Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Parallels Desktop for Mac' started by Stevamundo, Mar 17, 2007.
Where has Parallels said that 3186 & 3188 are official releases?
I think it's implied, rather than being verbose. Those two builds have graced / is gracing the download section as non-beta / non-RC releases, hence 'official'. To say it's not 'final' simply means Parallels will release more builds under 2.5 version number as they are deemed stable. It's like how we had 7.0.x releases of iTunes and whatnot. the last x has changed but each 7.0 release was official. Parallels simply uses build number instead of the third digit.
3186 was there also.
Again, Parallels just doesn't put their betas or their RCs on this page.
thank you for your answers, they are correct.
Allow me to explain a bit further.
To provide clear understanding, I will take MS release strategy
1. Beta release
3. Final release
4. Updates like cumulative packs and so-called Service Packs
Adding those to your WinXP Pro does not make it Vista
Parallels does exactly the same. Only different term is used - Builds.
Just to beat it to death...
Versions are based on feature sets. If you pick up a brochure for version 1.0 it will have a different feature set than version 2.0. Revisions are corrections to versions. They improve the version without extending it's features.
But here's where Parallels breaks with tradition - they do add features within a cycle which is why we saw the sudden emergence of coherence, boot camp integration, and the Kaspersky AV tools. They get a bit of creative license because this happened during a beta/RC period, but it is irregular.
Many of us would like to have seen the effort go into improving stability, but sitting out here in Userland we're not privy to the design goals and priorities (but we certainly have our own priority tree). And one has to consider the nature of software development by coordinated groups. Various groups are assigned certain modules and if a module is ready for Beta, RC, or release, in it goes. The people on the helpdesk feel the brunt of the customer acceptance
I'm glad that we got that settled.
But wait - there's more!
The whole point of versioning and blockpoint releases is to establish the basis of a purchase agreement. That is a contract and contracts are based on understandings. If a particular version did not have an established feature set (promises) there would be no basis for warranty and that would break a zillion federal and state regs at least in the litigious USA. I'd hate to think what would happen in the even more litigious EU where the "Nanny state" approaches perfection.
And now, as they say, you know the rest of the story.
To Tom Riddle, Resolver, and other Parallels folks
It is REALLY good to see you on these forums. Thanks mucho
But you Parallels people must have the same problem we all do: a ton of duplication (and sometimes contradictions) between threads.
Is there any way to mark certain threads "official" for discussions of particular problems and release announcements?
I have to agree with everyone else. It is great to see more activity from Parallels Support Staff on the forums. I, myself, have not been an active member, but I have mined a wealth of information from the forums when I have run into trouble.
It is my pleasure and honour to be here and try to move the things from ..uhh.. current position
As for your "certain threads marking" idea - It is my opinion, that current forum structure and content structure is not what we all require. I will open a new thread regarding this issue in General Discussions board.
Why does Workstation not get any beta versions like Desktop does?
Did you say this once before?
That is pure BS.
I've been waiting 7 days fo ra response from your "support team"
And they don't answer the hard questions.
It's hollow commitments like this, that have gotten people so disenchanted with Parallels.
can you please explain what do you mean by this?
Some questions just cannot be answered just right after they have been asked either on forum or in E-mail support system. Bug fixing takes a considerable time as you may guess.
Hollow commitments? Not sure, that I understand what do you mean by that. Mind to comment?
BS eh? You mean Brave Statement?
Provide me with your ticket ID or PD registered email via private message here, so I can find your case in our Support System and sort it out.
P.S. It would be very nice of you to avoid being rude, even if you are not in good mood.
I never heard, that swearing was a solution to any sort of problem.
Between October 2006 and March 2007, there was not a Parallels person to answer any questions, bar what was literally a handfull of exceptions. And as for the hard ones, like where are the Parallels people, or where is my paid for support reply, there was no response at all.
As for hollow commitments, where is the forum thread you spoke of starting? Granted you are only new here, so have not had the benifit of seing this sort of thing before. So you'll have to take my word for it, it has happened a number of times in the past.
I have to agree with Constant, in times past when I would look at the forums to fix an issue, I would rarely see assistantance from Parallels. Hopefully this is a thing of the past, current support is certainly very much up from what it used to be.
Tom, hello Tom. Are you there............. hello Tom. Forum thread. How's it going?
Hollow commitment? Or hard question?
And this is what life in the Parallels world is like. Such good potential, such a pitty.
Please answer the workstation questions. Will you please?