Hacker News Reader

Comment by palsecam | Hacker News Reader

I don't care that much too, but I would say: it's good to see some software which doesn't suffer from the eternal beta syndrom (like Gmail).

View on HN

> the eternal beta syndrom (like Gmail).

Of all days to make that claim... :)

What actual difference does this make? Is VLC 1.0.0 any more stable or secure than the non-1.0 versions? Would Gmail be any different if it didn't say "beta"?

(As an aside, VLC still crashes on malformed data because the video codecs are written in careless C code. Changing the version number isn't going to fix that bug. )

For VLC: apparently this version 1.0 is effectively not a special release, a "major version, with long time support". 1.0 just comes after 0.99. However, quoting one of the developer blog: "After the longest feature freeze stabilization period in the project's history, VLC 1.0.0-final is coming at last..." (http://www.remlab.net/).

In general case: for me "version 1.0 not beta" means "we give you the insurance that this software is very stable and reliable. We consider all bugs as important issues. We respect you."

In the case of GMail, I'd like Google to give me this insurance and stop the "no warranty at all, f* you if there is a problem" era. I think they have the power to do it. Would it be really different? No, but I would be able to sleep at night knowing Google takes really care of my email.

I agree with this. By declaring this branch stable, who knows what new features will be brought in...can't wait to see the 1.x/2.x roadmap.

Time, cost, quality, right? Even google can't do miracles.

yeah, you get what you pay for. VLC has worked for me when Quicktime would not (to play a movie from a DVD, for example)

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/google-apps-is-out-of...

"1.0 is stable and reliable"?

True of very few, IME.

Uh, did you click the link? The changelog from 0.9.9 is right there on the page.

Bet you feel dumb this morning. ;-)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com