Wes Garland wrote in a message to Michael Grant:

> If programmers insist on having a "purist" type of attitude towards
> what has been undoubtedly shown to be a useful tool, and refuse to even
> consider it simply because they care only about how well the program 
> works and not at all about how easy it is to use, then they do the  
> program development a disservice, IMO.
  
WG> Not at all. They only do a disservice when they make it impossible
WG> for *other* programmers to add the features users want. The
WG> absolute #1 goal for programmers SHOULD be program correctness.
WG> Ease of use may very well be #2, but #1 is absolutely correctness.
WG> A pretty program which crashes and eats message bases is less
WG> useful than an ugly program which doesn't.

That's exactly right.  I've lost count of how many programs I've taken out
of my files section because,  though they had lots of "flash", 
they just didn't work right.

One especially aggraving example that comes to mind is programs that insist
that you follow a very exact set of steps to go from point A to point B and
doesn't let you deviate from it at all.  Or let you out,  either.  Grr...

---