> Runrev, here is your release history. Under the current licensing model
 which of these would have been called maintenance releases and which
 would have been called feature releases? 2.1 and 1.1 are the
 non-obvious ones. 2.0 clearly was a feature release.

 Version 2.1:   August 25, 2003
 Version 2.0.3: August 22, 2003
 Version 2.0.2: July 14, 2003
 Version 2.0.1: June 4, 2003
 Version 2.0:   May 26, 2003
 Version 1.1.1: April 2, 2002
 Version 1.1:   November 5, 2001
 Version 1.0:   July 1, 2001

 My boss just asked me if we should get the SBE renewal license or the
 new Studio license  and I told him that I really have no idea which
 would be a better value.


Hi Alex


I wouldn't count anything prior to the 2.0 release in your reasoning here.
2.1 is a feature release. My understanding is the numbering scheme goes:
major.feature.bugfix

I've commented on the improve list (without any reply) that unless there are
a minimum or 4 feature releases per year that the Enterprise Edition is more
expensive to maintain than the Studio Edition. Two Studio Editions could be
upgraded 3 times per year for $294. One Enterprise Edition can be maintained
for $299.

It should be noted that Since the release of 2.0 RunRev has managed 3 bugfix
releases and a feature release in under 3 months. All this while attending a
number of trade shows, buying MC and changing the licensing scheme.
Therefore one would assume that RunRev intend to deliver on the 4 feature
releases per year.

If it were me and I had two months up my sleeve I'd wait and make sure the <
3 month cycle continues.

Regards

Monte

It is nice to get new features each quarter but at the same time, as the above timetable nicely illustrates, each feature release is followed by a couple of bugfix releases. Keeping up an aggressive (as in frequent) feature release schedule practically warranties that some bugs slip through. I personally can't afford being in more or less regular upgrade/bug-hunt/bug-fix cycle. So I dare to say that 2, top 3, feature releases per year are enough. What that means in terms of licensing costs is another story.


Robert
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Reply via email to