No, actually I didn't know that. I no longer use firefox, and their scheme honestly makes no sense to me. I am convinced they only adopted it so that Mozilla supporters can shoot down any criticism from people who abandoned it more than a few weeks ago by saying "well your criticism is hardly relevant, we're several version numbers past what you were using now!" Notice several examples of this tactic in this very discussion...
But anyway, are they bumping the version number every 1.2 months then? Is that supposed to be obvious?
PS: I would also like to add that "There hasn't been a major UI change in 6 months" is anything but a strong refutation of the original assertion that Mozilla changes up the UI too much. This is another example of redefining "major release" to silence valid criticism.
I am convinced they only adopted it so that Mozilla supporters can shoot down any criticism from people who abandoned it more than a few weeks ago by saying "well your criticism is hardly relevant, we're several version numbers past what you were using now!" Notice several examples of this tactic in this very discussion...
Increasing the version number doesn't fix bugs, but pretty much every time it has been pointed out in this topic, it was "we fixed some issues in that area, please try a newer version".
I don't understand the argument here. You're saying Mozilla is rapidly addressing the issues users are complaining about, and that is somehow a bad thing?
But anyway, are they bumping the version number every 1.2 months then? Is that supposed to be obvious?
The 6 week schedule has been pointed out in every HN thread about FF, and many public announcements before the rapid release system started, and the last 3 releases (not counting Beta and Aurora) have exactly been 6 weeks apart. So yes, it's supposed to be quite obvious by now. Don't ask me where your "2 weeks" figure comes from.
2 weeks was obviously a sarcastic exaggeration, I am not asking you where it came from. This is however the first I've heard that 6 weeks is the new version scheme..
"I don't understand the argument here. You're saying Mozilla is rapidly addressing the issues users are complaining about, and that is somehow a bad thing?"
If that was what Mozilla was actually doing, I wouldn't have issues. In practice nothing ever really seems to change.
No, my point is that there seems to be a bizarre attitude among Mozilla supporters that in order to have the "right" to criticize firefox, you have to continue to subject yourself to its abuse.
Well I've had enough abuse. I've given them the benefit of the doubt time and time again for damn near half a decade now. They now need to make a sincere and dramatic effort to win back my trust. And no, "I've changed, I promise I won't hit you anymore baby.." won't do it this time. Fool me once...
I've moved on to greener pastures, but I will continue to point out what shit firefox is until I see that Mozilla finally has recognized what their users have been saying for years, admits that they were wrong, apologizes, and details (no hand-waving) their recovery plan. Mozilla needs to get on the 12 steps program for bad software development and user relations.
But anyway, are they bumping the version number every 1.2 months then? Is that supposed to be obvious?
PS: I would also like to add that "There hasn't been a major UI change in 6 months" is anything but a strong refutation of the original assertion that Mozilla changes up the UI too much. This is another example of redefining "major release" to silence valid criticism.