On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 07:40, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Just because a package moves from 1.x to 2.x or 3.x gives no indication > > of any major changes. They are just version numbers. > > Actually, when the major number changes, that's generally an > indication that something big has changed. >
I hate to bring them into the discussion, but even Micro$oft follows that reasoning with Windows - when the underlying codebase of the Windows kernel makes a change, they make a change to the o/s major number. Hence Windows 1 was a 640 KB based 16-bit windowing system that *could* be coerced to use extra memory, Windows 2 ran primarily in the 640 KB but could run its programs in EMS, Windows 3 moved from Real mode to Protected mode and EMS to XMS. Windows 4 (95, 98, ME) shared being semi-32 bit systems with essentially common, semi-bug fixed kernel and gui. Windows 5 (XP, 2000) is based on the "now" 32-bit kernel (morphed from a mix of Windows 3, OS/2 and Vax code.) That said, they don't *always* follow that with major number changes with their applications - there it is far more of a decision made in Marketing rather than IT. -- Mark L. Kahnt, FLMI/M, ALHC, HIA, AIAA, ACS, MHP ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
