>In this day and age, I think 4 months is pretty long, yeah.

Most commercial desktop software, and even web services like Gmail, go on for years on end without an update.

Browsers are always adding crap (like Firefox's nth cosmetic update), they should be stabler too. Once every 6 months or so at worst.

One reason for the 6 week update cadence that Firefox uses was to increase stability by reducing the pressure to include a feature in a release even if it's half baked. If not shipping at release time meant that the feature would be delayed for six months or a year while competing browsers pull ahead, there's a lot of pressure to just go ahead and release, even with known issues.

The approach, in my mind, has had mixed success, but has been a net positive overall. The biggest weakness is that it can be hard to maintain large architectural changes on a branch, which means there's still pressure to ship them in some form. (Though ideally with a configuration option to disable them by default.) Most things aren't like that, though, and for changes with a more controlled scope the six week cadence works very well.

Are you sure Gmail isn't updated often? I feel that they do update it regularly but they don't feel the need to advertise anymore.

>>Most commercial desktop software, and even web services like Gmail, go on for years on end without an update.

Yes, and I'm saying that's too long. I don't like waiting months or years for fixes or new features.

I also stated that this is my personal opinion. Not sure why people are downvoting.

I'm finding it hard to see where people are coming from with this complaint, though you're in good company so I assume there's something to it. But what features? What bugs?

Sublime seems to have a well-defined aim and to be resistant to feature creep. It's doing a good job of meeting that aim, so I'm happy with it only changing as needed to keep up with like, high DPI monitor support or other things that would actually make it unusable.