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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have edited to change the spelling to craplet rather than crapplet, because it seems to be more popular, generally. The article itself uses this spelling everywhere except for the previously changed heading (it was changed by Gaerteuth on 14 February 2014). Here's what I found:
Source
craplet
crapplet
Urban Dictionary
✓ 5 definitions
2 definitions
Google
✓ 151,000 results
32,700 results
Startpage (Google)
✓ 15,580 results
895 results
Yahoo
9,820 results
✓ 45,700 results
Bing
✓ 10,200 results
6,450 results
Ixquick
✓ 229,190 results
8,670 results
Wiktionary
Listed as alternative spelling
✓ Definition provided
Also, I removed the quotes in the heading because it looks ugly with them and neat without them. Besides, if it's a term that's being used to describe something, I don't find any reason to quote it just because it's not in an official dictionary yet.
-- ADTCTalkCtrb 16:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Surely if you're going to redirect from bloatware, and use bloatware references, the word should at least be mentioned 1.123.19.92 (talk) 11:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
I agree. Although lots of naïve people will call crapware bloatware, they are NOT the same thing. Bloatware refers ONLY to software that has an enormous file size when it doesn't need to. This can be caused by a compiler that isn't very effecient. Or a developer who includes lots of unwanted or virtually useless features. The "Bloatware" complaint was used against versions of Microsoft Office especially in the 1990's, and to a lessor extent Windows OS itself, when those programs grew so large on disk that they would take up more than half of the space available on affordable hard drives of affordable computers. This was bad, because almost everyone needed to use at least Windows, Excel and Word for work or school. As of 2016, hard drives have enormous capacities in comparison to major software & operating systems, so we don't hear the word "bloatware" anymore. While crapware is sometimes also bloatware, it is not necessarily so, and they are completely different ideas. Only uninformed noobs would use these words interchangeably. Bloatware deserves its own article, as its causes and solutions are quite different from those of Crapware, and concern fundamental issues of computer science. Ace Frahm (talk) 17:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
