Board index » delphi » Does DevCo plan to publish beta version of new (2007) products?

2006-10-08 04:31:37 PM
delphi20
Does DevCo plan to publish beta version of new (2007) products? Turbo
Explorer 2007 Beta?
BDS2006 sometimes looks like alpha version with a lot of apparent
blunders <g>(F1 problem is the first, for example). Now (in new era of
free Turbo Explorer) DevCo has a good chance for wide beta-testing with
help of all members of community.
Alex.
 

I used to think that a public beta would be a good idea to get the product
hype going. Now after more thought I think it would be a bad idea. I think
that some people would see this beta product (which I expect would still
have some bugs to fix) and be very vocal about all the things that are wrong
with it. I think the product would then have a bad name before it was even
released, even if it didn't deserve it.
--
Pete
Blessed are the geek, for they shall public class GeekEarth : Earth {}
====
Audio compression components, DIB graphics controls, ECO extensions,
FastStrings
www.droopyeyes.com
====
 

Peter Morris [Droopy eyes software] writes:
understanding between company and customers? <g>
Beta is beta and nothing more.
Alex.
 

When you say F1 problem, what do you mean? Do you mean, putting the
cursor on a keyword in the editor, pressing F1, and you don't get the
Help on that keyword? Works for me everytime.
AlexB writes:
 

That's why it is called a Alpha, Beta, RC, etc.
--
 

"Peter Morris [Droopy eyes software]" writes:
think you got it all wrong.
First off, people know that beta releases are not bug free but have a
reasonable expectation of a beta being more-or-less usable but with some
glitches and some features not available. Sure they will be carping about it
but so what, let em {*word*75}. People who expect to be your customer don't pay
too much attention to beta glitches until you get to the RC releases but by
then you had better be glitch free!
OTOH people have a reasonable expectation of a final release having no known
bugs, after all they are paying money for the product and will demand that
it be fully usable without glitches and if disappointed will be very vocal
in ways that truly injure both the product and the company. People don't
want to buy products from companies that are known for poor quality releases
that require patches and service packs soon after release. I don't know
about you but when that happens to me I say, those SOBs are taking my money
and turning me into their beta testing slave.
Years ago I participated in several closed and very secretive beta test
programs and was usually appalled at the {*word*99} that was sent out to be
"tested". Often even the final test release was full of bugs. I stopped
donating my time out of frustration.
In the past few years I have participated in several open public beta
programs, usually for Microsoft but some for other companies. I always have
a direct interest in the products I test. I jumped on the early VS.NET
public beta to evaluate .NET since the market buzz sounded like something I
might well choose to use in my work. By the time VS.NET 1.0 was ready for
release I had become a convert - glory be, I had seen the light so to
speak.<RBG>
For the past several months I have spent a fair amount of time with WinFX beta
especially the WPF part. It has been a hellishly frustrating beta since WPF
was a real work in progress and it broke lots of code on every beta release
but now that isn't happening any longer and it is kinda like when your thumb
quits hurting after you have hit it with a hammer, oh so good.
Open beta programs are somewhat costly to the company who decides to test
that way but the returns from a successful test are very rewarding.
In summary, IMO if a product is of such a nature that it will be hurt from
bad open beta test publicity, it will be hurt a lot more by really angry bad
publicity and hostile customers when they release the product without
adequate testing. The name of one such company immediately comes to mind...
 

Peter,
products, including such obscure ones as - say - Windows Vista or Visual
Studio...
--
marc
 

"I.P. Nichols" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Coincidentally, last week I received a request from a prospective
beta-tester of a new product of mine. As part of my reply I stated:
"I don't usually let beta-test software out the door until I believe it is
at a standard that others might call 'release-candidate'".
Anything less than this is a major waste of time for both the developer and
the tester. Call me old-fashioned but my understanding of beta-test software
is that the developer has, to the best of his abiities, identified and
rectified any reproducible defects in the software. What remains is for it
to be tested in of variety of unfamiliar environments / systems by
unfamiliar users.
IMO Delphi 8 was alpha quality. D2005 at the time of initial release was
beta-quality and D2006 with both updates and all hotfixes now qualifies as a
release candidate.
 

marc hoffman writes:
wrecks my PC of Vista? I can see the new features in a video just
nicely!
--
 

Chris Burrows writes:
"Does DevCo plan to issue RC version of new (2007) products for testing
in community?"
Alex.
 

"Phillip Woon" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Help content. Try pressing F1 on XPMan or XPActnCtrls in a uses list for
example.
 

Holger Flick writes:
there was in fact much more value in it, apart from looking much nicer. ;-)
 

Oliver Townshend
 

Oliver Townshend writes:
as it kept crashing. So no use in that.
And don't think I am a VS-hater. I have a version by now and there are
many aspects I love about it! I just think the public betas are pretty
much unnecessary. Betas for technology partners are a different matter.
--
 

"Peter Morris [Droopy eyes software]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
released for testing (alpha, beta, or whatever) is not expected to be
representative of release versions.
I personally think that public betas (perhaps even public alphas) would be
a great idea for DevCo to embrace.