
The Version Number Is Dead. Google Barely Whispers The Launch Of Chrome 8 - obilgic
http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/02/chrome-8-2/
======
BjornW
I guess the average person assumes that a higher version number implies a
'better' (define your own interpretation) product. Seems Google is joining
that particular use of version numbers as marketing. And to be honest, to some
degree I can completely understand this. Imagine having to explain why
Internet Explorer 6 is not a better product than Firefox 3....

As a developer I always find it hard versioning my work. Why do I consider it
to be a 0.8 and not 1.0? Why would you consider it 1.0 and not 0.8? I try to
stick to the following rule of thumb:

a.b.c

a) Major changes or multiple big new features b) Medium changes, maybe one or
twee new small features c) Improvements

I'm curious as to what 'system' other people use to determine their software's
version numbering.

~~~
ShabbyDoo
"Seems Google is joining that particular use of version numbers as marketing."

Perhaps. But, if this is really their strategy, they're doing a terrible job
of it. If they really are thinking this way, wouldn't they be much louder
about it?

I suspect that products for which major releases are trumpeted loudly by
marketing organizations (think IE9) elicit two kinds of reactions: (1) "Wow, I
have to download that NOW!" and (2) "New things are scary, so I will avoid
upgrading."

Reaction #2 is what has caused IE6 to die such an agonizingly slow death.
Grandmas probably thought it scary to upgrade, and IT managers certainly have
been burned in the past by "major" software upgrades.

The web browser experience improves only when developers believe the lowest
common denominator browser feature set of their user base has shifted upward
and they can therefore drop support for older stuff. It doesn't matter so much
now quickly IE9 is adopted compared to how quickly IE6 (and 7, etc.) go away.
Perhaps by positioning newer versions of Chrome as just a normal course of
change (much like Microsoft security patches), Google hopes to help the
laggards hurry up.

------
trotsky
I'm not really sure why revving the major version number so fast on chrom*
makes any sense - or makes any difference. By their goals I'll be running
chromium 26 in two years.

~~~
InclinedPlane
The Chrome team revs version numbers for development reasons not for marketing
reasons. It's a return to the classic, and more useful, use of versioning.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Or, they had to catch up with IE so that when Microsoft promote IE9 they can
say Chrome9 has all that, and this, and runs faster with a smaller footprint
...

Cynical and optimistic.

IMO people will be affected by the numbers and will tend to think that a
higher number means a more finished, ostensibly better product.

~~~
InclinedPlane
The only exposure people have to Chrome revisions are if they dig down into
the about info (and there it's just a single version string, there is no per
major version branding) and in independent news reports. Typically a Chrome
user would have to read google's Chrome release notes blog to find out what
new features a major version change entail.

From everything google does there's no indication they care particularly about
the major version number other than as a guide for major development
milestones. Typically the average user is never exposed to the major version
number. Indeed, most users will experience major version updates with
absolutely zero fan-fare. In contrast, Firefox and IE make a much bigger deal
about major version numbers. They use per-version branding, they notify the
user when they've updated versions, and they put out press releases with the
hope of getting a lot of coverage when they make a major release.

~~~
Waywocket
Exactly. This is an effective user-centric strategy that to me explains how
Chrome has made such massive inroads in a deeply entrenched area - it gets out
of the way and isn't annoying.

(Until your swapfile hits 6GB, and Windows starts moaning and then you have to
restart Chrome :P)

