Jump to content


Photo

Records are made to be broken


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 18 June 2012 - 12:38 PM

RM 5.00 released 28 Nov 2011
RM 5.01 released 16 Dec 2011 (18 days)
RM 5.02 released 26 Jan 2012 (40 days)
RM 5.03 released 27 Mar 2012 (61 days)
RM 5.04 ????? (82 days and counting)

The only thing consistent is that the delay between release dates and the growth of the "tracking system" are both increasing exponentially. A good business model would expect to see both measures decrease over time.

#2 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6174 posts

Posted 18 June 2012 - 01:27 PM

That data suggests an average delay of about 21 days between releases and were it indicative of the future, there should be a release today. There is no statistical increase in the delay to date, let alone an exponential increase. As for the tracking system, it is undoubtedly growing larger but that is probably more linear than exponential; given some relative quiet in the forum recently, the growth might actually be diminishing. A business model that planned ever decreasing delays between releases would be annoying, if not scary.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#3 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 18 June 2012 - 01:54 PM

RM 5.00 released 28 Nov 2011
RM 5.01 released 16 Dec 2011 (18 days)
RM 5.02 released 26 Jan 2012 (40 days)
RM 5.03 released 27 Mar 2012 (61 days)
RM 5.04 ????? (82 days and counting)

The only thing consistent is that the delay between release dates and the growth of the "tracking system" are both increasing exponentially. A good business model would expect to see both measures decrease over time.



A good business model would be to only release new features and changes to features other than fixing bugs in a new version for which an upgrade fee would be charged to generate more money for the company.

Many companies only release paid updates even if they only include bug fixes.

RootsMagic spoils it's users.

In 5.0.3 alone there were 7 changes in features that user asked for and the new "Who Was There" report, not counting the bug fixes. We paid for none of those changes.

5.0.3 - 27 March 2012

New: New "Who Was There" list prints all people in a selected place at a selected time (see help for details)
New: "Fix Broken Media Links" now lets you select the starting drive and/or folder
New: Media Gallery now lets you sort media by either file name or caption
New: Added options to custom reports to shade alternate records or draw lines between records
New: Added preparer option to Box Charts
New: Added "Living" checkbox to "Add Person screen
New: Added option to print detail ref# for citations in Source List report
New: Changed 95 year rule to 110 years in New FamilySearch features

And you deliberately left out all the in between updates.

RM is not obliged to maintain some user's arbitrary idea of how often an update or new version should come out. Nor should that be the case.

#4 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 18 June 2012 - 06:32 PM

That data suggests an average delay of about 21 days between releases and were it indicative of the future, there should be a release today. There is no statistical increase in the delay to date, let alone an exponential increase.


Better check those numbers again, Tom.

#5 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 18 June 2012 - 06:35 PM

A business model that planned ever decreasing delays between releases would be annoying, if not scary.


It would annoy you to have interim releases made as quickly as possible, with a goal of eliminating the backlog of bugs and user requests?

#6 MVS

MVS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 02:11 AM

I wonder how much of the development resource is being spent on the "new platforms" rather than the backlog of change requests.

I also wonder whether the new platforms are going to be working "full" versions of RM5 or just some subset for "on the road use". If it is the former then I wonder how the development team will cope with duplicating new functionaility across multiple platforms. If it is the latter it will be more workable but probably a shade dissappointing in terms of usefulness?

I also wonder, if one of the new platforms is an iPad, how recent announcements by Apple on change of allegiance on mapping technology might have thrown a spanner in the works?

I spend a lot of time wondering.

With regards to "being spolied" by getting upgrade functionaility within major releases, I do not agree. I think the users were promised an awful lot of things in RM4 which never came to fruition in that release. Some of them were addressed in RM5; but again not all. And we also had to wait, I seem to remember, 3 years for that release - so perhaps 4+ years in total for some items that were mentioned in the RM4 blog. Bearing this in mind I think it is inevitable that the team has to relase things "on the fly" or we would be facing even more lengthy waits for improved functionaility.

What always worries me is that I feel that some great ideas are not always thought through properly; for example Shared Events was a brilliant idea but it soon became clear that reports did not know what to do with the shared data in the database so then there were subsequent patches to fix these problems; and then when media gallery enhancements came about with media tagging in RM5 we still have faulty logic being appplied to the handling of media in Shared Event, Also we still cannot export shared events to other platforms via a GED, and so on. And we see from all the many forum entries on this site for the Media Gallery how, again, the actual solution seems a "half baked" rather than fully thought through solution.

I dont know how the RM team will ever escape from this trap; I restate a previous entry of mine - I would be happy to pay MORE for RM, ie charge me the 20 for an upgrade every year - PROVIDING the extra revenue is used to catch up on bug fixes and the Users suggestions on these Forums for the core PC product.

And just to wonder again; having worked in small development houses in the past I know how easy it is for over deference to the "main man" to come about. When I see all the blogs and forum entries referring to the "Roots Magician" and the cringing introductions to the Webinars it makes me wonder - is there someone in the team who stands up to Bruce n a regular basis to say "this isn't right, we are going about this in the wrong way, we need to so this differently".?

MVS.

#7 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6174 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 06:23 AM

Better check those numbers again, Tom.

Yeah. :ph34r:

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#8 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6174 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 06:27 AM

It would annoy you to have interim releases made as quickly as possible, with a goal of eliminating the backlog of bugs and user requests?

No, Re-read my sentence. If the delay was halved between each release, starting with 18 days, 5.04 would have come 2 days after 5.03, the next one 1 day later, the next one 1/2 day....

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#9 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 19 June 2012 - 07:37 AM

No, Re-read my sentence. If the delay was halved between each release, starting with 18 days, 5.04 would have come 2 days after 5.03, the next one 1 day later, the next one 1/2 day....


I'd be thrilled to see 18 days again.

#10 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 11:19 AM

RM 5.00 released 28 Nov 2011 (978 days since 4.00)
RM 5.01 released 16 Dec 2011 (18 days since 5.00)
RM 5.02 released 26 Jan 2012 (40 days since 5.01)
RM 5.03 released 27 Mar 2012 (61 days since 5.02)
RM 5.04 released 09 Jul 2012 (104 days since 5.03)
RM 5.05 released ?????????? (66 days and counting)

#11 texas_nightowl

texas_nightowl

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 15 September 2012 - 01:33 AM

I wonder if the tracking database is mostly a big black hole...especially considering an issue I ran into was actually reported in RM4 and never fixed.

#12 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 16 September 2012 - 08:37 AM

RM 5.00 released 28 Nov 2011 (978 days since 4.00)
RM 5.01 released 16 Dec 2011 (18 days since 5.00)
RM 5.02 released 26 Jan 2012 (40 days since 5.01)
RM 5.03 released 27 Mar 2012 (61 days since 5.02)
RM 5.04 released 09 Jul 2012 (104 days since 5.03)
RM 5.05 released ?????????? (66 days and counting)


A good business model would expect to see both measures decrease over time.


How about we go back to an old business model of a new version release every year and the man gets paid for his work, well at least by those who have the registered version and not RM Essentials. ;)

RM4 was the exception in this and I made my thoughts and expectations very clear during that time, however I believe the Rootsmagician has now settled his debt to the loyal users for that unfortunate little incident.

“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#13 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 02:35 PM

The previous RM5 record for days-between-minor-and-insignificant-but-you'd-think-they-could-find-SOMETHING-to-fix-releases has now been shattered:

RM 5.00 released 28 Nov 2011 (978 days since 4.00)
RM 5.01 released 16 Dec 2011 ( 18 days since 5.00)
RM 5.02 released 26 Jan 2012 ( 41 days since 5.01)
RM 5.03 released 27 Mar 2012 ( 61 days since 5.02)
RM 5.04 released 09 Jul 2012 (104 days since 5.03)
RM 5.05 delayed 23 Oct 2012 (106 days since 5.04)

#14 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 03:49 PM

RM 5.05 delayed 23 Oct 2012 (106 days since 5.04)


You must be using the wrong algorithm, I calculated mid December. :)

“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#15 snowathlete

snowathlete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 04:56 PM

As an expert in software development processes and release management I'd say that anything close to 90 days is optimal in this market. With significant bugs being fixed in between. Of course, if you are releasing some bug fixes in between then you might chose to release new completed functionality alongside. Particularly in a scenario where you aren't trying to buildup an acceptable mass of new functionality so that you can charge customers a small fee for a minor upgrade.
In my experience, the challenge is usually getting down toward 90 days, not up to to it. So long as the gap doesn't continue to increase too much further between releases, I don't really see how anyone can complain.

#16 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts

Posted 23 October 2012 - 07:01 PM

As an expert in software development processes and release management I'd say that anything close to 90 days is optimal in this market. With significant bugs being fixed in between. Of course, if you are releasing some bug fixes in between then you might chose to release new completed functionality alongside. Particularly in a scenario where you aren't trying to buildup an acceptable mass of new functionality so that you can charge customers a small fee for a minor upgrade.
In my experience, the challenge is usually getting down toward 90 days, not up to to it. So long as the gap doesn't continue to increase too much further between releases, I don't really see how anyone can complain.


Bug fixes should not be on any "schedule".

#17 snowathlete

snowathlete

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 63 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 06:12 AM

Bug fixes should not be on any "schedule".


Thats true for significant bugs, but in many processes new releases have associated overheads. So its often not worth doing a new release solely for small bugs. That being said if a release is going out anyway, perhaps for new functionality or for other significant bugs, then its often worth rolling up those other less significant bug fixes at the same time.

But It's important to reaslise that releases are usually not without associated costs and so it is to nobodies benefit to incur the cost of these additional overheads. It means that time which could be spent fixing other bugs and developing new functionality (for both the customer and the company's benefit) is spent instead on those overheads.

#18 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3385 posts

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:36 AM

Thats true for significant bugs, but in many processes new releases have associated overheads. So its often not worth doing a new release solely for small bugs. That being said if a release is going out anyway, perhaps for new functionality or for other significant bugs, then its often worth rolling up those other less significant bug fixes at the same time.

But It's important to reaslise that releases are usually not without associated costs and so it is to nobodies benefit to incur the cost of these additional overheads. It means that time which could be spent fixing other bugs and developing new functionality (for both the customer and the company's benefit) is spent instead on those overheads.


All pretty common sense, IMO

“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

It's now time for discretion, trust, patience and support

 

User of Rootsmagic 7.5.9, Family Historian 6.2.7, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#19 zhangrau

zhangrau

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts

Posted 30 October 2012 - 10:02 AM

I think it's time for a different perspective - timewise, that is.
I started my family history project in mid-1988, using a piece of shareware called Genealogy on Display.
I transferred my info to Family Origins sometime after 1990 (my backup files from that long ago have been discarded).
My earliest Roots Magic backup was in August 2003.
I upgraded to RM2 in July 2006; to RM3 in July 2008; to RM4 in April 2009; and, to RM5 in November 2011.
Based on this, I'm anticipating (NOT expecting, which is an important symantical difference) that RM6 will arrive mid-to-late 2013.
My two most-active databases include 300K and 500K individuals. My current computer is an ASUS laptop with an Intel i7 processor, 12 GB of RAM, and 1.25 TB of hard drive space. Keeping my files maintained (run the Database Tools every few days to re-index and compact the databases) helps to keep the databse performance reasonable. It seems I've never been able to afford the computer that waits on me, instead of me waiting for the computer....
Thanks to the Roots Magician for a "simply mahvelous" tool !!!

#20 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6174 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:13 PM

When should we expect version 7, Ludlow Bay?

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.