|reply to jc100 |
Re: Wouldn't Know
Yeah, because this isn't like, a beta release or anything.
Well I know its a beta, but still. Wouldn't YOU WANT your best foot forward when launching something new to the public? I would, beta or not. I've never understood why companies fail to optimize their products, so Betas serve more as a proving ground than as a let's go back to the drawing board stage. It'd be much nicer for a company to say, HEY this product WORKED pretty well as we thoroughly tested it. Here you try and see, but you probably won't encounter too many issues. We've already done most of the leg work. Unfortunately, these days, companies tend to rush half finished add unproven products out. I guess its a lot cheaper to have the public beta testers tell you the flaws, than pay the coders to trial the things out themselves. Economics I guess. I'm just pointing out my view none the less.
P.S. Betas are good for UI suggestions, I agree. However, I still don't agree about them being the basis for one having to fix 10,000 various flaws. I think companies should do that work prior to release and give their best foot forward as I stated.
I see your point, however this is where your argument falls flat: Google Chrome is open source software. I understand that's not an excuse for "bad software", but the wonderful thing about that is if you'd like, you can create your own version of Chrome using their code, and there's things like bug reports: »code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list
I agree that Chrome has a way to go before it becomes my main browser of choice (mainly extension functionality), but for first hearing about it this past weekend, it's not looking bad so far.
Well, I know it is open source, which allows one to customize it. Still, should one be left REDOING everything do to numerous bugs and flaws? Open source is a great concept and builds community around a program. Still, open source shouldn't be used as a ploy to skipping out on the job. I still think companies need to do more to show their best foot forward when showcasing stuff. I mean, would you want GM to beta a new car that looks good, but the breaks don't always work or it fails to start randomly? Then, GM puts this car to market, telling the consumers you need to check these and other bugs. Have fun? The same goes here, even if its just for show, you want it to be the best show ever. Google and companies can do more to help make their new software less buggy and more of an experience. Once again, my view.
Well, that's kinda why Google doesn't build cars. You're kinda stretching it, don't you think?
|reply to jc100 |
Google has right in their promo that they can only test so much automatically. The did as much automated testing as they could to the browser but they couldn't automate something like the hallmark.com login. That is where the beta comes in. Did you forget to read about it before trying it?
|reply to booticon |
it was KINDA an example only KINDA with the cars. I wasn't stretching just saying that in business, one should always try to show their best side. The better the first impression (beta or not) the more people you win over instantly. First impressions count for everything in life, whether or not we like to admit to it.
|reply to utahluge |
That's the thing, automated. Then they handed it over as a beta to the public. As I said to boot, if I owned Google and I wanted to make a splash, I'd go well ABOVE the automated and have staff test it out for a bit and write down problems. The better you make it before launch (beta or otherwise) the more it shows in your favor. First impressions count and they are the thing that win people over IMMEDIATELY. How many times in life have you gone to a place, had a bad feeling, and LEFT. Everyone has done that. People see this NEW search engine being riddled with problems, and they figure why not stick to time tested ones. Firefox is a great browser, and IT ONLY has 20 percent share of the market. Hence, for Google to win people over, I'd say they'd been better making this beta more of an "experience" than simply find our problems for us type deal via open source community.
TomClancyFreedom Isn't Free
|reply to jc100 |
I wouldn't care if the car was a beta or not if GM offered cars for free I would take and test it but unfortunately they don't unlike Google Chrome which is FREE!
Freedom isn't free!
You're a brave man. If someone offered you an UNTESTED car, you'd really accept. Hell, I know who to call when I want a crash test dummy!! Your career future is looking bright as a dare devil.