Personally, I prefer the major version number, minor version number, release/build pattern. That way you can know that a major release has some big changes. With years, it's just an excuse to trickle out updates on a yearly basis, with no guidelines about what will no longer work or be supported. Major version numbers give you that. Versions named after years has an awful history (looking at you, Microsoft). At least it's better than naming them after things (looking at you Apple).

Microsoft Windows initially adopted a pretty sane version numbering scheme. Everything was fine up to Windows 3.11, then suddenly we were at Windows 95, followed by Windows 98, a bewildering Windows 98 SE (Second Edition), Windows Millennium Edition (designed to conflict with Windows 2000, its NT cousin?).

What a mess! What was so great about 1995?

But under the hood, the major version numbers were still ticking over. Windows 95/98/Me = Version 4, Windows XP = Version 5, Windows Vista = Version 6, and then back to numbers again with Windows 7, and the list is soon to supplemented by Windows 8. But wait! Under the covers Windows 7 is actually Windows version 6.1. That makes no sense. I mean it really doesnÃ(TM)t. Apparently the reason for this is to allow software that checks for compatibility to run correctly. Specifically, software written to run in Vista will run in Windows 7. This is stupid. Windows 8 is version 6.2! Windows 9 was skipped altogether because it would interfere with version checks that already looked for Windows 95 and Windows 98.

Windows 10 has the major version number "10". Back to sanity.

But wait! Windows 11 has the major version number "10", as well!

"Feature Rich" is a time-honored foolhardy mistake.
Thunderbird has been the go-to mail client of choice for over 20 years.
Thinking that they had to compete with the bloated and slow Outlook was a mistake.
I want a slim email client, and Thunderbird is moving faster and faster away from that. Outlook may be the competition, but making all those mistakes is not the solution.

Siri:"It's Friday, March 21, 2025"
Me: That's the answer to a different question
Siri: -turns off-
Me: Hey, Siri, what year is it, only the year?
Siri:"It's Friday, March 21, 2025"
we're doomed

Asking, for a friend.

After they built that massive fugly building in mid-town Manhattan, it would be embarrassing not to have anyone in it.

The sheer magnitude of possible exploits this could generate is staggering.

Barcodes don't have the ability to hijack a consumer's browser. I bet a buffer overflow exploit on simple scanners is already prepped and ready to roll.

Fair point. Skimming too fast to notice that.

That's not Bloomberg.

Are these those 5th generation aircraft I heard about?

...and hiring PWC to consult on their position, for the paltry sum of £1 million. The answer was "Yes, USB-C should be the standard".
Masters of the bleeding obvious.

Cheers!

...got tired real quick.

Bring back search, you dolts!

Hardly a new tactic. See the movie "Falling Down" for reference, and how not to express your elevated grievances.

A protection racket for the new millennium,

APL was bonkers. You had to learn a whole new character set. But, that matrix operator efficiency was worth it, for the right application, of course