5 ms·

The next major release, 15 is the version number. Visual studio 2015 is version 14, so '15' will probably be vs 2017, unless the marketing department change the

The next major release, 15 is the version number. Visual studio 2015 is version 14, so '15' will probably be vs 2017, unless the marketing department change their minds again.

oneplane 10y ago
Why is it so hard for some companies to use logical succession numbers. Just assign 1 number, and then keep incrementing it, the same way each time. It's not even about semantic version numbering, but just pure use of logical numbers. So far, they screwed up with practically everything they make...
- kyriakos 10y ago
  Marketing really even though it's completely unnecessary in this case.
- 0xffff2 10y ago
  They do? For quite a while now, MS has referred to pre-release versions of Visual Studio by incremented version number and post-release versions by year released.
  - oneplane 10y ago
    If you re-read your comment, does the 'pre-release' and 'post-release' thing not ring a bell? Also, it seems that the only real ID on what software you have seems to be the build number, and not even that makes sense.
- douche 10y ago
  They used to be kind of sane about this, back before .NET, when it was separate Visual C++ and Visual Basic IDEs. I also wish they'd just use version numbers instead of all of the {XYZ} Service Pack {Q} Cumulative Update {Foo} nonsense.
  - hugodahl 10y ago
    There were many other tooks all in yhat realm/package from Microsoft,when Visual Studio was a bundle of tools. Tools such as Visual Interdev, Visual SourceSafe, Visual J++, Visual so-and-such - except for Visual FoxPro for some reason (likely it's own cash cow given the huge user community at the time).
- jboles 10y ago
  They do. Visual Studio version numbers go all the way back to 6.0, and have been logically continuous since, except for skipping 13.0.
- moogly 10y ago
  The hilarious thing is that, apparently[1], they tried doing that with VS14: they skipped VS13 to harmonize the version numbers, but VS14 ended up being released as VS 2015 anyway :) [1]: at least, I'm pretty sure the team isn't superstitious.
  - hugodahl 10y ago
    They also skipped "13" for the Office suite of products. It just so happened to serendipitously that Office 2016 also turned out being Office 2016. Edited to add: they apparently skipped v13 for many products. Presumably due to superstition. However, was it theirs (whoever this "they" might represent at Microsoft) or their users'

The next major release, 15 is the version number. Visual studio 2015 is version 14, so '15' will probably be vs 2017, unless the marketing department change their minds again.

oneplane 10y ago

Why is it so hard for some companies to use logical succession numbers. Just assign 1 number, and then keep incrementing it, the same way each time. It's not even about semantic version numbering, but just pure use of logical numbers. So far, they screwed up with practically everything they make...

kyriakos 10y ago
Marketing really even though it's completely unnecessary in this case.
0xffff2 10y ago
They do? For quite a while now, MS has referred to pre-release versions of Visual Studio by incremented version number and post-release versions by year released.
- oneplane 10y ago
  If you re-read your comment, does the 'pre-release' and 'post-release' thing not ring a bell? Also, it seems that the only real ID on what software you have seems to be the build number, and not even that makes sense.
douche 10y ago
They used to be kind of sane about this, back before .NET, when it was separate Visual C++ and Visual Basic IDEs. I also wish they'd just use version numbers instead of all of the {XYZ} Service Pack {Q} Cumulative Update {Foo} nonsense.
- hugodahl 10y ago
  There were many other tooks all in yhat realm/package from Microsoft,when Visual Studio was a bundle of tools. Tools such as Visual Interdev, Visual SourceSafe, Visual J++, Visual so-and-such - except for Visual FoxPro for some reason (likely it's own cash cow given the huge user community at the time).
jboles 10y ago
They do. Visual Studio version numbers go all the way back to 6.0, and have been logically continuous since, except for skipping 13.0.
moogly 10y ago
The hilarious thing is that, apparently[1], they tried doing that with VS14: they skipped VS13 to harmonize the version numbers, but VS14 ended up being released as VS 2015 anyway :) [1]: at least, I'm pretty sure the team isn't superstitious.
- hugodahl 10y ago
  They also skipped "13" for the Office suite of products. It just so happened to serendipitously that Office 2016 also turned out being Office 2016. Edited to add: they apparently skipped v13 for many products. Presumably due to superstition. However, was it theirs (whoever this "they" might represent at Microsoft) or their users'