Slashdot Mirror
Do Software Versions Really Matter?
An anonymous reader writes "I work for a rather large software company and I am currently working on a completely new product. So new in fact, that the official name has not even been decided. I had assumed that the version number for this product would be 1.0 (at most). However recently I learned that the Product Managers want to release this NEW product with a version number somewhere between 5.0 and 8.0 because 'there is a stigma about buying 1.0 products. People assume it's no good.' This latest Dilbert-esque comedy routine nearly sent me over the edge. So to gauge my sanity against that of the upper Product Management, I ask the community: Do version numbers play a role in software decisions, or have product version numbers lost all credibility and meaning? Would the community feel comfortable buying version '6.3' software (and paying tens of thousands of dollars for it) knowing that it was the first release of the product?"
Let me know when you hit 7.0
Turn it up to 11!
That will inspire confidence in quality...
A lot of us are probably using Open Source software that's been released and relatively stable for years but is still only at version 0.2.07 or somesuch. We're not exactly representative of the general public.
This is like the one where they had to rename the movie "The Madness of King George."
Americans, the story goes, wouldn't be interested in "The Madness of King George III" because they missed parts I and II.
Way back in 1995, I upgraded my version of Windows to Win v95 from Win v3.11. I thought "oh man, there's been 92 upgraded versions of this software! I better get with the times!"
The Internet is generally stupid
Just call it "_________ 5000" and it'll be a while before it starts to sound outdated.
would be to take the 4.5.1.2 version and rebuild it from scratch to a new 1.0 version where all the old cruft is removed.
- Release it as a beta, and never let it out (Charge for the "beta.")
- Use the year as the version
- Use a chemical element or gemstone as the version
- Use an animal as the version.
- Use two random consonants.
- Periodically drop the most significant digit
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
You missed a perfect opportunity for "Post 1.0!!!".
Remember the Microsoft slogan: "Quality is job 1.1!"
John
And relating to this project, the initial 6.0 release should have infinitely more features than the previous 1, 2 ... 5.0 releases that were non existant. Who cares about the bugs! There are so many more features than the previous releases!
signature is pants
And I'm using Firefox 3 when there's obviously an Internet Explorer 8 that should be 5 times better!
3 * 5 = 8
Holy shit that's some bad math!
What do you expect when Internet Explorer is involved?
3 * 5 = 8
Holy shit that's some bad math!
That's nothing. You want bad math:
Its not just "8" its ie8... and e is around 2.7 and i is the square root of -1... so
ie8 =~ 21.6i
FF3*5 = 21.61i ... ok, hmmm.. that's not really better is it... lets keep trying
FF3 = ie8/5
FF3 = (8e/5)i
FF = (8e/15)i or
F^2= (8e/15e)i
F = sqrt((8e/15)i)
F = sqrt(8e/15)sqrt(i)
F = sqrt(8e/15) * (1/sqrt(2)+1/sqrt(2)i)
F = sqrt(8e/15)(1/sqrt(2) + sqrt(8e/15)((1/sqrt(2))i)
F =~ 0.516 + 0.516i
(assuming you only consider positive roots...)
who knew?
Exactly.
Tell Them to call it "Software X CIS". The CIS will stand for Confidence Inspiring String and we can all have a laugh down the road after the marketing people bite.
Tube-SOCKS
Of blankness, I know nothing.
Or Quality is Job Service Pack One (or Two, or Three)
Um, duh. Product better-osity varies exponentially with version numbers. Why else would a new products initial version number matter?
Jeez. Some people... ;)
blog
Well, if they were smart they would change it to:
"Quality is job 5.0!"
you'll once again hear the trolls saying, "Why are people spending $130 to buy a point release?
Oh the irony. Windows 4.0->4.1->4.90 weren't free upgrades, nor is 5.{0,1,2,3}.
Microsoft do, however allow a free major version upgrade. 6.0 to 5.1.
better than apple's slogan: "Quality is what we tell you it is, bitches!"
Software Version Number Guide
1.x: First release from either a new company, or of a new product. If the former, it's probably innovative if a bit quirky (wait for 3.0). If the latter, check for a "Home" qualifier, or look for the "Pro" moniker, then decide and wait for version 3.
2.x: It's amazing the feedback they've received through "anonymous, not personally identifiable" network connections. They've been really busy fixing bugs and adding enhancements. Unfortunately, they don't fix the bugs and functional issues that you've noticed.
3.x: Now we're getting somewhere. Many bugs are fixed, usability is improved, and memory footprint is still reasonable. Backup this version, this is the version you are looking for. Stock splits, investors take note.
4.x: Version 4.x is usually released far longer after the previous release than any other release. That's because Version 3 was such a kickass product, that everybody who wanted it has it, and sales have now dropped. But what a cash cow Version 3 was. Version 4 introduces the rental license, with mandatory bi-yearly upgrade deactivation with NannyAlert(tm). Stock has a mild bump up to 42% of what it was a year ago, then drops back to 35%.
5.x: Hmm, sales continue to plummet, so /obviously/ it's from piracy. Version 5 introduces per-machine CPU serial number locking (or a USB dongle), a new EZ-to-Yoose one-window interface, and a Registry Cleaner, "for Security". Walmart begins selling it. Fry's begins offering rebates.
6.x: You must be writing antivirus, portable document, checkbook-balancing, or tax prep software. Start looking at newer vendors or other products, because those offerings will be closer to Version 3 functionality.
14.x: Autodesk called, they want their CAD system back.
200x: For software companies, a year-based version number is the proverbial White Flag of Surrender. It's an acknowledgment that their development process is so encumbered by well, Process, their quality control so numbed by despondent QA testers, and innovation positively hindered by burnout and irrelevance, that any hope of a release more often than the vernal equinox is out of the question.
201x: First OS X release. In a Cider wrapper.
--------
On a serious note to the OP, I do see version numbers >5 as "has been". History has shown that innovation is long gone, and major releases contain minor enhancements ("Now supporting CSV and XML formats!") Why not exhibit some courage and make it not 1.0, but 1.0! and make a statement? Innovation takes courage. Deception is not innovation.
If I saw a new product, especially with a 6.x version number, I really would wonder where it's been. "It must have not sold very much before, I wonder if it's still crap?"
EVERY version of Windows has more bugs...
Windows NT 4 was much more stable than NT 3.x. Every version of Windows after ME was better than Windows ME. Windows 3.11 was better than Windows 3.0 and Windows 3.0 was a huge improvement over Windows 2.0...
I could go on...
Sure you could!
But not for much longer.
how is babby formed?
Every version of Windows after ME was better than Windows ME.
Come on, compared to windows ME nailing your hand to the desk was more plesent, productive and had fewwer bugs.
Read my blog you know you want to
Did you just break an NDA?
Microsoft is begging to differ with you. Again. They're going to call the successor to Vista, "Windows 7." Not "Windows 2009", not "Windows AB", not even "Windows VII".
Microsoft had some version-number-itis with the XBox because PS3 would be greater than Xbox2. It would have been much more interesting if they had named it Xbox 2006. Or maybe XpBox Vista Live Ultimate Edition and leverage on their other brands. Personally, 360 makes me feel like I'm back where I started instead of giving any impression of progress.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
so is the next Xbox 540? 4? 720, 1080, Y-Cube?
The reason for this is that Windows 7 is the last major release of Windows. XP was planned for this too but Longhorn (now Vista) messed their earlier plans.
You mean XP couldn't handle the task, so they tried with Vista, but shipped it before it was done, and will finally finish the work in Windows 7, right?
My suspicion is it merges with the XBox 360 not too long beyond that.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
None of those are as bad as the next version of the Wii: the Nintendo Wang.
seriously. anyone who makes their software choices based on which product line has the higher version number at the moment is a moron and should be fired.
You obviously have never heard of the Peter Principle.
My opinion? See above.
... start at version 8.5 and count down!
And less blood loss.