open-source SW. Unfortunately I'm not an expert to carry out the task, but I'm sure there is enough expertise out there.--Jasón (talk) 18:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the history section seems totally wrong. It seems to claim that software was only available from OEMs until the advent of the PC. However, I believe games were available for the AppleII and similar, and programs like Unix and Emacs pre-date the IBM PC (just checked!) My prof says he used a package such as SPSS or something on the mainframes, and it was sold by the software vendor, not the OEM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snydersware (talkcontribs) 19:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Non-Encyclopedic Phrase[edit]

The article reads:

"It is hard to imagine today that people once felt that software was worthless without a machine."

This may be true for some people -- but equally, it maybe be untrue for other people. In any case, the phrase "hard to imagine" is highly subjective and un-encyclopedic, and should be re-written or removed.

Karl gregory jones (talk) 20:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I concur it should be removed, although for the much simpler reason that it sounds puerile. --Coolcaesar (talk) 08:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --M4gnum0n (talk) 10:22, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested move: Computer software → Software[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Software. Favonian (talk) 18:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Computer softwareSoftware – Is there any other kind of software important enough to require the word 'computer' added to 'software' in the article's title? (I don't thing that clothing qualifies). As already mentioned in this talk page, software requires a computer to run, so there is no need to explicitly mention it. But most important of all, nobody talks about 'computer software' but rather about 'software'. The current name seems quite awkward and unjustified to me. Am I missing any rationale for NOT changing it? Thanks. Jasón (talk) 14:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Support I also don't see directly a reason why software should be prefixed by computer. -- SchreyP (messages) 16:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment it depends on how restrictive a term this is. Does Microcode, Firmware, FPGA coding, etc count as software or not... (talk) 08:09, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. This top-level article can easily address related topics like firmware and microcode in a section, and calling it computer software wouldn't segregate it from those anyway. Among the other uses of software it's obviously the primary topic. I ordinarily don't cite category titles in mainspace move discussions (because category titles are usually based on articles, not vice versa) but I'll point out that Category:Software has been so named since 2004, despite the general use of unambiguous titles in that namespace. – Pnm (talk) 21:03, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Unnecessary disambiguation. —Ruud 23:34, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. Possibly the oldest unnecessary disambiguation in the encyclopedia. Powers T 01:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Software Management?[edit]

Why isn't "Software Management" even mentioned in this article? --Alien4 (talk) 16:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Added link to Software asset management, although it might not be completely the same. --Alien4 (talk) 09:30, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Software Topics[edit]

Might I suggest a "Theory" subcategory under software topics? Software has now evolved to exist as a part of technology that is currently being studied in-depth by academics. Wendy Chun's "On Software, or the Persistence of Visual Knowledge" is one such example. She writes, "Software perpetuates certain notions of seeing as knowing, of reading and readaibility that were supposed to have faded with the waning of indexicality. It does so by mimicking both ideology and ideology critique, by conflating executable with execution, program with process, order with action." Another work of hers, "Invisibly Visible, Visibly Invisible", is also of note. Taylor Bohl (talk) 18:53, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

You clearly don't know much about the study of software, otherwise you'd know that there are at least two fields that would better come under "Theory" - computer science and software engineering. And I'm afraid I think this is a clear case where your proposed material for inclusion is so obscure in the context of the overall topic that it should not be covered in this article at all. There is precedent for this view.--greenrd (talk) 20:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Significant rewriting and restructing underway[edit]

This article was really bad and read like a mismash of several different textbooks, some from the 1990s - the lead was too long, certain statements were outdated or simply wrong, and there was an amazing amount of repetition, the like of which I've never seen anywhere else on Wikipedia. I am presently rewriting and reworking parts of the article.--greenrd (talk) 18:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Definition of software[edit]

I see that a previous merge request for this article with Computer program was rejected. However the article starts out by saying that software is also known as computer programs, and the computer program article does the same in reverse. If they are the same, then the articles should be merged, and if they are not the same, then the articles shouldn't say that they are. It seems to me that the difference is that software includes libraries, which aren't programs because they don't have a single entry point. However other files types such as documentation files and audio files, are not computer software, even if they are shipped as part of an operating system. Horatio (talk) 10:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

According to the definition of software in the article, "ANY set of machine readable instructions that directs a computer's processor to perform specific operations" qualifies as software. This would make computer programs a subset of software, only if they direct the processor of a computer to perform specific operations. According to the definition, documentation files, audio files, as well as computer programs can only be considered as software if they direct a computer's processor to perform specific operations. However, if they don't direct a computer's processor to perform specific operations, the set of machine readable instructions is not software. This means, according to the definition, that a compact disc that contains binary values in a machine readable format, that thanks to our pervasive von neumann architecture, can be considered to be software when it actually directs the cpu. It is important to keep in mind that software can exist in these types of binary blobs, and that these binary blobs can be positioned to direct the cpu to operate according to the instructions provided. If we fail to keep in mind that a specially crafted data file can exploit a buffer overflow in the code that handles the data, causing what we normally think of as data to become instructions, we will find ourselves rooted by those who do keep this in mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Section on "three layers of software" taken from "Information Technology in Business", by Amir Manzoor[edit]

I just noticed that a large section of this page is a direct rewrite of a passage from the book "Information Technology in Business", by Amir Manzoor. The section on the "three layers of software" (platform, application and user-written software) is basically this text:

This section specifically:

"User-Centric Software Classification-Layered Approach

People using modem general-purpose computers see computer software differently than a computer programmer. For them, the computer software can be divided into three layers each performing a variety of tasks. 'Fhese three layers are platform, application, and user software.

Platform Software This software allows a user to interact with the computer and its peripherals. Platform software includes firmware, device drivers, and operating system.

Application Software When a common user thinks of the software, it is generally the application software. Application software is independent programs from the operating system. Typical examples of application software are office suites and video games. Application software is generally purchased separately from the computer hardware, but they may be bundled with the computer.

USER-WRITTEN SOFTWARE User-written software is created by users and caters to the specific requirements from the users. Examples of user-written software are spreadsheet templates, word processor macros, scientific simulations, and scripts for graphics and animations."

I am new to Wikipedia, so please be gentle. Shouldn’t this be mentioned in the "References" section? I wanted to do it myself, but don't know how yet. Michael Beijer (talk) 15:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Evaluation on the Wikipedia page of Software.
1.There should be more citations included so as to help provide verification and enhance the reliability of the article, so that it can be more widely used among Wikipedia users.
2. There are footnotes included that are accurate and it brings the user to the relevant pages if the users require more information on what Wikipedia has provided them with.
3. References are included and this increases credibility of the information posted in the article.

Evaluation done by Ai Wey and Jass for AB1401. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasslimhuimin (talkcontribs) 11:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)