• blackshirt@lemmy.worldEnglish
    16·
    19 hours ago

    Chrome bumped its versioning numbers to overtake Firefox back in the day, that’s how we ended up with stupid version numbers like 124.1.2 instead of meaningful versions.

    • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      15 hours ago

      Same with Apple skipping iPhone 9 and ditching the S model name for spec bump releases so they have a higher number than the Samsung Galaxy S models and then Samsung went straight from S10 to S20 as a response.

    • antiR@lemmy.worldEnglish
      46·
      18 hours ago

      It’s not really stupid. Even Linux versioning doesn’t mean anything. Linux 6.0 isn’t a bigger change than Linux 5.19. It actually feels more like a corporate thing that it is easier for them to have a consistent versioning increase and consistent release schedule. Major changes don’t need to be tied to a major change in number because, how do you decide what a major and minor change is? Do you need to group up changes and make the user wait so it becomes a new major version? Google also experienced fragmentation with Android in the past and likely wanted to avoid it. Because if you tie up specific stuff to specific browser versions, some people would want to keep a specific major browser version causing fragmentation. You can just dictate a specific end date of a feature support rather than a browser number to avoid fragmentation.

      • Scratch@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        8·
        1 day ago

        Some of the content is:

        { Reply pointing out the absurdity of the OP { OP saying something unhinged } }

        So sometimes, a post made in seriousness is part of the joke.
        And, given the context of this one, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe someone would just repost a line-go-up graph without actually reading it.

  • Salvo@aussie.zoneEnglish
    12·
    1 day ago

    I’m pretty sure this was Microsoft’s versioning logic for the 90s and 2000s.