The New International Version of the Bible is one of the most common translations used by Christians in America.  It's been around since 1984, and is my personal preference both because of its readability and because of its familiarity (I've been using it since I was a kid).  Just recently (i.e. late 2010) a fairly substantial update was completed and pushed to several digital Bible tools like Bible Gateway, and it went largely unnoticed and unannounced.  Print versions are expected in March 2011. 

Why it's a good thing:  Language changes over time, translation tools change over time, and archeological evidence and scholarly knowledge grow over time.  To ignore these facts puts everyone at a disadvantage, especially when you're depending on 400-year-old language to guide your faith in 2000-year-old facts. 

Why it's a bad thing:  It was sort of secretive and subversive.  Even if the updates and changes are a good thing, most people don't realize they're using a different translation than the one they've been using for over 20 years.  This becomes apparent in small group settings where one person is using a printed copy of the NIV1984 Bible and another person is accessing a digital copy of the NIV2011 Bible with their phone and they can't figure out why their translations don't match. 

How it could've been better:  (a) Announce it, or (b) change the name.  The TNIV (Today's NIV) was released in 2005 and was met with swift and universal criticism, which is most likely why it didn't really catch on.  But the NIV2011 essentially uses most of the changes from the TNIV and adds a few more, but still calls itself the NIV. #religion