This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software. This article is supported by Computer hardware task force.

Wikipedia already has forward compatibility and backward compatibility but not "plain" computer compatibility. Therefore this new article. Iterator12n 21:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. But "computer compatibility" is not a notable term. Maybe you mean compatibility in the context of computing. I think a better title would be Compatibility (computing). Oh, that exists. Did someone rename from Compatibility (computing) to Computer compatibility? If so, that was a mistake IMO. Stevebroshar (talk) 10:58, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google says "cross compatible" occurs on 38,000 pages and "cross compatibility" occurring on 44,000 others. It's a minority term by usage, to be sure, but that's exactly why people might want to look it up. I'd added it to this page some edits back, but it seems to have been removed as superfluous without explanation. I admit it's not the preferred term, but it seems to me an explanation of the term (and even why it's substandard) or at least an ability to search for the term is preferable to having no mention of it at all. Also, there's a term "cross-platform compatibility" which has 180,000 uses, including those in the Wikipedia entry for "cross-platform". I don't want to get in a conflict with someone by adding it back, but I did want to notice that I noted its absence and that I hope someone more savvy about how to resolve such matters without ruffling feathers will follow up. Thanks! --Netsettler (talk) 21:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]