UdoSchroeter wrote:

What a load of crap.


I would appreciate it if you were a bit more polite.

UdoSchroeter wrote:

People DO complain about software regardless of the version number, and rightly so (well not always). And versions below 1.0 DO in fact indicate the "product" is not finished, but some projects release it for public use anyway - which is great because the version number indicates beta status. And that in turn indicates that complaining about bugs is in fact very much welcomed by the developers!


I acutally agree with all of that. Still, the point I was trying to make (see also my second response to manip):
If I have to decide - *now* - which product I want to use, I will not give one of them any extra points, just because it is still beta (except, of course, if later switching would mean additional cost, that would be an additional factor).
So, if a product is constantly crashing, of course you can say, see, it's still 0.0.0.1 or something, but I will use an alternative that works.

UdoSchroeter wrote:

Oh come on, if you're really working in the software industry (I don't know) you too have shipped something that wasn't complete because time ran out.


I'm not, but I surely have used such software.

UdoSchroeter wrote:

Rhetorically you're right, of course, because no sane software company would ever actually ship something labelled below 1.0 - but that's just a marketing issue.


Yes, it's a marketing issue, that's what I meant. So, instead of just looking at the version number, better try a program yourself.