Re: Newer or later?

Subject: Re: Newer or later?
From: Jim Witkin <jameswitkin -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: "McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:25:52 -0800

Yes, I see the logic of using "higher" or "later" because in certain
scenarios (as described by Kevin and Gene) "newer" versions could have
actually have lower version numbers.

Thanks all.

(Who said this place was a ghost town?!)


On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:48 PM, McLauchlan, Kevin <
Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com> wrote:

> I use 'or later', and I have no objection to "higher" or "newer", either.
>
> Meanwhile, we are one of those companies that bump previous versions when
> necessary.
> When we bump version 5.3.0 to 5.3.1 we'll often go back and bump (say)
> 5.2.2 to 5.2.3 for the same fix, if applicable... such as a security fix.
> Of course, we don't do that for new features.
>
> On the third hand, if there's good reason to modify a purchased capability
> upgrade, that also requires a change to the base system that accepts it,
> we'll often provide updates for various older versions of product so that
> they too can accept the new version of the capability, and then we only
> need support a single part number for that capability.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Natalie Cavier
> Sent: February-19-14 3:22 PM
> To: Gene Kim-Eng
> Cc: Jim Witkin; techwr-l
> Subject: Re: Newer or later?
>
> I agree with Gene. I always use the term "higher" in this instance.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
>
> > I'd use "higher," because I've actually seen companies release a v3.0
> > for some customers and then go back and do a v2.5 for others.
> >
> > Gene Kim-Eng
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Jim Witkin <jameswitkin -at- gmail -dot- com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Today I'm writing about updating firmware and got into this debate
> > > with
> > one
> > > of the engineers. If you have firmware version 6.1, would you refer
> > > to
> > this
> > > version as "newer" or "later" than version 6.0 or would you choose a
> > > different term.
> > >
> > > I'm trying to communicate that any version after release 6.0 will work.
> > So
> > > which sentence is preferred?
> > >
> > > "Verify that the firmware version is 6.0 or newer."
> > > "Verify that the firmware version is 6.0 or later."
>
> The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
> may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
> from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
> message and deleting it from your computer without copying
> or disclosing it.
>
>
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Doc-To-Help: new website, content widgets, and an output that works on any screen.

Learn more: http://bit.ly/1eRs4NS

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


References:
Newer or later?: From: Jim Witkin
Re: Newer or later?: From: Gene Kim-Eng
Re: Newer or later?: From: Natalie Cavier
RE: Newer or later?: From: McLauchlan, Kevin

Previous by Author: Newer or later?
Next by Author: Re: ghost town
Previous by Thread: RE: Newer or later?
Next by Thread: Re: Newer or later?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads