Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Why 2.0 ?


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Meithal

Meithal

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts

  • Calculators:
    G35+
    Cp300

Posted 23 August 2005 - 12:45 AM

I?m wondering why do you give so big numbers for the classpad extensions.

If you consideer Starcraft for example ; between each patch, it is only a diff?rence of a centimal (v 1.12 -> v 1.13 ) . And when the new patch change a decimal, it?s really an event with huge improvements. And step by step , starcraft will slowly upgrade to Starcraft v 2.00 which will be something revolutionnar.

Maybe my example is not very good, but it?s representative of the global politic of patch numbering.

I don?t know why casio or saltire use so big numbers but it really depreciate the value of their patches.

#2 SoftCalc

SoftCalc

    Casio Technician

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 406 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR USA

  • Calculators:
    ClassPad 300 , AFX 2.0, HP-48/49/50, TI-89/92/Voyager, HP Expander, etc...

Posted 23 August 2005 - 01:16 AM

I don't know why 2.0. The only big change is two new applications, but I don't think there was a big change to the OS (IMO). I think this is why a lot of people were upset with OS 2.0 because they expected big changes to the OS and not simply new applications.

Personally I don't know what the next number of the OS will be numbered, but internally I call it OS 3.0. ;)

#3 PAP

PAP

    Casio Overlord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere in Europe.
  • Interests:Computer Algebra, Numerical Analysis.

  • Calculators:
    ClassPad 300 (plus an old Casio model, with only a few Kb ram).

Posted 23 August 2005 - 08:23 AM

Version numbering is, more or less, arbitrary, since every developer can number its program version as he/she likes. In the <{GNULINUX}> world, version numbering usually follows the scheme A.B.C, where a change in "C" means minor (but still useful) improvements, a change in "B" means significant improvements, and a change in "A" means huge improvements. I know <{GNULINUX}> applications that are continuously developed for more than 8 years, and where the "A" field is still equal to 1. In this scheme, ClassPad OS version 2.00 should be numbered 1.2.1, or something like that. But I'm afraid that Casio follows the M$ numbering scheme, A.B, where a change in "A" or "B" usually means almost nothing. :angry:

#4 SoftCalc

SoftCalc

    Casio Technician

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 406 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR USA

  • Calculators:
    ClassPad 300 , AFX 2.0, HP-48/49/50, TI-89/92/Voyager, HP Expander, etc...

Posted 23 August 2005 - 06:10 PM

The version numbering I normally use is.....
MAJOR.MINIOR.BUGFIX
...where major means big changes that are highly visible (like UI changes or major feature enhancements) and minor means small changes many users might not even notice.

At least Casio didn't use the Micro$oft approach and name if CPOS 200x. :P




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users