Wow. Techies really think they are the shiznit don’t they. That second one isn’t a demonstration of idiot manager, but a demonstration of the “there are 10 type of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don’t” mentality of programmers. The manager wasn’t wrong in that those numbers will be misidentified by the public. That was his only point. He wasn’t saying that is what those numbers meant, he said what some members of the public might think of those numbers.
Brad: Except that just about EVERY PIECE OF SOFTWARE has the version number located in the same place. That’s where you find it. I would find it very frustrating if it wasn’t available.
Does anyone really look at Internet Explorer and think, “Gosh, it took them 6,000,000 builds to get it right?”
(Of course, it’s obviously not right anyway.)
Most customers have no idea what a build is. If they do, then hopefully they know that a build is just a step along the way to a release, perhaps to test a line of code or a new feature.
If a company like that thinks so little of its customers, it could still obfuscate the information. Call it version 2.8.448.001 so the customer has no idea what the digits mean, but can still communicate them when asked. Removing the version number altogether is a bad, bad idea. Something you’d expect from a politician. 🙂
There is really no reason why you need to submit users to actual build numbers. Just name every released build after a star and chuck them all in a 2 field database. Problem solved.
Foo 2.8 Enterprise Edition FT Pro (Tetra Build) sounds so much better.
Customers do think wierd things and it is the marketing people’s job to premept their stupidity.
Comments
LOL!
“Never call a man a fool; borrow from him.”
Wow. Techies really think they are the shiznit don’t they. That second one isn’t a demonstration of idiot manager, but a demonstration of the “there are 10 type of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don’t” mentality of programmers. The manager wasn’t wrong in that those numbers will be misidentified by the public. That was his only point. He wasn’t saying that is what those numbers meant, he said what some members of the public might think of those numbers.
Brad: Except that just about EVERY PIECE OF SOFTWARE has the version number located in the same place. That’s where you find it. I would find it very frustrating if it wasn’t available.
Does anyone really look at Internet Explorer and think, “Gosh, it took them 6,000,000 builds to get it right?”
(Of course, it’s obviously not right anyway.)
Most customers have no idea what a build is. If they do, then hopefully they know that a build is just a step along the way to a release, perhaps to test a line of code or a new feature.
If a company like that thinks so little of its customers, it could still obfuscate the information. Call it version 2.8.448.001 so the customer has no idea what the digits mean, but can still communicate them when asked. Removing the version number altogether is a bad, bad idea. Something you’d expect from a politician. 🙂
There is really no reason why you need to submit users to actual build numbers. Just name every released build after a star and chuck them all in a 2 field database. Problem solved.
Foo 2.8 Enterprise Edition FT Pro (Tetra Build) sounds so much better.
Customers do think wierd things and it is the marketing people’s job to premept their stupidity.
Whose job is it to educate them? 🙂