|
|
Its all explained at last (Joke) (General Discussion)
Its all explained at last (Joke) // General Discussion
Apr 28, 2002, 11:40pm
Found on internet
Software Version Explanations
Once you start playing with software you quickly become aware that each
software package has a revision code attached to it. It is obvious that this
revision code gives the sequence of changes to the product, but in reality
there's substantially more information available through the rev-code than
that. This article provides a guide for interpreting the meaning of the
revision codes and what they actually signify.
1.0: Also known as "one point uh-oh", or "barely out of beta". We had to
release because the lab guys had reached a point of exhaustion and the
marketing guys were in a cold sweat of terror. We're praying that you'll
find it more functional than, say, a computer virus and that its operation
has some resemblance to that specified in the marketing copy.
1.1: We fixed all the killer bugs ...
1.2: Uh, we introduced a few new bugs fixing the killer bugs and so we had
to fix them, too.
2.0: We did the product we really wanted to do to begin with. Mind you, it's
really not what the customer needs yet, but we're working on it.
2.1: Well, not surprisingly, we broke some things in making major changes so
we had to fix them. But we did a really good job of testing this time, so we
don't think we introduced any new bugs while we were fixing these bugs.
2.2: Uh, sorry, one slipped through. One lousy typo error and you won't
believe how much trouble it caused!
2.3: Some jerk found a deep-seated bug that's been there since 1.0 and
wouldn't stop nagging until we fixed it!!
3.0: Hey, we finally think we've got it right! Most of the customers are
really happy with this.
3.1: Of course, we did break a few little things.
4.0: More features. It's doubled in size now, by the way, and you'll need to
get more memory and a faster processor ...
4.1: Just one or two bugs this time... Honest!
5.0: We really need to go on to a new product, but we have an installed base
out there to protect. We're cutting the staffing after this.
6.0: We had to fix a few things we broke in 5.0. Not very many, but it's
been so long since we looked at this thing we might as well call it a major
upgrade. Oh, yeah, we added a few flashy cosmetic features so we could
justify the major upgrade number.
6.1: Since I'm leaving the company and I'm the last guy left in the lab who
works on the product, I wanted to make sure that all the changes I've made
are incorporated before I go. I added some cute demos, too, since I was
getting pretty bored back here in my dark little corner (I kept complaining
about the lighting but they wouldn't do anything). They're talking about
obsolescence planning but they'll try to keep selling it for as long as
there's a buck or two to be made.
Apr 29, 2002, 8:02am
LOL!!! ;-"D
[View Quote]"wizard myrddin" <admin at rdescape.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3ccca474$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Found on internet
> Software Version Explanations
>
> Once you start playing with software you quickly become aware that each
> software package has a revision code attached to it. It is obvious that
this
> revision code gives the sequence of changes to the product, but in reality
> there's substantially more information available through the rev-code than
> that. This article provides a guide for interpreting the meaning of the
> revision codes and what they actually signify.
>
> 1.0: Also known as "one point uh-oh", or "barely out of beta". We had to
> release because the lab guys had reached a point of exhaustion and the
> marketing guys were in a cold sweat of terror. We're praying that you'll
> find it more functional than, say, a computer virus and that its operation
> has some resemblance to that specified in the marketing copy.
>
> 1.1: We fixed all the killer bugs ...
>
> 1.2: Uh, we introduced a few new bugs fixing the killer bugs and so we had
> to fix them, too.
>
> 2.0: We did the product we really wanted to do to begin with. Mind you,
it's
> really not what the customer needs yet, but we're working on it.
>
> 2.1: Well, not surprisingly, we broke some things in making major changes
so
> we had to fix them. But we did a really good job of testing this time, so
we
> don't think we introduced any new bugs while we were fixing these bugs.
>
> 2.2: Uh, sorry, one slipped through. One lousy typo error and you won't
> believe how much trouble it caused!
>
> 2.3: Some jerk found a deep-seated bug that's been there since 1.0 and
> wouldn't stop nagging until we fixed it!!
>
> 3.0: Hey, we finally think we've got it right! Most of the customers are
> really happy with this.
>
> 3.1: Of course, we did break a few little things.
>
> 4.0: More features. It's doubled in size now, by the way, and you'll need
to
> get more memory and a faster processor ...
>
> 4.1: Just one or two bugs this time... Honest!
>
> 5.0: We really need to go on to a new product, but we have an installed
base
> out there to protect. We're cutting the staffing after this.
>
> 6.0: We had to fix a few things we broke in 5.0. Not very many, but it's
> been so long since we looked at this thing we might as well call it a
major
> upgrade. Oh, yeah, we added a few flashy cosmetic features so we could
> justify the major upgrade number.
>
> 6.1: Since I'm leaving the company and I'm the last guy left in the lab
who
> works on the product, I wanted to make sure that all the changes I've made
> are incorporated before I go. I added some cute demos, too, since I was
> getting pretty bored back here in my dark little corner (I kept
complaining
> about the lighting but they wouldn't do anything). They're talking about
> obsolescence planning but they'll try to keep selling it for as long as
> there's a buck or two to be made.
>
>
>
|
Apr 29, 2002, 6:26pm
hahaha :-
sonystyle [maki]
[View Quote]"wizard myrddin" <admin at rdescape.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3ccca474$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Found on internet
> Software Version Explanations
>
> Once you start playing with software you quickly become aware that each
> software package has a revision code attached to it. It is obvious that
this
> revision code gives the sequence of changes to the product, but in reality
> there's substantially more information available through the rev-code than
> that. This article provides a guide for interpreting the meaning of the
> revision codes and what they actually signify.
>
> 1.0: Also known as "one point uh-oh", or "barely out of beta". We had to
> release because the lab guys had reached a point of exhaustion and the
> marketing guys were in a cold sweat of terror. We're praying that you'll
> find it more functional than, say, a computer virus and that its operation
> has some resemblance to that specified in the marketing copy.
>
> 1.1: We fixed all the killer bugs ...
>
> 1.2: Uh, we introduced a few new bugs fixing the killer bugs and so we had
> to fix them, too.
>
> 2.0: We did the product we really wanted to do to begin with. Mind you,
it's
> really not what the customer needs yet, but we're working on it.
>
> 2.1: Well, not surprisingly, we broke some things in making major changes
so
> we had to fix them. But we did a really good job of testing this time, so
we
> don't think we introduced any new bugs while we were fixing these bugs.
>
> 2.2: Uh, sorry, one slipped through. One lousy typo error and you won't
> believe how much trouble it caused!
>
> 2.3: Some jerk found a deep-seated bug that's been there since 1.0 and
> wouldn't stop nagging until we fixed it!!
>
> 3.0: Hey, we finally think we've got it right! Most of the customers are
> really happy with this.
>
> 3.1: Of course, we did break a few little things.
>
> 4.0: More features. It's doubled in size now, by the way, and you'll need
to
> get more memory and a faster processor ...
>
> 4.1: Just one or two bugs this time... Honest!
>
> 5.0: We really need to go on to a new product, but we have an installed
base
> out there to protect. We're cutting the staffing after this.
>
> 6.0: We had to fix a few things we broke in 5.0. Not very many, but it's
> been so long since we looked at this thing we might as well call it a
major
> upgrade. Oh, yeah, we added a few flashy cosmetic features so we could
> justify the major upgrade number.
>
> 6.1: Since I'm leaving the company and I'm the last guy left in the lab
who
> works on the product, I wanted to make sure that all the changes I've made
> are incorporated before I go. I added some cute demos, too, since I was
> getting pretty bored back here in my dark little corner (I kept
complaining
> about the lighting but they wouldn't do anything). They're talking about
> obsolescence planning but they'll try to keep selling it for as long as
> there's a buck or two to be made.
>
>
>
|
Apr 29, 2002, 6:35pm
"wizard myrddin" <admin at rdescape.co.uk> wrote in
news:3ccca474$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com:
> Found on internet
> Software Version Explanations
>
> Once you start playing with software you quickly become aware that
> each software package has a revision code attached to it. It is
> obvious that this revision code gives the sequence of changes to the
> product, but in reality there's substantially more information
> available through the rev-code than that. This article provides a
> guide for interpreting the meaning of the revision codes and what they
> actually signify.
>
<<<trimmed>>>
LOL, nice one :-)) even though generally you'd call the revision the third
part of the version ([major].[minor].[revision]), but I guess it might just
be me ;-))
KAH
|
