This document compares traditional annual software release cycles to more rapid six-week release cycles. It finds that the rapid release cycle results in more frequent but smaller releases, with fewer post-release bugs, lower median daily crash counts, higher median uptime, and faster fixing of bugs compared to the traditional approach. However, it also notes that more investigation is needed and rapid releases can lead to a higher percentage of users remaining on outdated versions longer term.

1. 1

2. 2

3. 52 weeks release cycle time 6 weeks release cycle time
30
25
Number of Releases
20
15
10
5
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
3

4. 4

5. Speed Quality
5

6. Case Study
• 20 Alpha • 5 Alpha
• 20 Beta • 5 Beta
• 23 Minor • 6 Minor
• 2 Major • 5 Major
6

7.  Median Daily Crash Count
(lower is better)
 Median Uptime
(higher is better)
7

8. 13 20
Number of Post Release Bugs /
5
4
3
Day
2
1
0
Traditional Release (TR) Rapid Release (RR)
8

9. 250K
Median Daily Crash Count
200K
150K
100K
50K
0K
Traditional Release (TR) Rapid Release (RR)
9

10. 1200
1080
960
Median Uptime in Seconds
840
720
600
480
360
240
120
0
Traditional Release (TR) Rapid Release (RR)
10

11. YES… BUT
More investigations are needed…
11

12.  Fixing time of bugs
(lower is better)
12

13. 100%
90%
80%
70%
% of Bugs Fixed
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Traditional Release Rapid Release (RR) - Traditional Release Rapid Release (RR) -
(TR) - Main Main (TR) - Beta Beta
Main Releases Beta Releases 13

14. 654 159
100
90
80
70
Bug Age in Days
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Traditional Release (TR) Rapid Release (RR)
14

15. 15

16. 16

17. 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0
100%
90% Version8
80%
Version7
% of Stale Crash Reports
70%
60% Version6
50%
Version5
40%
30% Version4
20%
Version3.6
10%
0%
012345678901234567012345678012345601234501234
Weeks since Last Release
Approximately 20% of users remain on a stalled version
17

18. 18

19. 19

20. 20