wow they sre are artifically inflating the version numbers huh? it was just an alpha and now its already in version 2? yea ok

you're dreaming, Chrome 1.x is final for 2 months already

the alpha one was 2.x alpha, and now it is 2.x beta

it is just the normal way

no i mean chrome just emerged several months ago and was in actual alpha, then suddenly it became a final and now they have a version 2, their just artificialy inflating the version number to try and get people to download it

blindartist I think you're just annoyed with the big version jump. People that like being up-to-date will certanly update it, even if it was a 0.0.0.1 jump, but there are others that wont upgrade, they like working software (*AHEM* debian etch users, nothing against it - its cool) and like the way old version works. "If it ain't broken, dont fix it" or "If it ain't broken, tweak it untill it is."

no what im annoyed with is that their trying to gein polulairty for the browser with over bloating the version, people are more likely to try a product that appears to be in a mature version, when they see 'version 2.0' they think 'new and improved' it fools you into thinking its somehow a great thing now when its really just a fake version number

its just a dirty tactic and i dont like it, its no different then nv or apperently now ati re-braning old cards to get more people to buy them

blindartist you dont understand how it works

when they release the 1st version to the public it was in beta and not in alpha (unlike what you think)

then they finished the work they had planned for version 1, so they released a version 1 final (well still with bugs they corrected)

and at the same time they started to work on a version 2, they version 2 has new features, that is why it is an other version

so to be clear :
you keep same version when you correct bugs, you change version number when you add features

that is why they are now releasing betas of version 2 while still correcting bugs on version 1 (if you check chrome update every few days you ll see you ll be able to get new version with only a change in the last digits of the version number since it is only bug correction)

version 2 is the same lackluster browser as version one, there is almost no visible difference, i understand perfectly how it works

and no you change versions when you relese a product that is significantly different from the original not just if you add features, there is little to no difference between chrome 1 and 2, its just a re-branding to try and boost the browsers popularity and at-a-glance appeal

I deal with version control in my business, and basically our versions in our software roll something like this.

PROJECTNAME_MAJOREDITION(editions are bi-annual)_1a, 1b,1c,1d,1e etc.

Any time there is a major software change/revision, i.e. a substantial new feature we go to version 2, 3, 4

fixes, minor revisions, just up the sub letter. It is a basic version control as that is all we need.

so it may go, 1a, 1b, 1c ----- 1q, 1r then 2a, with the introduction of a new feature.

Every software project has its own rules for how version numbering works. Just because lets say Windows, or Internet Explorer, literally move 1 version number every 2-3 years, does not mean every software project only moves major number every 2-3 years.

Google Chrome could easily be legitimately on version 12.3 in 2 years time, without "artificially" inflating anything.

Basically for them, 0.#### is pre-release, version 1.##### is release, version 2+ is major releases, i.e. new features. Once it gets up to version 3-6 it may slow down dramatically as there may be no new major features to be added, and it will just be lots of sub-revisions/fixes/security updates.

So really Blindartist, you are off the mark with your comments. Microsoft Windows is no benchmark of version control.

I think it would be very artificial of Google to keep Chrome on version 1, when it is such a new piece of software that is growing rapidly.

Growing rapidly and still doesn't support FTP.

or have anything new, its the same ol boring chrome with a 2 slapped on it, looks better to people interested in a new browser

and thanks for the break down lyla but being a business major and a game developer i do know how it works, also i mentiones absolutly nothing about windows or any other software and i know exactly what google is trying to do, higher version numbers look better to potential users which means they are more likely to try it which means chrome gets more market share.

blindartist, like your nick you re blind, and the fact you dont see any differences, doesnt mean there are any, but just you can't see them

on the version change you can think what you want, i work in software programming and I know how it works

btw if you dont like chrome, you dont have to use it

Hmmm, I can access my FTP server through it? What support do you mean?

The first final build hasn't supported FTP protocol.

So how long do they have to stay version 1 to please you, another month, another 6 months, stop being stupid. Version 2 has different core elements, networking, different front end features and wider support for Mac standards and such like. The reason they have gone with this being version 2, is under the hood it has a few differences in core elements, and it is being alpha/beta'd in parallel to bug fixes/security updates to version 1. So while Version 2 was in development, they still had to be able to continue to release new revisions of version 1.

So what would you have suggested mr. almighty, they release all the new stuff as 1.0.2? and continue with 1.0.155 etc. for the bug fixes.... Well wouldnt that make the whole 1.0. level completely superfluous. might as well be 1.5.5 and 2.0.0.....again stop being stupid. Google's version control is up to them, and it is fairly clear that they see the core changes and front end changes worthy of a new core number. Yes they may zip up the numbers, but quite frankly that is common with a newly released and developing core code. I just find it funny that you think you can determine when they SHOULD raise the version number.....So mr...twit. Tell me what date would it have been right?, June? what day in June?

Version 2 works with it fine, tested away after reading your first comment, perhaps another reason to call this version 2 vs version 1.

http://www.slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php?faq=general#0
Q: Why the jump from 4 to 7?

[Sarcasm]Blame Slackware they started it all.....[/Sarcasm]

yes because version 2 is higher than IE version 8, hmmm can't be that then.