As usual, everyone rushing to Mojang's defense pretty much misses the whole point of the story.
I think Slysnake150 has a point. 1.7.10 is such an insignificant update over 1.7.9 it's misleading to give it the same weight as say, 1.7.2 over 1.7.1. Whether it could have been 1.7.100 or 18.104.22.168 doesn't matter, the OP is just saying it looks strange the way it is.
The OP's post has nothing to do with update significance at all, he was talking about the mathematics of version numbers. This subject has been brought up by many people in the past so this is not exactly new to us veterans. And as far as I can tell no one here was defending Mojang, just correcting an all-too-familiar misunderstanding of what software version identification is about.
As for the subject of update significance that you brought up, the significance of each update is irrelevant to the identifier unless you specifically have a rule / scheme for it. The 3rd number in MC's version identifier is incremented by 1 for every patch to a major release, that's really all there is to it. The one thing you want to avoid in software development is ambiguity, keeping things simple, well defined and discrete is the way to go. When you start trying to "weigh" each update and give it a version identifier based on that you are adding another layer of complexity, one that has no real reason to be there.
Minecraft Forum is the sewer of the Minecraft community.
People who intentionally desecrate a language are no different than griefers who tear things down because they are too immature and undisciplined to create, so instead they destroy out of jealousy.
The rest of the post you didn't quote, as well as the thread title itself, makes the OP's point painfully obvious. 1.7.91 was suggested simply because that is a larger fraction than 1.7.9 (ignoring the 2nd decimal point), in that context 1.7.10 would indeed be smaller than 1.7.9 since a padded zero in a fractional part has no weight: 1.71 == 1.710.
As for the OP's "pain", I really can't see how making a version identification scheme more complicated and inconsistent would help ease it, I would actually be much more worried about the OP never coming back because people jumped on his/her first post in masses for being harmlessly misinformed, but maybe that's just me.
Wow. I believe you just completely and totally missed the point of the Op's post. Take at look at where he say:
"Should be 1.7.91 or something instead of 1.7.10" (emphasis added)
He's not talking about math. You have to feel the poster's pain. His pain is the misleading relative magnitudes of the update numbers, that's all.
The OP says that "1.7.9 is the same thing as 1.7.90" and then goes on to say "so it just really bugs me that the new Minecraft update is technically all the way back before 1.7.2." This shows that OP holds the common belief that update numbers are decimals, since according to the 1.7.9 = 1.7.90 logic 1.7.10 would be 1.7.1, which would be before 1.7.2. That is of course incorrect, as version numbers do not work that way, and 1.7.1 =/= 1.7.10. The point the OP is trying to make, no matter how ludicrous it is, has nothing to do with the "magnitude" of the update that you claim OP was referring to.
The original poster made a statement, not a question.
Stating that in fact, 1.7.10 was incorrect, and made no sense. And as I would have predict, excited people. They in turn responded as I assumed.
This is why one does not, "Drink the Kool Aid, if they don't know the flavor".
Coarse we could have had nice posters just mention that it's not a mathematical number, but this is the internet! Nice (like thinking) is not encouraged.
Carry on internet, carry on!
Or OP could have spent the time they put into making this thread looking up software versioning/version numbers (Wikipedia has an entire page dedicated to the subject and it's the first result in Google searches on the topic) and resolved their own confusion. Besides, the first 4 posts do explain that's not how version numbers work and that they're not mathematical, rendering your sarcastic argument pointless. But carry on!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Spigot/CraftBukkit plugins: TallNether - Generate a 256-block high nether
User: *BOOM* You're dead.
Cleverbot: I divide by zero and come back as an angel ninja.
For those who read this because they actually read comments.
Version numbers are NOT decimals. Every single program has multiple versions, and they don't use decimals like normal math because it IS NOT normal math.
For instance, my Chrome is v.36.0.1985.143
Usually, most programmers use sequence-based identifiers for their programs. It is usually noted as MAJOR.MINOR.REVISION
For example, Minecraft is 1.7.10
The major number is 1, that is it's emergence from Beta's numbering system of Beta 1.X.X. When it went from Beta to Release, they changed the number back to 1 and it now isn't prefaced with anything. Back in Beta, the versions were not "1.2", but rather "Beta 1.2"
A lof of companies prefer to use 0.X for their Betas but that is up to the company. The only time the first number goes up by one is when a MAJOR release change is made, such as the actual release of Minecraft, or a major change in how Chrome is programmed. For instance, in it's lifespan, Chrome has had 36 major updates to it's code.
The second number is the Minor changes in code. This is usually small additions to the program that are not full enough to be a major change or release. For instance, adding biomes isn't something that drastically changes how Minecraft is played, but major enough that it isn't a revision of code. So 1.6 becomes 1.7
The last number (in this case 1.7.9 -> 1.7.10) is a REVISION of code. This involves and and all bugfixes released in that version as well as small changes that are sidenotes instead of actual huge changes. A great example is 1.7.2's bed texture glitch. Now they aren't adding anyhting except for some codes to fix that glitch, however it is technically a release of code. To differentiate between "This is the version that the bed is messed up" and "This is the version where the bed is okay" you have to add a revision number! Hence why 1.7.2 became 1.7.3, then more code made it 1.7.4
Now my Google Chrome is made by a huge company so there are more places to denote changes, but it provided some context.
Minecraft may never actually hit the "Minecraft 2.0" because the games coding would have to be substantially changed and a HUGE part of Minecraft AS A CORE needs to change, such as the change from blocky sprites to complex polygons. Or using magic to dig instead of tools. This is why sequels are made instead of directly making a game "2.0". In fact, when you hear "2.0" you think that something has been changed so much that it is completely different.
Project Zomboid (advertised in the Minecraft Splashes) has upgraded to 2.X because they went from a small map to a large map, completely changed their inventory system, added skills, added experience, changed the lighting engine, added traits and finally changed all of their 2D sprites into actual 3D models. THAT is what you need for a 1.X - 2.X release change, so I don't think Minecraft is going to bump up to "2.0" but keep it going as "Minecraft 1.11.6"
The only other thing you might see is "RC". This means "Release Candidate" and is something that is about to be cleared for release but needs to have more testing done with it until it is up to par. Minecraft had 1.0.0-RC1 and 1.0.0-RC2 before 1.0.0 release.
Instead of posting all that text for the same info, the numbers and period work as a shorthand, much like 08/20/14 represents August 20th, 2014 in the States. (or the Universal 20/08/14 for "The 20th day of August in the year of 2014") Just a different punctuation/symbol to avoid confusion *facepalm*
It's mostly games that work out the bug problem and other issues, have test servers/versions that have this short format. There are games that just release and fix as bugs are reported and instantly release it into the game before testing it, which leads to higher numbers like the Chrome version listed by Damien. The same bug can be "fixed" over and over again, or just have that many problems that generate the numbers like that. It is also easier to look up past versions and bug fixes. Say for instance there is a glitch with a door opening and making a block transparent, it's happened before. Knowing this they type in the 1.version.fix for the last one, and it will show what they did to fix it the last time. There is a change log for each release, version, and update Inspired by the dewey decimal system.
Last I checked, "1.8" was the same-number as 1.0, which I started with - as a plurality of others did, really, too - November several years back. Now we're "reaching" "1.8," again, so to me, it's non-linear, to have Overlap, and re-use, the previous, Numbers.
This is part of the reason I'm not a mathematician: they don't-even notice Overlap, as-such, sometimes; whereas to me Numbers are all abstractions, in Any case. And they always keep moving-on to other cases, but, hey, er heh, that's another Point.
That is not how version numbers work. MOJANG is free to do One.Seven.ten if they want. Jeb has already said that after 1.9 they are going to 1.10.
They've already done that once which makes searching difficult sometimes when I turn up something from version 1.8. From several years ago.
If they are going to keep starting over at 1, I don't see much point of having the "1" there. 1.7 the third time could just as easily be version 7 the third time.