PowerArchiver 2012 or PowerArchiver 2013
-
@Sir:
You can check that in product history, via blogs, and in the help file. :)
At the end of the day, its no Biggy, but it seems more users are happy for it to move with a build identifiy rather than a Year.
You only have to look at our Competitors Winzip, Stuffit, 7-zip,Winrar.
All of such moved away from Year stamps, as it doesnt really give the user an indication of major, minor, revision updates.
Every time i visit Winzips website i know prior it was version 14.1, i visit the site 2 months later its 14.6. instantly from that i know changes have been made without having to read the news, blogs or anything else.
You see build number of PA everywhere, on main page, on download page, on download.com everywhere.
It is not like it says PowerArchiver 2015.
It is PowerArchiver 2011 12.12.
-
And thanks for everyone’s input.
If we developed our software as rarely as competition then we not use the year :P. But we do. It is also basis for our upgrade schedule so it wont change anytime soon.
-
-
My vote is to call it PA 2012 or 2013 (year), then the build number like you have eg 12.12.
By the way, some new 2013 cars are out already eg the Maxda CX5 :) For atleast a month already…
By the version date, eg 12.07 (eg July) vs 12.09 (eg September) it is hard to tell if there is a major change, eg from PA 2011 to 2012 with, thus the PA 2012 is still necessary. Hopefully you get the idea, to still keep the PA 2012 versions.
Keep up the great work Conexware team!
-
what you dont want is to change the version numbers widely. I would suggest that you yuse the above suggestion say 13 for year and mm for month and a b c or d for the version numbers for that month if you need bug fixes that month
-
I like the old style. Just use the real version number.
v13.xxI don’t like the year number which always make confuse and bad if your don’t big update in those year or up coming year.
-
Why don’t we try to get rid of the numbers?In my opinion Power Archiver neo/beta/Alpha sounds cooler then Power Archiver 2012 or 2013!!
-
Why don’t we try to get rid of the numbers?In my opinion Power Archiver neo/beta/Alpha sounds cooler then Power Archiver 2012 or 2013!!
Using “Beta” “Alpha” are typical stages of development and you have them in every version developed.
And technically we do PowerArchiver - “Profesional”, “Legacy” and “Toolbox”.
Having Version numbers are really helpfull as it can give you an instant idea of the age of the product when you visit the site.
