Vincent Povirk wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm not sure if we should remove the option for 'fully functional, requires >> hacks'. A lot of people come to the AppDB to find out how they can make >> their apps work, and are more interested in the end result as opposed to how >> to get there. > > In practice, is there really enough difference between "fully > functional" and "mostly functional" that we need another rating? > People who only care about the end result would know that anything > Silver or above will just about work. > > I've seen Gold applied to software that is really "mostly functional, > requires hacks", i.e. there are some other minor problems that can't > be worked around (and Platinum for software with minor problems as > well). > > > Then again, if we add a few more variables, we can express the ratings > with radar charts. ;) > > http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/9466/screenshot5ec1.png
Yeah, use a multi-dimensional rating system. Have different criteria and not just one. Rate each with zero to four stars. The overall rating (platinum, gold, garbage) is then a function of all the criteria ratings. Rating: - 0: Does not work - 1: Works but ... - 2: Works but requires dlls (download from internet) - 3: Works but requires local changes in winecfg (sound settings etc) - 4: Works with vanilla wine Criteria: - Installation - Functionality - Usability - ??? The radar chart is not a bad idea. smartvote.ch, a site that helps you find out who to vote for (in switzerland), creates nice charts: http://dbservice.com/ftpdir/tom/smartspider.png tom