Unique display of Beta information
OLLI_S Community Moderator last edited by
In the list of applications I found 2 times the word beta.
Once in the product name and once in the version number:
Version: 3.0 Beta 14
Application: Vortex (Beta)
The Beta information should be displayed unique (I suggest in the version number).
@Tom I have a solution!
In the list of apps I have for example:
- SUMo (Beta)
- Vortex (Beta)
If you now add the 32-Bit and 64-Bit classification in brackets behind the product name then you would get:
- SUMo (Beta) (32-Bit)
- Vortex (Beta) (64-Bit)
This is looking strange!
If you remove the brackets at "Beta" then you would get:
- SUMo Beta (32-Bit)
- Vortex Beta (64-Bit)
This is not a good solution, because now it seems like the text "Beta" belongs to the application name.
So I suggest that you display the Alpha and Beta information in the version number.
So you would have:
- Application SUMo (32-Bit) version number Beta 126.96.36.1998
- Application Vortex (64-Bit) version number Beta 0.17.7
This is in my eyes the best solution!
We have a new Beta version for this discussion here:
- Application SUMo (Beta) version number 188.8.131.528
@Tom please show the Alpha and the Beta text unique at the same place (in the version number or in the name of the app).
Currently it is totally mixed up...
Just for information:
- Application Star Citizen version number Alpha 3.4.1
- Application Franz version number 5.0.0-beta.22
Let me bring a new aspect:
I suggested that you add an option of beta versions of applications should be reported to the user.
By default the checkbox is not checked.
So if I have Ahnenblatt installed and there is a new beta version available, I don't get the Update Available label shown.
But when I have the Beta of Ahnenblatt installed then I get the notification shown.
So I suggest to write the "Beta" only in the version number, not in the product name.
I will give this more thought.
However, there is IMO a big difference between vendors who release a few beta versions in between other stable releases and those who maintain a parallel track of some kind of pre-releases. I still believe that most users who go with Firefox Beta, Chrome Canary, Office Insider and so on are aware of this and will understand that the product name is (consistently) different to indicate the different channel that they follow.
I can see why this may seem a bit confusing with the difference between Vortex and Ahnenblatt, but I still think that the approach makes sense, as all current Vortex releases are Beta, but it also requires that we create a new channel, once it goes to stable releases. So old (and potentially new) beta releases are tracked in the current channel and the stable releases get a new channel without the Beta.
I think you should separate the product name from the product version.
The product name will always be the same and not change between beta and stable.
You already did that for some apps like FreeCommander XE.
Here you wrote the year into the version number:
- 2019 release 790 public
- 2018 release 788 donor
- 2018 release 770 public
For the application Ahnenblatt you wrote the "Beta" in the version number:
- 3.0 Beta 14
So you should also do the same at Vortex.
Name the application Vortex ans show the version number 0.16.15 Beta
I know that there are other cases where you have a year or a version number in the product name.
- Application Microsoft Outlook 2016 version number 16.0.11126.20188
- Application Microsoft PowerPoint 2016 version number 16.0.11126.20188
- Application Microsoft Word 2016 version number 16.0.11126.20188
In Word I see in Help -> About Microsoft Word for Office 365.
So maybe this should be changed...
- Application LibreOffice 6.0 version number 6.0.6
- Application LibreOffice 6.1 version number 6.1.2
In Help -> About I see the product name "LibreOffice " and the version number "184.108.40.206".
So please consider removing the version number from the application name.
I guess you are right. But we can't dictate a (very) different way of showing this, than what the vendor uses. When it is possible, we will attempt to display version information in a way where it is very similar to the release and support information from the vendor.
But of course, sometimes there is exceptions, where the information isn't readily available, and we have to show something else.
I am afraid that there is no one size that fits all, and we therefore have to take this on a case-by-case basis. So your input and comments on this is always welcome, and I am happy to revisit it, when you spot something that isn't accurate.
OLLI_S Community Moderator last edited by
I just thought about the user that does not know all the background information and all the technical stuff...
Is this intuitive?
I understand that wish.
However, there is a difference in how the different vendors use beta.
Some have a specific "channel" that is beta, like Firefox, that is maintained in parallel with other channels.
While some, like Ahnenblatt, seem to alter between a release, some beta release(s), and a release again.
In the latter case, we don't want to treat it like different channels / products, but rather as the same product, thus beta is a version, rather than a channel.
I hope that makes sense.