Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 16th Dec 2011 07:36 UTC
Google Only weeks ago StatCounter reported that Chrome pushed past Firefox to become the second most popular web browser after IE. A new StatCounter report says Chrome 15 has jumped into the number one spot, replacing IE8. This is the first time a non-Microsoft browser has led the list in StatCounter's tracking.
Thread beginning with comment 500325
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Version 15
by djrikki on Fri 16th Dec 2011 15:03 UTC
djrikki
Member since:
2011-09-02

Version 15 uh? In less than 2 years uh? Chrome's versioning really does suck from a programmer's POV. How long did it take FF to get from 0 to 4.0? How long did it take the same for any other browser? How many version numbers does it take before a product has a name change? Version 15.... it really is kinda silly now.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Version 15
by arpan on Sat 17th Dec 2011 07:21 in reply to "Version 15"
arpan Member since:
2006-07-30

On the web, instead of checking the version number, you should verify if a particular feature is implemented and then use it.

Tools like Modernizr make this easy. Use that instead of tracking version numbers.

Also, for a browser like Google that upgrades installs almost invisibly, it's makes sense to just test in the current version (and if necessary, one version back). If someone's using Chrome, they are most likely using the latest version.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Version 15
by aacs on Sat 17th Dec 2011 09:28 in reply to "Version 15"
aacs Member since:
2008-12-13

From a programmer's point of view who also knows that this type of version numbering is a natural consequence of "multi-channel" development, this is easy and you don't have to continously decide on what feature or fix would justify a .1 or .5, etc. or major version bump.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Version 15
by gfolkert on Sat 17th Dec 2011 15:59 in reply to "Version 15"
gfolkert Member since:
2008-12-15

OMG... I've got the following things installed, version control be damned!

"less" version "444" a pager program similar to more

"libflickrnet2.1.5-cil" version "25277" Flickr.Net API Library

"libgudev-1.0-0" version "175" GObject-based wrapper library for libudev

"libudev0" version "175" libudev shared library

"xterm" version "276" X terminal emulator

So, these are all crap... because of the high version number. Ahh... ok, going to remove them now.

P.S. no not really going to remove them. You are a Dolt.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Version 15
by tanishaj on Sun 18th Dec 2011 18:35 in reply to "RE: Version 15"
tanishaj Member since:
2010-12-22

OMG... I've got the following things installed, version control be damned!

"less" version "444" a pager program similar to more


Thank you sir. I had never noticed that before. It is a great response to people who get all excited about escalating version numbers.

On my system, a fully up-to-date RHEL 6.1 system, I have "less" version "436". So, that just shows how quickly this version number is escalating. I will remove it immediately. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Version 15
by djrikki on Sat 17th Dec 2011 19:19 in reply to "Version 15"
djrikki Member since:
2011-09-02

I wasn't referring to having to check the version number in anyway - I was merely referring to the version numbering they have in place is simply ridiculous given FF has been around for considerably longer than Chrome.

Increment updates usually go .1, .2, .3 etc... not in whole numbers.

A larger number doesn't automatically mean something is better than something else - are job public that dense to fall for this dirty trick? Wait, don't answer that - the answer is probably yes.

Reply Parent Score: 1