4 ms·
He should have followed the "release early and often" mantra and released a version every decade, and then iterated based on user feedback. Instead, by waiting
by drcode 12y ago
He should have followed the "release early and often" mantra and released a version every decade, and then iterated based on user feedback.
Instead, by waiting an entire 40 years, the beta seems to have some obvious usability issues that a more frequent once-per-decade release schedule would have caught early on.
- Someone 12y agoBut he did. There was a Windows 95 release in 1998 (http://cs.brown.edu/memex/ACM_HypertextTestbed/papers/60.html http://cs.brown.edu/memex/ACM_HypertextTestbed/papers/60.htm... is the best 'link' I can find to it. If you can find it, you should read the license present inside the installer)
- enkiv2 12y agoThere was a release in 1993, a complete open source release of all code developed during the 80s at autodesk in 1999, a release around 2003, a windows demo in 2007, and this latest release. There were some intellectual-property-related delays, mostly related to either unfiled patents (wherein the ideas were under trade secret protection until the patent applications were filed) or due to the difficulty of convincing all developers involved to agree to a release. Having too many developers and not getting them to agree to a license or design beforehand bit him in the ass several times.