I don't like this guy's approach. Simply noting that a feature is rarely used is not enough information.<p>For example, code for error handling & recovery is typically rarely used. For some classes of products, most users will <i>never</i> need such code. But if you ship without it, then you're shipping a broken product. Not good.<p>Another example is features used only by high-end users. Something like MS-Word (also the PDF format) has some features that are really only used by high-end publishers (in the traditional sense). Microsoft (Adobe) could have left these features out of the low-end products. But that would mean multiple versions of Word, possibly incompatible formats, etc., which I think we can agree would be a bad strategy. Indeed, the success of Word (& PDFs) is, in part, due to the fact that all users can share the same documents.<p>That said, there <i>are</i> some good points here. Throwing in every feature you can think of is far too common, and results in bloated messes. Indeed, Word seems to have been designed with this philosophy. I am not claiming that the feature bloat of Word is a good thing.