3 ms·

> You originally wrote that applications were a subset of programs and this changed because of iPhone You’re right I did. Agh truth be told I don’t know when t

> You originally wrote that applications were a subset of programs and this changed because of iPhone You’re right I did. Agh truth be told I don’t know when the shift happened (it all feels like ancient history these days) but I do remember people making a distinction between applications, utilities, games and systems software, which they don’t now. I even remember teaching material making that distinction (old enough to have been in Uni when GUI applications were just shifting away from novelty). Also you keep saying that I’m missing your point about APIs but I’m not. My point is that Windows documentation isn’t a legal document and thus using the term “application” for stuff that could mean any software is perfectly valid. Even now many make a distinction between systems software and applications yet the contents in most of the reference material applies just as much to systems software as it does application software. This is what is meant by metonymic purposes of the term.

badsectoracula 6y ago
I mentioned the Windows documentation not as an authoritative source for what "application" means, but more as an informal source for how people even in the 80s used "application" to mean any sort of software. I mentioned Windows because it is the most likely to be known, but it also applies to other systems. For example the GEM installation manual[0] uses the term "application" to refer to non-system software and even seems to make the distinction between applications and programs where applications is the whole and program is a part of the application (notice in section 4 where it mentions that to install an application you use its installation program). [0] http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalResearch/gem/GEM3/5125-2055-001_GEM3_Desktop_Installation_Guide_Nov87.pdf http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalResearch/gem/GEM3/5125-2...
- laumars 6y ago
  Which is another example of metonymy. Did you read the link? I've referenced this several times now and it explains every example you've given. In any case, I've also said it was a bit of a fuzzy term and it feels like we're ostensibly arguing similar points.
  - badsectoracula 6y ago
    I did read the link, but i'm not sure how to interpret it, it just mentions that the word application can have several uses. Which, ok it does, but it doesn't sound like it was contradicting anything i wrote about "applications" not being just about specific types of software like productivity or even a subset of "programs" (the GEM manual even shows how it was used in the opposite where an application can be made up of multiple programs).

badsectoracula 6y ago

I mentioned the Windows documentation not as an authoritative source for what "application" means, but more as an informal source for how people even in the 80s used "application" to mean any sort of software. I mentioned Windows because it is the most likely to be known, but it also applies to other systems. For example the GEM installation manual[0] uses the term "application" to refer to non-system software and even seems to make the distinction between applications and programs where applications is the whole and program is a part of the application (notice in section 4 where it mentions that to install an application you use its installation program). [0] http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalResearch/gem/GEM3/5125-2055-001_GEM3_Desktop_Installation_Guide_Nov87.pdf http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalResearch/gem/GEM3/5125-2...

laumars 6y ago
Which is another example of metonymy. Did you read the link? I've referenced this several times now and it explains every example you've given. In any case, I've also said it was a bit of a fuzzy term and it feels like we're ostensibly arguing similar points.
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  I did read the link, but i'm not sure how to interpret it, it just mentions that the word application can have several uses. Which, ok it does, but it doesn't sound like it was contradicting anything i wrote about "applications" not being just about specific types of software like productivity or even a subset of "programs" (the GEM manual even shows how it was used in the opposite where an application can be made up of multiple programs).