Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[modelmaker]

I think the lesson learned for future versions is to keep the beta process closed to the general public and stick with it until release. That means you need to be more of a hard ass in that respect, Jim!

[KingSparta]

I think the lesson learned for future versions is to keep the beta process closed to the general public and stick with it until release.

That Maybe good, but what if JimH left you out Of The Beta Testing, How would you feel?

I Know My Eyes Would Water Up A Bit.

I personally Think That reporting of bugs should be an added feature of the "help" option in MC, In the format and the information JRiver Requires To Help Them Find And Fix The Bugs.

Submitted to a Beta forum, And Topics Can Only Be Added thru the Bug Submitting Format Form in MC.

This Will cut Out All The Other Posts That Has Nothing To Do With Beta Testing And Bugs.

[modelmaker]

Well, if the beta were private/secret, then I wouldn't know that I wasn't invited until it was released . If I knew I wasn't invited, of course I would be dissapointed, but I would certainly get over it. MC 's too good to get bent out of shape because you didn't get invited to the beta party.

I assume I got invited because of my post numbers, (I have been here a while) and as a long time user of MC, not my computer tech expertise, (I don't have much), so, yeah I would be dissapointed, but not insulted if I were not invited to the beta party next time.        

[hit_ny]

I personally Think That reporting of bugs should be an added feature of the "help" option in MC, In the format and the information JRiver Requires To Help Them Find And Fix The Bugs.

you mean like a form ? with a ticket# that could be tracked.

Hmm..that would work if it was triaged, so similar bugs could be put together.

But i'm not sure whether it would necessarily be better and as easy & informal than the current practice. Do you like filling in forms ?..or would you rather put it in your own words in a loose format and see what others think.

The forum has a way of bubbling the hottest problems to the top. It's self sorting. It's also where all the latest news is.

Delaying releases, might catch the very important bugs, but what about the others, many times a fresh set of eyes can be revealing, some one that is new to the product sees things that the more experienced miss.

JRiver have been building and releasing early for many years. This has worked i think rather well. It might frustrate the odd few who would prefer to only have a finished product like they do with other companies. At least this way you have some hope your requests might be incorporated into a future build.

I think that thought is what keeps people coming back, which contributed to the almost cult like following you have around this product.

Would you check Interact all that often if there was nothing new to play with ?

[Rob L]

Would you check Interact all that often if there was nothing new to play with ?

Well, to be honest, I'm unlikely to be reading or posting here now - I just won't have any reason to.

There were a couple of bugs I was helping some of the developers with, and they're not fixed in the latest available build. I don't have access to any others, so I can't help with/test those now.

I don't really have any other reason to be here to be honest - the stuff that works, works. I don't really have any need to discuss that personally.

[glynor]

But i'm not sure whether it would necessarily be better and as easy & informal than the current practice. Do you like filling in forms ?..or would you rather put it in your own words in a loose format and see what others think.

The forum has a way of bubbling the hottest problems to the top. It's self sorting. It's also where all the latest news is.

Delaying releases, might catch the very important bugs, but what about the others, many times a fresh set of eyes can be revealing, some one that is new to the product sees things that the more experienced miss.

I agree completely.  In fact, when Jim split this posting off from the original thread, he didn't include my original "hard ass" comments for some reason, but they came down to:

I'm not sure this will be a good idea.  It will solve the problem of people who really shouldn't be using Beta builds screaming "OMG I just installed the new build and it completely broke my computer and I paid for this and OMG I'm so ticked!", but I think it will create a bunch of new problems.  I said:

My opinion is, if it's beta, call it beta and tell people THIS IS UNSUPPORTED BETA.  If you bought it, you did so at your own risk, and you can always roll back to earlier builds or MC11.1 if it isn't working well for you.

To which Jim replied essentially "We tried and witness the outcry."

And I said:

Oh, I know why you're trying it!  You're just not enough of a hard ass.   

That said -- I do understand why they want to try this.  Jim stated clearly that it's an experiment, and it might not last.  (Oh, and BTW, you're only missing a bunch of problems with the builds since 130 -- stuff crashing, installers failing, etc -- so don't be too jealous.)

[Rob L]

To which Jim replied essentially "We tried and witness the outcry."

Was there really an outcry?

I actually only ever really noticed 'feedback'. OK, perhaps some of it was a bit more 'aggressive', but unfortunately you always get that; I thought it was very much the minority of the feedback, though (although I don't claim to be intimately familiar with all postings!)

[BartMan01]

People need to understand that beta MEANS beta.  Betas NEED to be used by the widest user base possible to shake out all of the important issues, and I personally like the way J River does it.  There is a sometimes a fine line between arguing passionately for a feature/fix and complaining that BETA software is not 100% all the time (and that things break from build to build).  The only way to handle it is to remind people that this is a BETA, and if they are not willing to deal with the inevitable issues then they need to be on v11.

[KingSparta]

Betas NEED to be used by the widest user base possible to shake out all of the important issues

Yes, not all users boot up MC Every day like i do and many of us That Chat from time to time in the forum (I can't see a day i have not used MC in the past 7 or so years, even when I had a kidney stone i booted up MC, if you have ever had a kidney stone, the only thing you want to do i hold your side and take controlled medication, morphine would have been nice)

And not all of us have the same chip set, sound board, Blaaa, Blaaa, Blaaa

[Doof]

The biggest problem I'm having as a beta tester is that everything I use MC for works, so nothing to report.
 
Then for the things I was pushing for (SDK improvements), I was told it wasn't going to happen, so... what to do now?

[aksdb]

What about a semi-closed beta? As I understand, it was closed again because too much users made (unnecessary) trouble because they had problems. So a solution would be if one had to sign up to join the "beta team" or "beta testers". That can even be automated, but one would have to explicitly say: "Yes, I'm aware that this is BETA software and I use it at my OWN risk to help improve this already great bit of software."
That would at least satisfy users like me who do not have a post count > 10000 but are also using this software on a daily basis. I just find it a bit strange that the beta testers are chosen from how much activity they show in the community which does not necessarily say something about how they use the software.
By the way, a bug tracker like mantis or bugzilla would also make the beta testing process a lot easier for both sides. That could be coupled with signup process for beta testers I suggested

[KingSparta]

I just find it a bit strange that the beta testers are chosen from how much activity they show in the community which does not necessarily say something about how they use the software.

Thats Actually Not How JRiver Picked Users. If you were reading the forum, JimH first put up a post asking for users to nominate users into the beta program.

I had the Idea to Do About 2 hours worth of spreadsheet work on searching out the users who have been most active, and that have been recently active within the forum. I then posted a list.

Jimh May or may not have selected users that was on that list, and other users that were nominated including ones he and the JRiver Crew selected.

It is hard to work with information you don't have, a user who posts only a few messages may mean he\she does not use the program all that often and or will not participate in a active dialog in the forum.

That may not be true, but then again it might.

I don't think any slide rules were harmed when the nomination of users was open.

I think JimH has always been open to user comments now and in the past, and I don't see his mind closing in the near future, unless he does not pick the correct gift for Christmas.

[wilfredjg]

King I agree with your last reply. Jim H owns JRiver I love using Media Center  it does everything I want it to do. Its up to Jim and his staff to pick who is on the Beta Team. I will be checking back for a new version when it is released I will download it. If i see a problem with how I use the software I will post the problem I see and not get mad because no one reply. Its Beta.

[slipknot]

Was there really an outcry?

I actually only ever really noticed 'feedback'. OK, perhaps some of it was a bit more 'aggressive', but unfortunately you always get that; I thought it was very much the minority of the feedback, though (although I don't claim to be intimately familiar with all postings!)

I'm a bit ticked at how it worked out.  I did pay for v12, and I reported a number of problems, some were fixed and others are being worked on, and some will not be fixed and/or changed.  If I was part of the problem with the public beta, I do wish they would tell me, just as FYI.

However, it's not a big deal, and I'm sure the development staff is struggling with how to provide public access to the beta without creating (real or imagined) obligations that the beta always work perfectly.  So they tried total access and it must have become more trouble than they gained.  They try new features and keep some and get rid of some, and I just figured that the access is also in "beta", easy come, easy go...

By blocking access after being public, they have quieted whatever they needed quieted, and they have also lost a number of good meaning users, life is full of trade-offs.

In the end, when I paid for v12 there was no contract, no stated access and this is their program and their company.  I'll get v12 when they are done. 

I know at my company, there is no way in hell, we would ever do a public beta, ever.

At this time, I see no point in checking this forum very often or reporting any bugs or issues with the public v12, since I have no idea if it's already fixed.

[glynor]

I'm a bit ticked at how it worked out.  I did pay for v12, and I reported a number of problems, some were fixed and others are being worked on, and some will not be fixed and/or changed.  If I was part of the problem with the public beta, I do wish they would tell me, just as FYI.

I don't know, I can't speak for JRiver, but I seriously doubt that you were a part of the problem.  You've always seemed helpful and insightful, and genuinely concerned over making MC a better product for all of us.

If It Were Up To Me (and it isn't) I'd Nominate You To Join The Beta Team.

[hit_ny]

However, it's not a big deal, and I'm sure the development staff is struggling with how to provide public access to the beta without creating (real or imagined) obligations that the beta always work perfectly.  So they tried total access and it must have become more trouble than they gained.  They try new features and keep some and get rid of some, and I just figured that the access is also in "beta", easy come, easy go...

My point was that they had the total access thing for years and years

Is MC12 really that different from its predecessors in this regard ?

If there are certain areas being worked on or planned for MC12, that the developers think are tricky and would be better served by a smaller group then i'm cool with that. It's new territory so a more guarded approach might well be the better way to go about it.

[NickM]

Thinking back to my purchase of an MC12 license, it was the single fact that the Beta program was an open process, with daily builds, that convinced me to pay up early so as to be part of the process that determined the final outcome of the product.

There may well be an argument for a smaller closed test group, to test specific features that the Beta Team individuals my have more experience with, but the greater scheme is to elect a wider review using different platforms, different levels of understanding and differing reasons for use.

For those of us who fall into the latter category, the incentive to contribute daily to the development process is to have new builds to install & test.  The incentive having been removed, means that there will no doubt be less useful contribution from the ‘larger’ beta user group.

This may well be sensible as a option, but I sense that the development manager has the process absolutely back-to-front.  You should start a beta test with a small user group, and then, when ready, extend the beta group to a larger number of users.

Having been part of the group and then being removed will irk some, but more importantly, will dissuade useful contribution to the forum.

[edladner]

I know I would love to access to the daily builds.  I use Media Center at least 6 hours every day.  I am disabled and cannot work anymore.  So I have lots of time to listen to music etc...  Thank you JRiver for saving my sanity. 

BUT!  If Jim and crew can keep a few users from losing data or corrupting something by further testing before releasing a build, I applaud their effort.  Few companys have open betas and even fewer are responsive to users as JRiver.  They did not say we would not get anymore like it was with 12.053.  They merely will only release them weekly or bi-monthly.  I suspect if they have a reliable release that fixes a major issue it would come out even quicker.

I don't post very much.  I do however read a lot of the postings.  I don't see why someone would change that just because they can't get a newest beta.  The 3rd party plugins and development forums have a lot of valuble information.  Don't go away, MC needs more theater view and standard skins.  The new wiki stuff will be an excellent place to post your really good ideas on how to use MC better.

Please forgive my percoset induced rant!

[slipknot]

I don't know, I can't speak for JRiver, but I seriously doubt that you were a part of the problem.  You've always seemed helpful and insightful, and genuinely concerned over making MC a better product for all of us.

If It Were Up To Me (and it isn't) I'd Nominate You To Join The Beta Team.

Thanks for the kind words.  I'm not a Beta Team person anyway, sounds like way too much responsibility, of which I've spent most of my life avoiding....

    I never want to be the responsible person.

    Whenever anything goes wrong,
    the first thing everyone asks is:

    "Who is responsible?"

    I don't ever want to be that person.

[KingSparta]

"Who is responsible?"

Just point to someone else

[Rob L]

I don't see why someone would change that just because they can't get a newest beta.

Well it really doesn't seem to make sense to me to post to the 12.0.130 thread for instance - it's a beta that's been already superceded by another beta that we don't know the details of.

I'm not even going to run 12.0.130 because there doesn't appear to be any incentive to over the version I'm running (12.0.12x something).

I certainly didn't install every beta that's produced - I only tend to install ones that look like they've got something useful or interesting in, or that I can help with.

Yeah, I can post stuff (obviously I am!) but I don't see much point discussing v12 at the moment...