Difference between revisions of "Talk:Case Studies"
m |
Jwdietrich (talk | contribs) (→References: new section) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Thanks, | Thanks, | ||
--[[User:BigChimp|BigChimp]] 06:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC) | --[[User:BigChimp|BigChimp]] 06:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == References == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Exactly the references are reason why this page is not merged with marketing case studies. Those are related to commercial projects, while this page is devoted to free and scientific software. | ||
Revision as of 15:13, 3 April 2013
Too many references?
Nice article (and great example of use of Laz/FPC), but it seems the references belong more to an academic article than a marketing case study unless they clearly indicated how spinathyr/simthyr are used. Even then, perhaps a selection of a couple of them might be better?
Otherwise this may look too much like a boring article and scare away would be users...
Thanks, --BigChimp 06:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Why not merge with marketing case studies
Also, I don't really see the relevance of dividing case studies into commercial and non-commercial. Both serve the purpose of providing examples where Laz/FPC use was an improvement.
Thanks, --BigChimp 06:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
References
Exactly the references are reason why this page is not merged with marketing case studies. Those are related to commercial projects, while this page is devoted to free and scientific software.
