Talk:List of the largest software companies

What does "Microsoft(Computer not Word)" mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.206.198 (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I.B.M. is also the world's second-largest software company, after Microsoft, with $15 billion in yearly revenue

Isn't the Software 500 a better source at http://www.softwaremag.com/SW500. It also shows the portion of revenue from software & services. - Rupertb

I agree, though the website might not be considered 'public', as it requires registration. I'm going to add a link to it on the page. Xyzzy288 17:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

ASML
ASML Holding is listed on this page, but this does not look like a software company to me. Should it be removed? Frggl (talk) 14:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, Infor is referred to as the 10th largest software company in the world. Why isn't it on this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.23.11 (talk) 15:15, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * While some of the companies are indisputably software companies (i.e. SAP, Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, Adobe, etc.), many of the companies listed don't even produce any software. Being a programmer under contract, and assigned to a corporation as supplemental staffing, does not make one a software product. It is most likely seen as a software service, even though it is actually personnel staffing. (Is Robert Half an accounting company or an accountant staffing company?) Many of the these companies such as Perot Systems, Cap Gemini, CSC are pure outsourcing firms.  The software doesn't change, only the bodies do. Have the analysts just became too lazy to define and evaluate what a "software company" is?  What does an infrastructure engineer have to do with software?  I am mentioning this because all of the revenues for certain companies is included as "software" yet I personally know people at these firms that are outsourced in areas having zero to do with software. Both this list and the Software 500, like a lot of current statistics, are obsolete and out-of-touch. It seems lists are being frequently compiled to provide a "finished product" rather than a glimpse of reality. Stevenmitchell (talk) 06:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that Cap Gemini and CSC and the like are really not software companies, but service companies. At best they make some custom software (like most firms in India do), however most revenue of the mentioned firms comes from systems integration, using third party software and hardware. However, as some people see it just to qualify that as software revenue, I think we should keep Software Magazine's list (with these service companies included) represented on the page, along with other sources, and some comments so people can make an informed choice rather than being given only one option. --BalderV (talk) 10:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

CSC and WiPro

 * I think these are staffing companies, not software companies. Can anybody name a software product developed by CSC or WiPro? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.51.63.2 (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Frequent distortions
I have been following this page for two years now, and there are frequent distortions. The Top 10 lists from Forbes, Software Magazine and Software Top 100 that are/were on it, are frequently changed by linkspammers who probably want to promote their company. At the moment of writing, the Forbes list shows at least three companies that are not really on the Forbes list: Stream Technology, First, and Softbank. Same for the Software Magazine list. --BalderV

Any list of "software market leaders" that does not have some mix of Adobe, CA, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, and Symantec in the top group is susupect. All are public companies that publish their software revenue and separate it from other revenue so it is easy to figure out how much revenue they have and to rank them. Others such as Autodesk, EMC, Fujitsu, HP, Intuit, Siemens, Sage and SAS might make it onto such a list but it requires a little estimating becasue their public documents are not as transparent as the first group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennisbyron (talk • contribs) 17:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Are government financial reporting docs considered "authoritative" I would think so. The table specifically says Fortune 2000 is that the only source to be used? 24.176.163.93 (talk) 16:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Update
I updated the Forbes and the Software Magazine lists today, so they are again reflecting the newest lists available from these sources. I did not add the Software Top 100 back in the page as being list no. 3, as I am involved in making the Software Top 100 in daily life: it might result in a conflict of interest which is against Wikipedia code. I leave it for you (and other editors) to add it or not! --BalderV (talk) 11:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

History information from past years
Could be valuable to keep data from past years in stead of deleting them. And have an historical data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.14.40.189 (talk) 12:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Table has to be wrong
The table is wrong. The default sort of the Forbes doesn't seem to be in any particular order. It's not in descending order by market cap, revenue, profits, or Forbes 1000 rank. You have to click on a column head to get it sorted by some value. John Nagle (talk) 03:30, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Looks like the problem is actually that the "Software & Programming" category misses out many companies that would typically be considered "software companies", making it inappropriate for this article. For example, Alphabet and Facebook are instead categorized as "Computer Services" companies, and are thus not listed despite being two of the largest software companies in the world. 2620:0:100E:421:7DC5:38EC:CFE0:FDE0 (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

DUBLIN IS IN IRELAND, NOT IN AMERICA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.237.52 (talk) 02:47, 28 August 2018 (UTC) SAP is headquartered in Germany, NOT IN AMERICA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.254.120 (talk) 12:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)