Ok yeah it’s much easier to get my dad to tell me he’s on “v2.12.6.001-build7F2023n12-kb0A hotfix”
That’s a false dichotomy. Firefox version numbering was never like that. It used the scheme major_version.minor_version.patch_release like almost every piece of software except browsers still uses.
The advantage of this system is that the numbers are meaningful: they tell you how significant a release is, whereas with straight versioning the version number gives you no clue about what the “119 to 120 upgrade” contains. It might be simple bugfixes, it might add some new functionality or it might be a complete overhaul that breaks everything.
The reason why browsers switched to a straight versioning scheme was never to make it easier for users to identify which release they’re on. The reason was artificial version inflation (i.e. “my version is bigger than yours”), and to force users into an incessant upgrade treadmill. In the past users could for example hold back on a major release upgrade until all the kinks were worked out while still receiving maintenance for their older major release.
It was the same with Firefox and Chromium when they hit version 100. Some developers were scared that websites would start crashing because of the three digit version string in the user-agent.
I think it’s alright, sure it’s not conventional but you get the point after all and non techy people also get the point. bigger number = highest update
Firefox needs to chill on the version numbers
Blame Chrome for ruining versioning
Honestly I think this is more on Apple for using “os x” for two decades
Blame users for not understanding semantic versioning and just wanting a bigger number.
Remember that time the users were right?
They’re not the ones that moved to whole number versioning
deleted by creator
Ok yeah it’s much easier to get my dad to tell me he’s on “v2.12.6.001-build7F2023n12-kb0A hotfix”
who gives a shit my dude? “Oh my god, 120? How ludicrous! There’s not even a decimal point or a hyphen! I run arch btw”
That’s a false dichotomy. Firefox version numbering was never like that. It used the scheme
major_version.minor_version.patch_releaselike almost every piece of software except browsers still uses.The advantage of this system is that the numbers are meaningful: they tell you how significant a release is, whereas with straight versioning the version number gives you no clue about what the “119 to 120 upgrade” contains. It might be simple bugfixes, it might add some new functionality or it might be a complete overhaul that breaks everything.
The reason why browsers switched to a straight versioning scheme was never to make it easier for users to identify which release they’re on. The reason was artificial version inflation (i.e. “my version is bigger than yours”), and to force users into an incessant upgrade treadmill. In the past users could for example hold back on a major release upgrade until all the kinks were worked out while still receiving maintenance for their older major release.
Nvidia needs to chill on the version numbers, their graphics driver is currently at version 537 lol
I remember using Nvidia drivers in the 70s years ago. I also remember thinking it was crazy when they rolled over 100. 😂
It was the same with Firefox and Chromium when they hit version 100. Some developers were scared that websites would start crashing because of the three digit version string in the user-agent.
no, I’m looking forward to firefox 420 in 2048
I think it’s alright, sure it’s not conventional but you get the point after all and non techy people also get the point. bigger number = highest update