[selowitch]

The web seems to abound with articles like this one. If I don't know when it was written, how will I know if the information contained therein is timely and relevant?

[zro]

What I really hate is when a Mac developer only versions their software according to the @&$#* cutesy cat nickname. That tells me absolutely nothing, especially when dealing with older systems.

[Big Mac]

I have never seen that before, zro.

Dating and some type of automatic versioning should have been built into web from day one. Too bad it wasn't.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by zro 

What I really hate is when a Mac developer only versions their software according to the @&$#* cutesy cat nickname. That tells me absolutely nothing, especially when dealing with older systems.

Well, it gives you some idea.

Code:
Cheetah = 10.0
Puma = 10.1
Jaguar = 10.2
Panther = 10.3
Tiger = 10.4
Leopard = 10.5

But you're right, it doesn't give you the sub-version and it is probably hard to remember which is which. Also, if I may say so, I consider your remark to be rather off-topic.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

Well, it gives you some idea.

Code:
Cheetah = 10.0
Puma = 10.1
Jaguar = 10.2
Panther = 10.3
Tiger = 10.4
Leopard = 10.5

But you're right, it doesn't give you the sub-version and it is probably hard to remember which is which. Also, if I may say so, I consider your remark to be rather off-topic.

Fortunately, you're above continuing an off-topic conversation.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Fortunately, you're above continuing an off-topic conversation.

How is that fortunate?

[Laminar]

Really?

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Really?

Maybe you meant to say "unfortunately." Either way, it's not inappropriate for the thread starter to address an OT issue while pointing out that a recent post is, in fact, OT.

[Laminar]

You're right, I was accidentally sarcastic.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

You're right, I was accidentally sarcastic.

Whatever. Any hope of returning to topic, or is this thread dead now?

[Chuckit]

Yes. It's especially bad when I'm looking for some info on something that just happened, and an article comes up that seems relevant, and I don't realize it's about something similar that happened a while ago until I get to the end and it's like, "Newly elected President Bill Clinton is expected to deal with this Monday."

[selowitch]

Sometimes you get lucky and a thoughtful person has put the date of publication in one of the page's meta tags, e.g.:

Code:
<meta name="date" content="February 28, 2002">

but that's unusual.

[zro]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

Well, it gives you some idea.

Code:
Cheetah = 10.0
Puma = 10.1
Jaguar = 10.2
Panther = 10.3
Tiger = 10.4
Leopard = 10.5

But you're right, it doesn't give you the sub-version and it is probably hard to remember which is which. Also, if I may say so, I consider your remark to be rather off-topic.

I'd consider it somewhat on-topic in that my example is other useful information that should be on a page. Release dates are often left off as well. But I use OmniWeb which will show the mod date of a page. Not really helpful for content pulled from a database, though.

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

The web seems to abound with articles like this one. If I don't know when it was written, how will I know if the information contained therein is timely and relevant?

Poor example - those tips on money management and building good credit are absolutely timeless. It'd be like expecting an article on using condoms to prevent the spread of STDs to be dated, lest you be unsure whether or not the information is relevant.

[olePigeon]

<meta name="date" content="February 28, 1993">
<download Mosaic to view this page with pictures>
<best viewed with Lynx>

[Art Vandelay]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

Well, it gives you some idea.

Code:
Cheetah = 10.0
Puma = 10.1
Jaguar = 10.2
Panther = 10.3
Tiger = 10.4
Leopard = 10.5

But you're right, it doesn't give you the sub-version and it is probably hard to remember which is which. Also, if I may say so, I consider your remark to be rather off-topic.

They give the subversion. Each Mac OS X release is "Mac OS X v10.x Cat name." Most people just don't say the version number but it's officially there.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

Poor example - those tips on money management and building good credit are absolutely timeless. It'd be like expecting an article on using condoms to prevent the spread of STDs to be dated, lest you be unsure whether or not the information is relevant.

I disagree, as would most people who have actually read the article. As the writer herself explains, the advice on maintaining good credit has changed dramatically over time, and therefore not "timeless" as you suggest. Knowing the pub date would have given the reader needed context for that advice.

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

They give the subversion. Each Mac OS X release is "Mac OS X v10.x Cat name." Most people just don't say the version number but it's officially there.

By "they," I meant the folks annoying the poster by referencing the cat-name. I should have made that clear instead of simply saying "they."

[shifuimam]

I guess I'm just not seeing in this case how knowing the date would be remotely relevant. All I'm seeing regarding the passage of time is that your FICO score isn't hit the way it used to be by seeing a credit counselor. Other than that, the only thing about credit advice changing is because the scoring process has become more transparent. I don't think this advice will be changing - ever.

Why? Because what she listed is timeless. Regardless of whether it's forty years ago or a hundred years in the future, you should always pay your bills on time. You should never max out your credit cards. You should never spend more than you make. You don't need fifty credit cards open, even if you don't use them. You should always pay off your debts as quickly as possible.

I'm just saying, in the context of advice regarding personal finance and savings, that information is just common sense. It's not going to change. An article advising investments in gold and bond funds is certainly date relevant, since such investments are unreliable in the long term.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

I guess I'm just not seeing in this case how knowing the date would be remotely relevant.

Emphasis in the following two quotes are mine:

Originally Posted by the article

We used to tell people to close accounts they weren't using. Now here's the word from direct from Craig Watts, an executive at Fair Isaac & Co., one of the leading credit scorers: "Closing accounts can never help your score, and often it can hurt."

Originally Posted by the article

New glimpses into the once-secret process of credit scoring have made it easier than ever to improve your credit -- and reversed some of the advice we personal finance journalists once gave consumers about managing plastic.

Without a date on the article, it's hard to know if the advice has changed yet again or whether the advice contained therein is still current. All we know is that it is possible for it to change and even completely reverse.

To put it simply, if the article were marked "1966" (presumably in that case published nearly 25 years before the advent of the World Wide Web but reproduced later) would you be more or less likely to follow its advice today than if it were marked "2008"?

Yes, some of what the article says is likely to have always been true and will remain true, but clearly not necessarily some of the key points she makes.

[King Bob On The Cob]

You can always try the age old

javascript:alert(document.lastModified)

as a bookmark, but it's not as useful anymore.

[brassplayersrock²]

That article must get very lonely on Friday nights