ubuntu versions

[Benjamin Drung]

Am Montag, den 07.11.2011, 11:22 -0500 schrieb Jeremy Bicha:
> On 7 November 2011 10:23, Randall Ross <randall at executiv.es> wrote:
> >> In fact, code names shouldn't really be displayed to users at all after
> >> final release, only version numbers.
> >
> > +1 for that.
> >
> > In the local-non-technical-non-power user community, the pre-release names
> > generate a lot of confusion. I've seen many new Ubuntu product consumers
> > bewildered by development code names.
> 
> -1
> 
> A Mac user may not know what OS X version they are running but if they
> do, I believe they are more likely to know the animal name and not the
> version number.
> 
> Animal names (and the associated alphabet letter) are inherently more
> memorable for most users than a string of numbers. In an effort to
> make things simpler to users, we are actually making it more
> difficult. And at least Ubuntu's names are alphabetical making it easy
> to tell that the Ocelot is newer than the Lynx, unlike other operating
> systems.
> 
> If on the other hand, we are in fact targeting the corporate world and
> not consumers, a conservative 12.10 version may sound more appealing
> than a quirky quadruped.

Why don't we use both (version with codename) when possible? Then the
user can decide what to remember.

-- 
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20111109/2673f839/attachment.pgp>