Talk:Application software

message: I am changing the screenshot from MS Word to OpenOffice.org.  The reason is twofold:
Firstly, under the fair use licensing tag of the MS Word image, it states that the image may be used for identification of and critical commentary on the software in question.  Using the image to illustrate and example of a type of software does not meet the stated requirement.
Secondly, according to Wikipedia's fair use policy, fair use images shouldn't be used where free alternatives are available.
-Seidenstud 03:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: I edited the section on industrial automation software because it lacked links to articles with examples. It appears to be describing possible features of software instead of actual software packages. I tried to find examples of packages that would use those classifications, but there appears to be none that aren't already mentioned in other categories. The only one that was unique to automation was programmable logic controllers which sums up sensors, actuators, and regulatory control. I was hesitant to even leave that part in because it is borderline describing system software instead of the application software contrasted by this article.  HMI is summed up in the user interface article, but only describes a feature of system software. Supervisory, Process Optimization, Production Management, MIS, ERP, Corporate Business Systems software are all summed up by the Enterprise software and Enterprise infrastructure software examples in this article.  Manufacturing Execution and Plant Engineering appear to be describing applications of programmable logic controllers.
The whole section and associated reference appears to be advocating for alternate ways of classifying software, but is too narrow in scope to classify all application software. It looks like the makings of a separate article rather than support of this article. Oicumayberight (talk) 17:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: about Industrial Automation software

message: What's the difference between an application and a program, other than the fact that you don't install applications, but install programs? What are the differences and why is this so? 75.105.128.39 (talk) 08:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To answer the question, the term 'program' is starting to slide away but it is largely a synonym for 'application' or 'utility' in the sense of "any non-system bit of software that can be invoked on demand."  That definition is not the most rigorous one, I know.  I noticed that we did use the word 'program' in this definition, and we should probably remove the use.  Nickmalik (talk) 22:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

text: See Program.81.155.142.224 (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Program? 

message: I am becoming quite upset that my edits that I believe are adding to the article are being rolled back.  If your going to roll back my edits at the very least give an explanation!!!--"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." Socrates, Ancient Greek philosopher in Athens, Greece (469 BC - 399 BC) (talk) 16:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edits in this article are inconsistent with the style of most wikipedia articles. Although, there's no rule in the style guide that says all articles must be consistent, I find that inconsistency between articles often gets reverted just because most editors don't like to see it. I don't like many of the styles favored on wikipedia either. But it's easier to conform than to risk getting banned for edit warring over something as trivial as presentation style. Content is much more important. Oicumayberight (talk) 16:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You should explain better than that, and be more specific on what edits violate what styles. In general rolling back is not the recommended way if the edits add facts, only if the edits are disruptive such as vandalism. Instead the edits that have an improper style, should be properized by supportive edits instead of being rolled back. Changes should as often as possible be discussed in the talk page in order to seek consensus. Just as a general principle. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 10:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

text: "Yoo", to you too! Happy surfing! ... said: Rursus (bork²) 10:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop Deleting My Edits Without Explanation! 

message: This page of application software is very usefull as for assignment, 
Thanks what is applications--205.127.217.111 (talk) 19:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Useful

message: Enterprise infrastructure software provides common capabilities needed to support enterprise software systems. (Examples include Databases, Email servers, and Network and Security Management)
So, should we not include entries in the example section for DNS management software, Router software, Firewall (computing) software, web server software and/or Intrusion prevention software?  Personal firewalls are certainly application software...   Seeking consensus here.  It's often been said, for example, that Cisco is a software company disguised as a hardware company.  Our article doesn't make clear which of these count as 'application software'.--Elvey (talk) 17:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A narrower interpretation of "application software" is more useful, because it helps distinguish the application-specific layer (invoked by the user) from whatever application-agnostic services the first layer uses. That sort of separation plays nicely with software engineering issues like identity, state management and n-tier/ distributed/cloud execution. I agree this interpretation doesn't offer an unambiguous cut-off point (e.g. systems like Lotus and Exchange straddle the boundary), but by this approach proxy servers, routers and firewalls wouldn't be "applications", would they? Actually, I doubt that a database system (or at least the core like the SQLite dll) could be called an application either, but I'm open to discussion on that. - Pointillist (talk) 22:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is all "Enterprise infrastructure software" 'application software' 

message: Have never knowingly used an app, but the idea of them that I have is an app is designed and written for a specific device - an 'app' to run on a cellphone but it won't run an a tablet - enlighten me please. Dumarest (talk) 14:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "App" is just a contraction of the word "Application". It is only used by people too lazy to say "Application" or who think the use of fashionable words makes them sound clever.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.88.136 (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct my understanding of 'apps' 

message: I just think it might be a good idea, considering it could make some people scratch their heads, when they install a discontinued "popular" office suite some years from now, because of this article.
Just a recap, OpenOffice.org was discontinued in favour of LibreOffice. A minor detail, but I feel it may help to keep this article up-to-date.  The Tangmeister (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This user is incorrect. OpenOffice.org is still in active development by the Apache Software Foundation. LibreOffice is a forked spin-off project developed by the Document Foundation. Nothing was discontinued. What sort of nonsense is this? --24.146.203.131 (talk) 05:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we swap the OpenOffice.org screenshot with a LibreOffice one? 

message: WHAT IS APPLICATION SOFTWARE?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.10.144 (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The intro is indeed poor.  Perhaps the analogy can be improved, for example by changing the lightbulb and generator to a railway and train or a shopping mall and a retail shop.  Jim.henderson (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  APPLICATION SOFTWARE 

message: Seems like whenever people use the word "app", they're referring to small, one-trick pony type programs developed for specific mobile OSes like Android or iOS (and by extension, Chrome and other ), not traditional software suites developed for desktop OSes. Can someone elaborate on this relatively unexplored connotation? 68.150.236.64 (talk) 22:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mobile apps? 

message: I believe that the introductory part of section "Terminology" is misleading at all. The word "application" should be simple presented as a computer program. Please make reference to the following definition of linux:
"Linux is, in simplest terms, an operating system. It is the software on a computer that enables applications and the computer operator to access the devices on the computer to perform desired functions. The operating system (OS) relays instructions from an application to, for instance, the computer's processor. The processor performs the instructed task, then sends the results back to the application via the operating system" (retrieved from "https://www.linux.com/learn/resource-center/376-linux-is-everywhere-an-overview-of-the-linux-operating-system").
In other words computer program can be regarded as part of two macro-categories: "operating system" which performs the task of dealinf with the hardware components and  "application". I do no see any reason to compare an application to a "utility". The comparison with the language program is a non sense at all since an application is a sequence of instruction written in a programming language...The difference between an application and the program language is the same between a book and the alphabet or a car and the material substance used to build it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.92.153.12 (talk) 15:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a somewhat simplistic definition, and is really tailored to explaining Linux to newcomers.  Having utilities as a distinct category from applications is very old, although clearly there's overlap.  Same for programming languages, although this could be clearer in describing implementations of programming languages, rather than the languages themselves (IOW, we’re talking about the installed C compiler, not the C language itself).  But both utilities (which you might consider applications for managing the system, rather than performing a task the user actually wants) and programming language implementations (application that are used to develop programs), are applications from the OS's perspective.  So it's a somewhat flexible term.   Rwessel (talk) 01:42, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the above definition is not simplistic since it is often present in a lot of books regarding the operating system. I can remember that Abraham Silberschatz, which may be deemed a "guru" on the field of the Computer Science gave a similar definition. In any case the "programming language" expression is really misleading since it may read in the sense that a programming language i.e, the way you use to write instructions, is the same than the instructions themself. Can you fix it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.92.153.12 (talk) 16:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the "programming language" reference.  Rwessel (talk) 04:49, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

text: When Rwessel says that this definition is simplistic, he does not mean that it is inappropriate. He means that it basically ignores utility programs in order to avoid muddying the discussion.Chappell (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: I find the given "definition" of application software quite poor and not concise: "Application software [...] is computer software designed to help the user to perform specific tasks". Well, isn't all software made for that? I would say that all system software is designed to help the user perform specific tasks. The file system of a computer, for instance, has as its sole purpose to help users perform specific tasks. It wouldn't exist if it didn't help the user. But I wouldn't call a file system "application software". So something is wrong with the definition – it is simply illogical (being so wide that it doesn't say anything and therefore cannot be a real definition). 
I am not sure, though, what a more logical definition could be. Where is the boundary actually between application software and other software? What is the real defining difference? 
Is it that application software has a user interface? If so, any command line tool would also be an application (the user interface is of course the command line). And in the end, all software has some kind of user interface, for instance an API accessible for programmers, otherwise it would not be usable. 
Where is the real boundary? What is the clear, logical test you can apply to a piece of software to determine whether it is application software or not? The definition might include something that is hard to determine, but the test should at least make some logical sense, as opposed to the currently used definition.
I have seen a definition talk about "end users" as the defining difference: "[software] designed for end users" (). In that case it depends on what is meant by "end users". Again, a command line tool would be application software if "end users" are seen as computer engineers, but not application software if "end users" are defined as persons that are not computer engineers, i.e. "normal people"; for them command line tools would probably be "system software" if the programs they use depend on these command line tools. So it is still not a clear definition, but it does make more sense than the currently used definition in this Wikipedia article. 
So I actually find the definition "software designed for end users" better, with the given link to the Wikipedia article User (computing).
Any clever thoughts on this, including other suggestions for definitions that would actually make sense?
--Jhertel (talk) 01:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure a bright-line definition exists, and often the context depends on the user in question.  But applications are generally more focused on a task an end user might want to perform than system software, thus Oracle sells a database we'd generally consider system software, and also applications that do (for example) accounting built on top of that database.  The end user not really wanting a database, but rather wanting an accounting package.  Something like a backup package would be much more ambiguous.  Rwessel (talk) 07:20, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting comment with good thoughts on the subject, Rwessel – thanks! --Jhertel (talk) 06:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

text: The question of what software is application software is much easier to grasp when we realize that application is from the word "apply". Application software *applies* the computer to a task such as writing letters, composing music, playing movies, viewing documents, or retouching photographs. If it would make sense to say "I want a computer to do X" (where X is not learning about computers), then the program which one would use while doing X on a computer is an application program. Thus word processors, media players, web browsers, and Adobe Photoshop are clearly application programs. Virus scanners, defragmenters, and backup programs clearly are not. You can argue about whether database engines are application software or not. Chappell (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 14:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with definition and suggested new definition 

message: In line #2: 'For example: MS Word, MS Excel, console game, library management system, billing system, etc. [1]': what is this an example of? In other words, are MS Word, MS Excel, console game, library management system, billing systems, examples of application software or examples of applications?
and: line #7: 'Examples include accounting software, enterprise software, graphics software, media players, and office suites.' Examples of what?
BogwhistleBogwhistle (talk) 08:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Line #2: 'For example: MS Word, MS Excel, console game, library management system, billing system, etc. [1]': what is this an example of? 

message: Shouldn't this page be titled "Application (software)"? I've been a programmer for decades and this is the first time I've read "application software"... just now, when I was looking for Wikipedia's page on applications and ran into this article. I have heard of "software applications", "applications", "apps", but never of "application software". Shouldn't this be "Application (software)" per WP:COMMONNAME or whatever? I've literally never met anyone ever that said "What kind of application software did you install?" or whatever. People use "applications" or "apps", not "application software". Just because System software exists doesn't mean this article needs to be named "Application software", just to make it consistent. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Or maybe "Application (computing)", like Context (computing) and Server (computing) and Mouse (computing) and such. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 20:41, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

text: I've been programming for decades as well, and "application software" is a pretty old and common term in my experience (if a bit redundant).  Just try Googling it (with quotes).  Rwessel (talk) 04:17, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

text: I disagree with the move to Application (software) and with the claim that the move is supported by WP:COMMONNAME.  I also have been programming for decades and agree with Rwessel that "application software" is a common term, distinguished from system software.  If you wish to pursue this, it should be submitted to an actual WP:RM discussion.  Msnicki (talk) 06:40, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: To repeat myself (since it's been a couple of months), I'd still prefer Application software.  Rwessel (talk) 07:26, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename? 

message: Why is the Advantages article listed in the "See also" section? I don't see any relation to this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.147.232.61 (talk) 14:16, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also: Advantages 

message: What this article doesn't do, is explain the word 'App' in contrast to application. Once a minority term (APParently coined in 1992 or earlier) that used to refer to small, discrete functions, in the 2000s app came to be the common shorthand for mobile applications. Since then it has spread to commonplace usage for PCs as well. The distinction between system programs and user applications is a fair one, but this doesn't explain why 'App' has become the word the world uses.
I would go as far as to suggest (although it will pain the pedants) that this article should be renamed 'App (Computing)' rather than 'Application Software' as 'App' is now the term in common usage, having long displaced 'Program' as the popular term for 'a piece of software I use on my device'. At the very least 'App (Computing)' should redirect here. Stub Mandrel (talk) 09:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Load of CrAPP? 

message: Current version shows "The collective noun application software"
But "Application Software" is not a noun.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarbonPepper (talk • contribs) 12:20, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collective noun - can't be a phrase 

message: Application software uses and limitation 39.35.176.138 (talk) 12:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Language 203.96.240.202 (talk) 09:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Italic 5.126.133.60 (talk) 09:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer