Quote:
Originally Posted by bob_ninja
Certainly the definitions if they ever existed of alpha, beta and GA are now fuzzy. In particular Google's so called "beta" of Google mail doesn't even come close to your definition. Other companies also stray away. Not to mention prototype software that never goes into alpha or beta, but simply starts being used and becomes a finished product over night.
|
Well gmail was actually really beta, remember when you only got into it by invitation? that was beta. A closed user group. However for free services, putting on the beta tag is IMHO just a lame "imunisation technique" that became very popular. If anybody complains that something doesn't work, they just reply "look this beta, see it? so shut up".. I can count up several public (advertisment driven) things that never even plan to get out of beta, because that beta tag has proofen to be so hany to shut up complains.
Quote:
|
The bigger issue is shipping GA product that is missing a significant feature - power management. That is why most/many users simply don't purchase V1, which is what I am doing - wait and see.
|
Exactly regardless how we define beta or non beta. Redoing the iLiad error is IMHO just stupid. I mean one can forgive about the iLiad, the company was new, was over enthusiastic, they made promises they never even came close to fullfill, they shipped a """"beta"""" (under all quotes) device, because they wanted userfeedback for a device they planned to actually sell over partners not themselves. But not in the next generation they just make the same stupid errors again. So tell about having an organisation that is unable to learn.
Quote:
|
To be fair, remember Windows 1.0? How many people used it or complained about its deficiencies? It took Microsoft several versions and years to get to V3.1 and actually make it widely used. And this is from one of the major software companies!!!
|
No, I don't remember Windows 1.0. I'm not so young, but windows 1.0 was before my time, if it was even used by anyone outside of the more narrow microsoft circle. As far I recall, windows 2.0 was the first one really getting any noteworthy attention at all. When I got my first PC (386) Windows 3.0 was on the market, and just going to be replaced by 3.1 and 3.11. Also note that microsoft was not a major software company back then (IBM was) and also I don't consider the microsoft model of making software and business copyworthy. (Software just make it look cool, altough buggy. Business: make partnerships, slurp out all technology, betray partnership) Unfortunally it was pretty sucessfull in our economic world, I really don't thing anyone ethical should make this his role model.
Quote:
|
I would cut some slack here and simply give them time. As for people who bought DR v1.0 .... not sure what to say. I would be angry as well.
|
Indeed, I so want iRex to be a cool company. But this is just yet another major oops. I hope they survive, I hope they can change their organisation in a way they start to be able to learn.But currently I wouldn't be surprised after all, that you cannot hold a business in this way this too long