Should it be added?

[webfork]

This question came up of what should go into the database recently while responding to the post by I am Baas thread.

I think everything that gets to the site should satisfy 3 primary criteria:

1. Is it stable? It shouldn't break or have obvious bugs.
   
   Example: Keynote NF was very buggy for me. I wouldn't add it to the database, even though it does much more than old Keynote.
   _
2. Does it work better than other programs on the site?
   
   Example: In the post by I am Baas about Gunner's File Type Editor, there's a similar program that Nirsoft makes. Is it better than his? If yes, definitely! If it does a few things that Nirsoft's program won't do or maybe does them faster or smoother, that's fine too. If there's nothing novel or unique about it, we should skip it.
   _
3. Is it cool? Do you use it? Stuff shouldn't be added to the database JUST because its portable and free.
   
   Example: How many minimize-to-try tools are there on the site at this point? If you need a utility like this, you probably only use one. However, its not critical we only accept the very best software with the most features: even though ListSorter is an ultra-basic program whose functionality is duplicated by many other programs on the site, I still use it frequently.

[guinness]

I agree with most of it but I do add applications which I don't use but are Portable, because what I consider rubbish is another members treasure!

[Hydaral]

"Better" is a subjective term. What if there are two apps, one of them does one thing and is 200kB, the other does that same one thing plus 5 more, but it is 5MB. Which is better?

If I only want an app to do that one thing, then the smaller one is "better" for me than the larger one. But someone else may want an "all-in-one" type application, the larger app would be "better" for them.

I think we should have a large choice between apps that do very similar things. For instance, we have a few file-moving apps (Dropit, MoveOut, etc) but I still haven't found one that suits my needs, so if any new ones come along I would like them to be added, even if they only differ very slightly from the current choices.

[donald]

I agree with Hydaral.

We are all different, some of us even have different sticks for different purposes.

I have one flash-drive which only holds the smallest of the best apps (my best not yours or anyone elses') for me, it is a wallet flash-drive (keep it in wallet) and is small capacity.

I have found that I prefer some applications for school and others for home. (I have no app size limit on my 8gb sd card)

I have also found that a lot of my favorite apps are not always the most popular.

Several apps in the database are essentially the same app but I prefer one layout/interface over another.

Of course some applications are BUGGY on some more recent window$ os's or do not support older os's but I like them.

I think the major criteria should be
1.) If you like it enough to use it,
2.) it fills a purpose for you, and
3.) is portable.

Some applications such as a file renamer application you might not use more than once in a long while, but you might use a web browser every day.

Use as a criteria should fit the application and your need for that kind of application.

Stable as a criteria should be based on OS support, and can not be accessed with just one test on just one computer (your computer could be buggy, it might have a hardware conflict, or an installed software conflict (ie a software on your system is in conflict or may have updated or removed something ), or a modification based problem you or a program may have done something to your pc.)

Of course you could unintentionally cause a program to be buggy, either by using bad settings, or by modifying it in a wrong fashion.

Who could forget silent data corruption, and bad downloads, all files should be checked for errors (md5etc) before you consider them buggy.

In short buggy is only a real criteria in a larger context, not in a vacuum.

"Better" is a subjective term.

I could not agree more.
And better for what? What purpose do you use it for, not always the same as everyone else.
And better for where? School, work, home, public computer, etc.

[webfork]

I think the major criteria should be
1.) If you like it enough to use it,

Exactly: adding a program takes time, so if you want to know people are benefiting from your hard work, I think those criteria could help.

what I consider rubbish is another members treasure

What purpose do you use it for, not always the same as everyone else.

You're both right that there are a lot of variables to what makes good software for whom, but good software isn't mysterious. We all know the difference between a 13 year old garage band and a symphony. Similarly, OpenOffice and Firefox have hundreds of features, millions of users, and should very definitely be on the site while Trend Micro System Cleaner probably has almost none. Without a user, there's no advocate.

As donald pointed out, I think every program has some program that likes it enough to use it and thinks it belongs here. An advocate can help us iron out at least one case where the program works great, even though almost no program is able to work bug free in every environment.

Andrew to some extent has already solved this problem with the voting system, but I still think its a topic worth discussion.