#PAR backup!
>>Disagree. A proper beta program has at least three things:…
Your utopian wish is noted but the reality is that many companies will "beta"
test their products just the way DPS is doing. ie an informal program of
feedback. I agree with you that a structured beta program is the best way to
do it but the informal approach as in the way DPS operates is at least better
than no testing at all. And, as a matter of fact, Brick did advise us of some
problems when he uploaded the "beta" versions for us to try and evaluate. He
also was present to accept feedback from the forum members as to new problems
and responded to us in public forum comments as to fixes in the works.
As for Microsoft being your shining example???? I can assure you that they are
no different, well maybe their customer relations people are more skilled at
telling you in an arrogant fashion with a smile and charm but it's still
arrogance just the same. I had complained to MS about WFW and the problem with
their Intel ethernet cards not being able to handle the packet load in a
graphics environment for a year and they denied it. After Metcaff published
his article about the problem and that he had been working with MS since the
mid 80's on it did MS finally admit they had a problem with WFW. And, I
believe you were off a bit on the beta program as the figure was more like
50,000 testers. I was one of them. In fact I've been involved with hundreds
of beta test software and hardware and only a handful of these have been formal
testing programs in a structure as you suggest.
As for DPS' specific backup problem I think they are working on it but don't
feel an obligation to report to you their progress.