[the-swa]

Don't get caught up on the word "art" or "artists." There's a great article by Carolyn Dean[0] that goes into depth about the history of the word and the problems with it. What I got out of it is that "calling something art reveals nothing inherent in the object to which the term is applied; rather, it reveals how much the viewer values it."

As a software developer, I consider software itself art because I understand the various complexities that arise when creating it, and also how it transforms hardware into something completely different (without software, hardware does nothing.)

Would I compare software to painting, sculpture, or music? Definitely. But that's just me, and before you can convince anyone else otherwise, you first need to convince them to value software as much as you do. The same goes for anything: fashion, cooking, even natural objects and phenomena.

[0]http://www.bucknell.edu/Documents/GriotInstitute/DeanArticle...

[the-swa]

(And just to clarify, I wouldn't consider all software "art", but neither do I consider all paintings "art" - it's really about the user's/viewer's experience interacting with the piece.)