- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Well, I've been drinking for 20 years since I last used Clipper, and the memories still haven't gone. They're probably hiding behind my memories of JCL and Easytreive.
God, I just realized I've been a professional programmer for 25 years. And people are still producing languages that are crawling horrors.
Admin
Oh my god, marketing and management just wasting away precious developer time with utterly inconsequential crap! No customer is going to care, ever, about that version number, and if they do, they are going to need so much support that it isn't worth having them as customers! pulling hair
Admin
As a product manager I have to point out the WTF is not that the Product Manager and Marketing Director thought the number of releases would be revealed. The assumption being that all previous releases were mistakes.
The WTF is that the Product Manager thinks the product should be perfect in one release, right out of the gate. They have no understand that a product evolves over time. New features or functions are added due to many factors (new technology, legal/regulatory requirements, or [God forbid] a customer may have requested it).
I suppose only those that can guess and anticipate all of any current and future customer's needs should work for this company.
capatcha = truthiness
Admin
very original post. i would probably shoot the guy. then laugh at him
Admin
I've actually worked in a startup where they used versioning information as marketing material:
We never shipped a version x.0, "because x.0 releases are always buggy." So instead our first non-beta release was 1.1 (our point numbers started at 1 also, but they were not advertised as such), followed by 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, etc. Engineering screamed bloody murder, but marketing didn't really care.
I cashed out before 4.1 shipped.
Admin
I take it these guys were not in charge of marketing for "Formula 409".
Admin
Actually? I think I offered.
Admin
Actually, "retarted" is not only valid spelling, but a distinct word. It also measures stupidity, but of higher magnitude than "retarded". For further emphasis, capitalize the second 't'.
Admin
Crap ... I am 32 years old so that makes me Bus Raker version 32.5, Build 389
And I ain't even close to right
Admin
I wonder if their customers wouldn't mind not getting a ticket at the vallet parking counter.
Dude, where's my car. What car, do you have a ticket
Admin
"You just installed this new trouble ticket tracker software last week, and you've already had 574 issues with your software? Sheesh, are you people incompetent?!"
"No, sir, just our customers..."
I would have sent them an email asking them to check other applications about dialogs and point out that Microsoft and McAfee, etc have vastly more builds than we do for their products, and consumer acceptance isn't impacted at all.
And lastly, get the Marketing department involved (in a trifecta of absolute pain) and have them spin the version number to show that, even though we are perfect and achieved our vision on the first try, we listen to our customers, and you can see by the build number that we often implement their ideas and suggestions. Then the higher version numbers are the most valuable because it shows more time invested in listening to the customer and taking their concerns to heart.
I love playing idiots against themselves.
Admin
The reasoning *I* heard, when they went to "95" was that "it's too difficult for users to figure out the latest version".
How hard is it to compare 4.0 and 4.1 and figure out the new one?
The entire WORLD of computer users is a WTF.
Admin
Great. Then the lusers will end up being angry when the phone complains about them trying to dial the "support number".
Heh. Captcha is "clueless" ;-)
Admin
If the managers care that much about numbers, just use the date. Just like Ubuntu. This works also for the trouble ticket problem... 3rd caller today gets number 060727-3
Admin
But then you leak information about the support pressure. Management will be up in arms!
Admin
NT 5 was renamed to Windows 2000. Another WTF with the Windows progressions is that there are two separate product lines there:
The DOS-based Windows: 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, Windows For Workgroups 3.11, 95, 95a, 95b, 98, 98SE, ME
The NT-based Windows: 3.1, 3.5, 4.0 (Workstation, Server), 2000 (Professional, Server), XP (Home, Pro, Media Center), Server 2003, Vista (Home, Professional, Ultimate, etc. etc. etc.), and whatever Longhorn Server finally gets named as...
And let's not start on the massive confusion that having two very different Windows versions that sound the same - I remember talking to a lot of people who had Windows"Millenium Edition" who swore that they were running Windows 2000 - after all, the new millenium started in 2000, right?
And let's not start on when the new millenium actually began...
At least you can get the actual version and build numbers from Windows if you really need them (I'm currently running Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] at work) - even Microsoft couldn't be that stupid or user-unfriendly... but let's not start on Microsoft...
Admin
...or old enough to remember Brew 102, whose catchphrase was "Perfected after 101 brews"
Admin
Yeah, or WD-40, or Vicks Formula 44D...
Admin
This is my comment 1.0 (build 1). More reliable than my other comment BETA 0.9b (build ¼).
Admin
A simple approach would be to encode a version like 2.3.288 as B-C-BHH. Easy to say, easy to convert in your head.
Admin
This is actually way more wtfy than today's wtf.
Admin
I see Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) 2000.085.1117.00 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158) on my workstation. Gee, this means it took MS .................................. never mind. :D
Admin
Heinz 57. Those guys know how to make SAUCE. Only 57 tries.
Admin
Seriously. Clipper was awesome!
Admin
Sounds to me like the technical stupidity is just a casus belli; what those two were up to is a struggle for dominance. If you give in to them on something this silly, you'll be at their beck and call up until the time they need a scapegoat.
How did it turn out?
Admin
Where is it written that version numbers have to be in decimal - or even Latin? Why not represent it in hex, binary, brainfuck, or, let's go for it here: Klingon?
Admin
What a smart retord.
Admin
And they still didn't get it right :)
Admin
Ohhh, good thinking! How about we change it to a bunch of squiglies and call it "The Software Formerly Known as 2.8".
Admin
Who are you calling a retord?!?!
Admin
Leading to the following conversation:
support: I'm sorry for the trouble sir, please select Help, then About and read me the version number of the product
user: *click* ... *click* ... um (wtf?)
support: It's in Klingon sir...what? you're not fluent in Klingon? No problem! We have an alternate method. Put the monitor on a wooden table, take a picture of it (showing the Klingon version number), print out the picture, send it by surface mail, and we'll get back to you...
user: um, never mind *hangs up*
support: *dogbertian-tail-wag* (closes ticket)
Admin
I heard once that in the 30's, the head of a big Hollywood movie studio was listening to the musical score of an upcoming movie and asked the Music Director, "What's that?!?". The MD replied, "What's what?". The boss said, "That....that part of the music...where it changes". The MD said, "Umm, that's a minor chord." So the boss said, "I don't like that. Take it out." And the next day the boss sent out a memo to the Music department declaring that henceforth minor chords would no longer be allowed in the musical scores. So the Musical Director framed it and it hung in his office until he retired.
Admin
It's actually quite hard for someone who doesn't know or care how software is developed. Do you know how many cylinders your car has?
Dotted version numbers reflect a business model of debugging and releasing whatever you happen to have on a given date. Windows, like most other large software products, has been developed for many years by setting out the features and coding until they are done. Therefore the product names now reflect that you are getting a set of features, not a particular version of the codebase.
Admin
Well from a marketing perspective there is a point to what these guys are saying. But from the developers perspective there is also a point.
Simple sollution: Make the build identifier a hex based value. People can read that over the phone, you know the version. And marketing might complain about a weird number, but it's not actually that human readable.
I don't consider this one a genuine WTF. This is just marketing and tech miscommunicating, nothing really stupid, both sides have a point here.
Admin
OH, MY GOD!!!!
Admin
They may not know how many cylinders it has, but most people do know the year in which their vehicle was made.
Admin
This is a genuine WTF, the request is absolutely ludicrous. It is comming from people who dont know anything about software, and the customer has no idea what the build number means anyway.<o:p></o:p>
Admin
The version should be a distorted word displayed like a CAPTCHA test.
Current Version = Paula
Next Version = FileNotFound
Admin
So what? Cars of the same model and year can have different engines. A mechanic will know about them, but you probably don't, because you only care that the car gets you from A to B and maybe that it looks sharp. It's the same with software.
Admin
Oh my sweet lord....
This is incredibly, unbelievable, astonishingly stupid. I'm in software configuration management, so this absolutely makes my hair curl. If this happened to me, I would make a valiant attempt to set things right; I could not in conscience go blindly down the path that management and marketing deemed appropriate when it was so fundamentally contrary to CM. If that failed, I'd resign. Such a company is antithetical to CM.
I raise holy hell if a COTS vendor doesn't furnish adequate change documentation with a new version, and frankly, build dates are inadequately descriptive for most large pieces of software, because there is so much useful information you can get into a version string and so little that you can put in a build date. A build date gives you a point in time; the version string actually tells you something.
But to suggest that this information should be hidden from the users.... That's astoundingly irresponsible on so many levels. It certainly implies they would not put any sort of change log anywhere with the software, whether in the user manual, a readme file, or some obscure file deep in the bowels of the software's directory tree. And that appalls me. When I see that in vendor software, it tells me that the vendor doesn't know what version they gave me, doesn't know what they changed since the last release, and frankly doesn't care -- or is consciously hiding information that could be damaging to them. I understand that some change information may be proprietary, but you need to justify to the customer why you're asking them to buy new software -- and you need to project the impression that you actually give a rip-van-winkle about quality.
Admin
Or Preparation H.
<font size="2">Edit:
[sorry, didn't read far enough to see all the nearly identical jokes before posting...]</font>
Admin
Acutually this is a FUBAR WTF from a marketing perspective. Who wants to buy a software product that hasn't been thoroughly tested? Most executives who make decisions on buying software don't. What the double digit (and I'm being extremely kind here I believe) marketing morons don't seem to know is how to use this to their advantage. I know a lot of companies that won't even buy a software product until at least 2 service packs or the equivalent thereof have been released. I'm also willing to bet that the idiots haven't done a lick of research into how their customers view this besides at most one or two calls and their own unsubstantiated opinions. Certainly it looks like no research has been done into best practices. Finally they should be telling IT what the problem is and not what the solution should be. The problem isn't the version numbers, it's the moronic view that more builds = bad product.
Admin
every shop that I have had repairs done to my vehicle has expected me to know at least the make, model, and year of my vehicle. Quite often I've been asked what size engine, but that's usually optional. However as a man, I feel very foolish not having the answer. But heck even my wife knows how may cylinders her car has and also how to read version numbers on software. She's nowhere close to being a mechanic or a programmer. She's just not dumber that a rock, despite the fact that she married me. ;)
Admin
Most people would realize that version 4.1 is newer than version 4.0 (because the number 4.1 is bigger than the number 4.0). However discerning version 4.5 from version 4.13 is a little more difficult. Is version 4.5 newer? The number 4.5 is bigger than the number 4.13. The issue here is that the dot is not a decimal place, but a separator. I agree that users shouldn't need to know or care which is newer.
Of course the whole point of including the version numbers at all isn't for the customers (direct) benefit, but rather that support can know precisely what version (down to any and all patches) the user is running.
A better solution is some sort of more automated bug reporting system. This could be given in an email through a menu option (help->support or something like that). The point being that the user doesn’t have to call tech support and give a version number, but rather can just click a button (submit version number) or something. There are plenty of possible solutions here that could make life easier for both tech-support and the customer while simultaneously making management happy.
Admin
Then there's the trick where the competition is up to version 6, so your first release simply must be "6.0" (or even "7.0") or you look like you're "lagging behind". You just can't win.
Admin
That was so funny I nearly wet myself. Thanks for the laugh!
Admin
Speaking as a Pittsburgher, I feel obligated to point out that the "57" refers to 57 varieties of products, not version number 57. And even then, supposedly the number was picked arbitrarily because HJ liked it or thought it was lucky or something, and in fact has no meaning at all.
Admin
Are you on crack. Have you ever heard of letting things do what they're best at rather than mangling everything into the app?
Great it'll work perfectly fine in the test lab - or for the one customer who has exactly the same version of whatever dodgy mailing software you use. But then we enter into the wonderful world of trying to match your "support" email facillity into the myriad of different email options in the Universe.
Bugger that. Don't assume your users are idiots (even if they are). Even my mother (who is totally computer illiterate) can go to an "about" box and send an email version in.
Admin
As a former employee of a company that was formerly Peter Norton Computing, what we did was to hide the version/build info (along with developer pictures) in an easter egg.
For example, to see what build your Norton Utilities for Windows was, go Help -> about, then hold down "NDW" and click OK (this doesn't work anymore... some suits from the <strike>soul-sucking cuppertino offices</strike> corporate offices probably had them removed going forward).
So, do what we did: simply hide the version/build numbers on the dialog, and when the user presses a certain keyboard combination, reveal the info.
Admin
I have had the opposite request, we were release a new product and the marketing people wanted us to label our first release as Version 7. The thought being that such a release number would make the product appear mature and presumably more stable. Unfortunately they ran out of money before the first (seventh?) release, would have been awesome to see it happen.