Talk:Applications

Nominations for Formats
Okay, there's been some discussion here over what format we should use on this article page. Normally, I'd suggest just do whatever you feel like, but since this is a question of style and format, rather than content, maybe we ought to do this more democratically.

I personally like this format: Talk:Applications/simple It's not as fancy as the current one, but it's much simpler and easier to maintain, and it fits in better with how the rest of the wiki works. (This version might not be up to date, but if we do decide to use, we can update the content later.)

Does anybody have an alternative format they would like to use, or does anybody like the current format better? I'll check back in a week (I'm going to list the date on Agenda.) If nobody has any comments, I'll go ahead and make the change. If somebody does want to go a different path, I'll open the floor to voting. Crazyeddie 18:33, Jan 17, 2005 (EST)

i think that simple format is perfect, the older one is very hard to use, as its just to much, maybe consider using the same format for some of the other clobered pages ( been meaning to try and clear some of em up, just got the internet back and running ) -- SciYro

Poll closes tomorrow. Speak now or forever hold your peace... Crazyeddie 16:44, Jan 23, 2005 (EST)

WYSIWYG Wiki editor
I'm still waiting for a decent WYSIWYG wiki editor... --Bad Bob 22:06, Jan 9, 2005 (EST)

That would kinda defeat the purpose of wikicode, since the idea AFAICT is to have a quasi-html markup that is simple enough you don't need a WYSIWYG. Crazyeddie 04:01, Jan 10, 2005 (EST)

In fact, I'm hoping somebody writes the opposite - a stand-alone wiki-to-html tool. Since I know wiki, this would let me make content quickly, and then work out fancy formatting when I get more proficient at html. Crazyeddie 18:37, Jan 17, 2005 (EST)

Software catalogs
Some folks on meta.wikimedia.org proposed doing a wiki-based software map. suggested that this project is already beginning to serve that purpose. While researching that proposal, I noticed the obvious - that there are a large number of non-wiki directories which may be useful in identifying useful software not yet mentioned in the wiki, to help answer the question, "Where can I get something that does X?" -- Beland 20:09, May 30, 2005 (EDT)

Catalogs And many more...
 * http://freshmeat.net/ - Very large database of Unix and PalmOS software and themes
 * http://directory.fsf.org/ - Released under the GFDL
 * http://www.gnomefiles.org/
 * http://www.linux.org/apps/
 * http://www.boutell.com/lsm/ - Linux Software Map
 * http://www.linuxsoft.cz/en/
 * http://stommel.tamu.edu/~baum/linuxlist/linuxlist/node4.html - A list of such sites

Downloads And many more...
 * http://www.download.com/ (c|net)
 * http://www.tucows.com/ - Edited
 * http://www.shareware.com/
 * http://downloads-zdnet.com.com/

IRC Hosting
 * http://freenode.net/

Software Listings
My dear LQwiki friends, I used to think this page would be a really cool place, but you still have double headings on it. Rather redundent. Some of the best articles on software are available on Wikipedia, but they don't necessarily do the best job of organizing a list of linux software. I would recomend that you at least decide on a consistant formant, and perhaps link to wikipedia articles for further information. --Bad Bob 12:46, Dec 27, 2005 (EST)
 * Bravo --ThorstenStaerk 06:31, August 17, 2009 (UTC)

= Structure = Regarding the structure of such an article, less is more. You had (I just corrected this) "Utilities" and "Miscellaneous". This defeats the purpose of this article. When I search for a multimedia utility, it can be under "multimedia" and under "utilities". And it can be under "Miscellaneous". So, you should never have "utilities" in such a listing, because you will have to read through it no matter what you search for. The best application menu I ever saw was --ThorstenStaerk 06:31, August 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Education
 * Games
 * Web
 * Productivity
 * Entertainment