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.
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.
980 to 1080 is a logical step, as - in simple terms- 9 was the generation and 80 the class/performance inside the generation. I somewhat get the step from 10xx to 20xx instead of 11xx for aesthetic reasons. But having a 16xx and 20xx?!
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.
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.
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.
I still hate how NVIDIA decided to go from the 980, to the 1080, to the 2080. I can’t keep up anymore!
My next graphics card will be an AMD.
Worse was the release of the GTX 1660/1650.
980 to 1080 is a logical step, as - in simple terms- 9 was the generation and 80 the class/performance inside the generation. I somewhat get the step from 10xx to 20xx instead of 11xx for aesthetic reasons. But having a 16xx and 20xx?!
Amateurs. I just pushed my 20261001 update yesterday.
Followed by the hotfixes 20261001.1700, 20261001.1720, 20261001.1755, 20261001.1805, 20261002.0940 and 20261002.1010
That’s how you got stupid Xbox names as well.
Yeah, there’s this old meme:
In fairness, 95 → 98 → ME was a separate branch, NT was 4, 2000 was 5, XP 5.1, Vista was protractedly 6, and they only missed 9 because seven ate nine
A typical programmer, out by one error, he counts to eleven these days
Really the one thing Sony has, and continues, to do right.
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.
linus has specifically said that he increments the major number when he runs out of fingers and toes for the minor one
Didn’t used to be that way though. Of course software was less mature then. They where on version 2 I think forevwe.
They were on 2.6 between 2003 and 2011, ending on version 2.6.39.4.
If you want to include all of version 2, you are going back to 1996.