If I bring out some software, and then I bring out v1.1, which fixes some bugs
would v1.1 not be both new and an improvement over v1.0?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 10:19, 1 reply)

No.
It would be new.

If you improved 1.0 and still called it 1.0, it would be improved.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 10:21, closed)

If it's improved
it's not the same as the one before it, therefore it is new.

Of course, the improved bit is a matter of opinion.

Windows Vista was new, but . . .
(username failed moderation, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 10:38, closed)

If I make changes to v1.0 it is no longer v1.0, it has become something qualitatively different
any act of improvement would create something "new"
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 10:49, closed)

So you agree with me, then.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 10:59, closed)

I agree with you that if you make a change to a physical thing
Like, say, you tune up a car's engine, then it is improved, but it is not new. Or if you replace the engine it is new, but not improved. However, if we're talking about the formula to make a brand of washing powder, we're into different territory. As soon as you make a change to improve it, it is no longer the same formula. It has become a different formula, which is new. It's also an improvement over the previous formula. Hence, new and improved.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 11:54, closed)

Improved when?
Once improved. Newly improved. Something.
(uncle_bud is not the jelly roll king., Tue 9 Oct 2012, 16:25, closed)

More of the same really
but it isn't, right?
(ed-z, Tue 9 Oct 2012, 12:37, closed)