Yeah, you are missing something. I'll help you though and explain. =) So, let's say a feature takes 7 weeks to properly build and test. You start on week 1. N

Yeah, you are missing something. I'll help you though and explain. =) So, let's say a feature takes 7 weeks to properly build and test. You start on week 1. Now, after 6 weeks, a release goes out. A week later, your feature is done. You now have to wait 5 weeks before your release goes out. So, you merge your feature and move on to your next feature. 5 weeks later, your features is released. So, to release a feature that takes 7 weeks, you had to wait 12 weeks. Now, with a 4 week release schedule, you only have to wait 1 week. This is a bit simple, but it really works this way. Now, here is the other end of the spectrum. Let's say the release schedule is once every 12 weeks. (Under the idea that quicker is worse and slower is better). Now, let's say at week 6, you start your 7 week feature. It will get done on week 13, and have to wait 11 weeks to get released. That's a long time! So what happens? Well, what tends to happen is people push to get it done in 6 weeks rather than 7. That means skipping steps, working longer hours, and cutting corners. Why? Because they don't want to finish with something and have to wait 11 weeks for it to get released. They want to get it out there. However, if you know that the longest you have to wait is 4 weeks, that's a lot more palatable. > And features requires time to think, design, bake, tested in real world and refine, Having more frequent releases doesn't change that. > having a few more releases in between those process doesn't make the features come out any quicker. tl;dr: They don't make finishing the feature faster. But they do allow finished features to get released faster. =)