The normal scheme of version numbering for products seems to work for most developers. Going from 1.x.x to 1.x.x+1 is a minor bug fix; going from 1.x.x to 1.x+1.x is maybe a few new features and bug fixes. In some cases, developers only charge for 1.x.x to 2.x.x updates which makes a lot of sense to me to differentiate the products. That’s how I like to do things. Today I downloaded a new version of a freeware product I was using (I was using version 1.1.2) and when I downloaded the 1.2 version, was extremely surprised to find that it was now shareware ($34). While the developers said that they would be charging in the future, a minor version number update caught me off guard. Furthermore, they didn’t provide release notes on what changed, but instead on first launch, I got an alert to buy it. I poked around for a few minutes and then reverted to the freeware version. I’m not opposed to developers making money, but they should have called it 2.0 and added some additional value to it (or charged money from the beginning). I’m a bit disappointed in this, but on the flip side, it reinforces my desire to write a new application based on ReceiptWallet.