I have made some improvements to this page, but it seems like it should be split into 2 separate definitions, one for computing and one for amateur radio. Does anyone else think this would be appropriate? Paul Mackay 05:34, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

They relate enough to each other that I think it should remain one. If separated, the subsections are short enough that they would have to be stubs. Because the term "boat anchor" in this article is exclusively referring to the uselessness of some old equipment, both in computing and amateur radio, I think it is appropriate to keep them in the same article. --Fotinakis 06:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

==

I don't understand this bit here:

A later meaning is a piece of hardware or software that serves no useful purpose that is kept around for political reasons. Often, everyone is secretly waiting for it to be used again, so it is no longer a derelict eyesore. In this meaning, a boat anchor is considered an example of an anti-pattern.

If the software serves no useful purpose at all, why would "everyone" be "secretly waiting" to use it again? Or is the software supposed to be good software which has been put on the back burner and become obsolete? --Saforrest 17:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's probably much too late to reply to this, but just so that other people can get an idea... In my limited experience, there've been times when code that's otherwise useless is left within the source file simply because there's a percieved possibility (however slight) of needing to reuse or revert to said code. Once it's identified, everyone knows that the code doesn't do a thing, but maybe... just maybe, it'll have to be used again. At least, that's the vibe I get. Anyone who knows more about this should probably set me straight. --Anonymous, 21 January 2006