Non critical user feedback about pop-ups and version numbering schemes


#1

Hope you take this as a genuine user feedback and nothing else:

When you first launch a new version of MP3TAG, it launches a browser pop-up window telling you what's new in MP3TAG.
You never see that window again.... except... you don't think about people who image their systems?
They see that popup window every single time they reimage their system and start MP3TAG - it's very annoying on machines which are frequently reimaged.
This popup window should not be mandatory.
It should be displayed under Help > What's New, or similar, not as a mandatory window popup.

And second thing: 10/10 [ten out of ten] new MP3TAG users are confused by the letter naming scheme.
Instead of 2.92a, can you do 2.92.1?

So in conclusion: Both no pop-ups - and standard numbering for versions, are both used by virtually all other programs, so you can say that this an expected standard, which MP3TAG is not following.
Hope you take this as a genuine user feedback and nothing else.


#2

From what I can tell the alpha character versioning scheme represents 'development'/'beta' versions (for hotfixes, testing new features, etc), which when more finalized are then rolled up into the next stable version (eg: 2.91 -> 2.92). From that point of view it makes it easy to tell it's a development version imo (Firefox for example uses a couple alpha characters for its Dev builds) but some may prefer a different versioning scheme.


#3

I know a company that issues operating systems with the versions 3.1, 3.11, NT, 95, 98, XP, 7, 8, 10 ....


#4

Or within the same PC version 10:

1507 10240
1511 10586
1607 14393
1703 15063
1709 15254
1803 17134
1809 17763
1903 18323

really obvious naming scheme :wink: :innocent:


#5

Beta versions precede final versions. So usually 2.92 Beta 1 and 2.92 Beta 2 would come before 2.92 final, whereas 2.92a comes after 2.92 for MP3Tag which is not obvious to anyone new.

To avoid all confusion, a version that comes after 2.92 should have an incremental number higher - with or without the word Beta added.
Incremental versions would make much more sense for MP3Tag, rather than even a standard Beta numbering scheme, because of the continuous useful fixes.


#6

I think the only quality that a version id has to have is to be unique.


#7

No way - most new users are probably helped by the number/letter principle. I don't mean to be harsh, but it's ridiculous to state that 10/10 [ten out of ten] are confused, when the truth is more likely the opposite.

In my opinion, the combination of numbers and letters is very useful as it helps to distinguish development versions in a visual way. The versions stick better in my head, so that I find it easier to remember which version I have installed, and which versions are being discussed in the forum.


#8

This is only true if you create the image prior to the first use of MP3tag. After that it is registered that you do not have to be reminded of the changes.


#9

You've just described the entire point of the thread topic.
We must actually start and launch MpP3Tag after each and every little fix to get rid of the popup.
Which registry key toggles that, maybe we can crate a registry .bat file to disable the popup and just run that ever time we install a new version because it would be quicker than launching and waiting.

No other major program makes this mandatory like Mp3Tag does.
No other major program uses non incremental numerical version numbering.
That is the entire point here, that both these things make plenty of sense to seasoned users of MP3Tag but they make no sense to most new users.


#10

I do not think that it is a registry thing as it also happens only once with portable installations.

In a way this reminds me of the splash screen debate:

and I quite like to be informed what has changed with a new version.
I just participated in a thread where some vital information did not get noticed because apparently the OP did not take the information about the new version seriously:


And so it took him several months to notice that the feature had been implemented for some time.
So I would say: a quick glance at the new features is quite useful.


#11

Why quick glance?
Why not permanent placement under Help > What's New?
...instead of mandatory pop-us?


#12

OK, I think it's getting a little bit repetitive here. Thanks everyone for the suggestions and the different viewpoints.

As a 1st side-note: one thing that gets rarely used in such topics is the heart feature at the bottom of each post. It makes it easy to show support for a specific idea.

As a 2nd side-note: it's generally advisable to not mix different things in one topic. It makes the discussion more focused and easier to follow.

I understand that using a more common versioning scheme can be more welcoming to users that are not yet familiar with Mp3tag's versioning scheme. I personally like the current one, as it distinguishes clearly between normal stable release and beta versions (or hotfixes, like v2.92a which β€” I guess β€” gave the final push for your suggestion). I think I'm also quite used to it (which is probably not a good reason).

I also understand that having the release notes opened every time a new version is installed can be disturbing. As a kind of background information: it's mainly motivated by the countless support requests that we needed to answer before I made this mandatory. There were so many questions about things that were already mentioned in the release notes. I always felt, that it's a small price for the user to close the browser window compared to the repetitive nature of answering the same thing again and again. And I'm also receiving my daily share of email by the way.

Regarding the version number: it's stored in the mp3tag.cfg and it's not recommended to mess with this file.

As you can see, I've not decided on something yet. But I wanted to give my reasoning for why things are like they are right now.


#13

I've continued thinking about what I wrote here: I'm not so convinced anymore, as it doesn't distinguish clearly between normal stable releases, beta versions and hotfixes. In fact, the distinction between beta versions and hotfixes is not clear from the version numbering scheme.

From the last release cycle, a clearer approach would have been:

Version Description
v2.92 beta 8 last beta in the beta cycle towards v2.92 final
v2.92 final
v2.92.1 hotfix for v2.92
v2.93 final without previous beta cycle

#14

True

I suggest to call the "final" version "stable" or "official".
"Final" IMHO include something like "not yet completely finished, searching for latest errors".


#15

Yes, everything that is not part of the version column above is meant for explanation-purposes only. It would not be part of the version number.

The "not yet completely finished, searching for latest errors" would be v2.92 rc 1 then, where rc stands for release candidate.


#16

I think versions are better distinguished with a "one piece" version number so that v2.92 can mean only one thing, and never ever be mistaken for e.g. v2.92 beta 8. People, including me, tend to omit "piece two".

I also think it's confusing if v2.92 beta 8 is followed by v2.92 final - the final/official version should have a higher version number than the beta. That's one of the things I like with the current system.

I don't think it's necessary to make a difference between beta and hotfix in the version number itself, as it is obvious in the announcements.

The current number/letter system is simple and has the benefit of being very recognizable, which helps to keep track of versions.

Those are just my humble reflections from a user perspective. It's not a big deal if you change the version system, but I do think that the current system is better than most others I've seen.


#17

Yes Florian, yes.
This is the computer programming standard in use since the last century:

Version Description
v2.92 beta 8 last beta in the beta cycle towards v2.92 final
v2.92 final
v2.92.1 hotfix for v2.92
v2.93 final without previous beta cycle