Posterous is Not in beta • Hacker News Board

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#11

Post by rantfoil » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 9:01 AM UTC

axod wrote: post #10

rantfoil wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong is being in a perpetual state of beta. If you release software into the world, take full responsibility for it. Saying you're in beta is like blaming your parents for bad parenting when you're 30 and living at home.

People like being first to get something. They like having an invite. They like getting a backstage pass. They like being specially selected to try some Beta software. It's not all about being able to blame bugs, it's also a good marketing strategy to make users feel privileged or important.

This I agree with -- beta has a time and place, and as a marketing strategy it can work. It just feels as though beta is used as a "Oh, my place is such a mess..." kind of excuse.

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#12

Post by Tichy » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 11:06 AM UTC

rantfoil wrote: post #8

Tichy wrote: post #6

That seems a bit silly. What is wrong with testing an application that is not yet 100% finished?

What's wrong is being in a perpetual state of beta. If you release software into the world, take full responsibility for it. Saying you're in beta is like blaming your parents for bad parenting when you're 30 and living at home.

I don't consider the beta to be a release. It is an unfinished state of the product. How do you propose to skip that state? I agree that remaining in beta indefinitely is bad, also, I would not charge for beta software (but it also comes without warranties).

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#13

Post by japiejo » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 11:41 AM UTC

See this passage on BETA stages by 37signals:

http://gettingreal.37signals.com/ch15_Better_Not_Beta.php

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#14

Post by goodkarma » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 12:12 PM UTC

I think "beta" gets a bad rap nowadays because everyone uses it. I mean, GMail has been in "beta" since it launched!

Beta doesn't mean your code is bad, it just means you're not at "version 1.0". There is nothing wrong with launching your app in beta for a few months.

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#15

Post by pierrefar » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 12:18 PM UTC

Being in beta can mean so many things. One good way to use it is define a stage where you're looking for testers prior to launch. Some set ups need to be tested by a number of testers larger than "a handful of friends". They will suggest usability improvements, suggest features, spot typos, break things you didn't think could be broken, etc.

Not to mention that if you impress your beta testers, you'll have them acting like your marketing force at launch.

In the end, a well-run beta can do wonders to the quality of the launched software. So please don't go poo-pooing beta testing. Yes it's an abused term but it's still a good thing for those that know how to do it.

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#16

Post by dcurtis » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 1:50 PM UTC

axod wrote: post #10

rantfoil wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong is being in a perpetual state of beta. If you release software into the world, take full responsibility for it. Saying you're in beta is like blaming your parents for bad parenting when you're 30 and living at home.

People like being first to get something. They like having an invite. They like getting a backstage pass. They like being specially selected to try some Beta software. It's not all about being able to blame bugs, it's also a good marketing strategy to make users feel privileged or important.

Artificial betas for marketing purposes have become extremely annoying.

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#17

Post by subwindow » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 2:13 PM UTC

I agree. I think beta should mean "Not all functionality is complete" as opposed to "Not all functionality is working". There is no excuse to release buggy software. None.

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#18

Post by huhtenberg » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 3:30 PM UTC

> Fuck no. "Beta" is just an excuse to release buggy software and not have to take responsibility for it.

Fuck no. Under conventional ("software engineering") definition, beta is a stage when a product may be missing few features (e.g. complete help system), but when you can already show it to the public. Unstable versions or those missing major features are labeled as alphas if they are released outside of the development or QA. These are typically released in a restricted fashion and are not available to a general public.

Re: Posterous is Not in beta

#19

Post by ALee » Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 4:19 PM UTC

Yeah, it's weird, how people even use the terms pre-alpha, alpha, beta, or beta invite-only. It just seems that if people can get to it, then it's public.