Posted by Hugo Kornelis on 09/16/05 22:55

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 08:39:56 -0700, DA Morgan wrote:

(snip)
> Anyway, from a commercial point of view, it appears
>> to me that Microsoft is doing the right thing. By making betas of the
>> new product available early on, more people get to play it, learn it
>> and know it, and will thus be more inclined to deploy it early on.
>
>Other software companies seem to do well keeping their Betas as Betas.
>I don't see SAP or IBM or anyone else thinking what you describe is
>ethical.
>
>> Since I have never used any Oracle product, I have no experience of they
>> run their betas. I would be suprised though, if they never make any betas
>> publically available, as most software vendors appear to do that at some
>> point in the cycle.
>
>Never. The vast majority of software companies never make Betas
>available to any other than qualified testers that will actuall use
>their software for purposes of testing.
>
>Anyone thinking they can get a copy of Oracle 11 should be prepared to
>buy Larry a new boat. I doubt anything less will put it into their
>hands today or tomorrow.

Hi DA,

Did you google for "public beta" before posting this? I got over 2
million hits. Just the first two pages had links to public beta programs
of (among others) Norton AntiVirus 2006, Novell OpenEnterprise Server,
Macromedia Flash Player, IBM Lotus Notes/Domino 7, and many others.

These companies apparently take quality serious, and take their
customers serious. They use the possibilities Internet offers to ensure
that their products are tested by a number of testers, and on a number
of configurations, that would never be achieved in a closed beta
program.

It's sad to learn that Oracle, apparently, still values secrecy over
quality.

Best, Hugo
--

(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)

[Back to original message]