I noticed that for many client software for on-line services, like ICQ and Napster, only a beta version is available. This is understandable if the beta were pre-1.0 version, but many of them are beta versions for 2.0 or higher. Has the meaning of “beta” changed? If not, why can’t I download a stable (realeased) version of 1.0 instead of a beta for 2.0?
“Beta” has seemingly taken on the meaning of “If it screws up, it ain’t our fault.” Also known by it’s original adage: “Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.” It’s also a mostly obsolete taping format.
a 2.0 version of software still has to be beta-tested just like the 1.0 version. why would it be different?
so, no. the definition has not changed.
My point was that some sites have, say, 2.0 beta 5 available for download and nothing else - no release versions at all. Shouldn’t I be able to choose between 1.0 (or 1.5) release version and a 2.0 beta version? It’s as if they never bother to finish one version before starting work on the next one.
I just got back from two weeks in San Jose. From my (very) limited perspective, this is may be a common SOP.
Just a WAG, but, in Napster’s case, they may not want the revenues until the cases are settled. It’s bad enough to be pirating software without profiting from it.
Most companies I know of will post at least the last non-beta version of the program (if there is one). Napster is an interesting exception. I’m sure if you e-mail them they’ll send you 2.0.
As for SPOOFE Bo Diddly’s “If it screws up, it ain’t our fault.”, it’s more like “if it screws up, tell us now, or we won’t fix it before the next version”.
I think that software oftens stays in beta version because official releases require more problem resolution resources and have more liability than beta versions. And there isn’t a lot of incentive to take that last step with free software.
Most software goes through two major test phases. The first one involves alpha versions which are pretty much tested in-house exclusively. The second one, beta versions, are usually tested by certain out-of-house clients, though more and more vendors are making beta versions available to everyone. When software makes a release version, it usually has gone through formal quality assurance validation and ideally documentation and user support is in place. Before formal release the documentation is often sketchy and trying to train a team of support people is impossible because so many of the problems are undergoing investigation/resolution and not a lot of this is written down in one central place, if at all. Plus the nature of the problems in beta keeps things pretty transitory for quite awhile, again making it next to impossible to have user support in place.
Those companies that do offer both beta and release versions typically offer the beta version for free and make you pay for the release version. Or if they don’t make you pay for the released product upfront, they suggest you register and pay some fee that then entitles you to customer support.
ICQ and napster make their money not from selling their product itself but from other tie-ins to their product so they aren’t going to spend anymore on a product they are giving away than they have to.
scr4, mostly because the manf. doesn’t want to tech support it any more.
Netscape has a FTP site where you can download all the previous versions. You could get a stable version 1 of ICQ, if there was such a thing, from searching FTP sites I suppose.
True, the companies I mentioned don’t make money selling software, so I guess that is a reasonable explanation. I just found it strange that there is enough incentive to write the software in the first place but not enough to finish it.
Another disturbing possibility is that users today value features over stability, and given the choice, everyone would download the latest version instead of the older stable version. This ain’t so, is it?