why do so many people Beta-tests for windows 7?

[Screwdriver0815]

Hi,

first of all: I wanted to post this in the right category (recuring discussions) but I got a failure message that I am not allowed to do this

so now to the topic:
In the last time I saw lots of threads regarding the new Windows 7 and I came to the conclusion that many people in this forums do actually test this OS. Okay, nothing wrong with that. But I would like to know: why?

Maybe I have to explain a little bit more why I raise this question:

I work in the automotive industry and of course we do all our tests on our own because the customer expects a fully tested and working product which fullfills his needs and expectations.
Never ever would we ship out cars in an early dev. stage and ask people to do Beta-Tests for us.

So in my eyes windows is not an open source product and you get charged for using it (except the Beta stuff). Just like a car. So everybody could lean back himself and wait until he gets the system and if it doesn't work, you get these support guys to work on the issue (like with the car: you go to the dealers and let it fix).
But in this case Microsoft gets many people as testers for free (or do they pay for the testing?), the tester can use the system... yes, thats right... but after a certain testing time you either have to pay or erase it, right?

I mean, Beta testing is okay, but I only would do it when I would get an advantage out of it. So only for open source projects, because the people working on such projects do it, the user gets the system, program, whatever most likely for free and is free to ask for additional features and so on. So in this case, Beta-testing is for the community, but when beta testing Windows, it is for a company and you don't know if they really care for your error reports, feature requests and so on...

so why do you beta test Windows 7? :confused:

cheers

Steffen

[mamamia88]

why not? it's something different worth trying

[scottuss]

Even though I greatly dislike Windows (I'm now an Open Source IT Consultant) I do see why people test Windows 7. I haven't done it, and will never use any Microsoft product on any of my personal machines, but the fact is that Windows is still the most widely used consumer OS and the people on these forums do include regular consumers, they're not all "open source geeks"

Also, some people will probably end up using it (either exclusively or with Linux) for things like games, Photoshop etc and so seeing what will be in the next version early makes sense to them.

(On a side note from what I've read about it and knowing how Microsoft work in general, Windows 7 is just Vista with bells and whistles but that's another story)

[kestrel1]

I beta test Windows 7 mainly to see if it is any better than the previous attempt (Vista). I work in the IT industry, but I do agree with what you say about putting things out on beta.
If MS put all of it's products out without beta testing then there would be many disgruntled users, when there systems start crashing. I do think that MS are trying to be kind to the majority of end users & therefore allow a number of beta testers to help them to help others. Not standing up for MS in anyway, as they should get thew code right first time, but they are not able to test on every single type of computer that thier products may be used on, so the beta test versions are a good idea. Lets face it Ubuntu puts out many Alpha's before the full version is released.
On a personal note I much prefer Linux to Windows anyway, but the above is just my veiwpoint.

[hanzomon4]

Strange I've heard the opposite on these forums... that because foss is free you should just accept what you're given or fix/add to X program yourself.

[linsux]

Hi,

first of all: I wanted to post this in the right category (recuring discussions) but I got a failure message that I am not allowed to do this

so now to the topic:
In the last time I saw lots of threads regarding the new Windows 7 and I came to the conclusion that many people in this forums do actually test this OS. Okay, nothing wrong with that. But I would like to know: why?

Maybe I have to explain a little bit more why I raise this question:

I work in the automotive industry and of course we do all our tests on our own because the customer expects a fully tested and working product which fullfills his needs and expectations.
Never ever would we ship out cars in an early dev. stage and ask people to do Beta-Tests for us.

So in my eyes windows is not an open source product and you get charged for using it (except the Beta stuff). Just like a car. So everybody could lean back himself and wait until he gets the system and if it doesn't work, you get these support guys to work on the issue (like with the car: you go to the dealers and let it fix).
But in this case Microsoft gets many people as testers for free (or do they pay for the testing?), the tester can use the system... yes, thats right... but after a certain testing time you either have to pay or erase it, right?

I mean, Beta testing is okay, but I only would do it when I would get an advantage out of it. So only for open source projects, because the people working on such projects do it, the user gets the system, program, whatever most likely for free and is free to ask for additional features and so on. So in this case, Beta-testing is for the community, but when beta testing Windows, it is for a company and you don't know if they really care for your error reports, feature requests and so on...

so why do you beta test Windows 7? :confused:

cheers

Steffen

Why not? Haven't you ever heard of testing out the latest software? Every computer enthusiast I know has tried Windows 7, just to get a sneak peak at what's to come. People like to play and tinker with stuff, look at all the Distro Hoping people do.

People are obviously interested enough to give it a try.

[monsterstack]

I beta test Windows 7 mainly to see if it is any better than the previous attempt (Vista). I work in the IT industry, but I do agree with what you say about putting things out on beta.
If MS put all of it's products out without beta testing then there would be many disgruntled users, when there systems start crashing. I do think that MS are trying to be kind to the majority of end users & therefore allow a number of beta testers to help them to help others. Not standing up for MS in anyway, as they should get thew code right first time, but they are not able to test on every single type of computer that thier products may be used on, so the beta test versions are a good idea. Lets face it Ubuntu puts out many Alpha's before the full version is released.
On a personal note I much prefer Linux to Windows anyway, but the above is just my veiwpoint.

+1 for this. Testing is extremely important, and all software has to go through lots of it before making it into any distribution, whether Windows, Linux, or otherwise. It's more apparent on a distribution such as Debian, where they have an entire version dedicated to nothing but testing. Then there's Google, whose software stays in Beta forever and ever and ever.

Still, kudos to Microsoft making the beta free. Time was they actually made people pay for the privilege of using the beta Windows, submitting bug reports and such.

[hyperdude111]

I test it to see if its any good and worth using, however after both the RC and Beta i went back 2 buntu

[CharmyBee]

There are also lots who "test" but don't really test but to brag on the internet that they "own" it. Whistler and Vista had the same cycle. Windows 98 doesn't though.

[Screwdriver0815]

so do all of you file bug reports to Microsoft, or do you only try it if it fits to your needs and play around with it?

I know that testing is important but I still don't get the point in doing this for free for a prop. company.
Because as I said: If I would need it, I would buy it and if it doesn't work, the support guys should get it working. Because I have paid for that.


Strange I've heard the opposite on these forums... that because foss is free you should just accept what you're given or fix/add to X program yourself.
but at least you can ask the developer if he could implement feature xy into his program.
For open source projects I would file bug reports (I also did it once and it was fixed after that, based on my report) because I see this as a help and with that as something I could give back.
But I never would do this to a company for their proprietary stuff - they don't want nobody to look at it - so they could fix their stuff on their own. Thats why I have some problems to understand why people do the Beta test for windows 7.

[MikeTheC]

Well... it's not quite the same thing, Screwdriver0815.

Car manufacturers absolutely do beta-test (so-to-speak) every car they release as well as all the other variants and concepts that seem promising. The difference is that normally it's people connected with the designing, engineering and manufacturing who typically test-drive these vehicles for a while.

Would I beta-test a car for a company? Sure! In fact, I wouldn't mind beta-testing cars, model after model and year after year as an alternate to having to even own my own car.

You get the senior people at your car company to contact me and, if we can come to agreement on terms, I'll be happy to beta test your vehicles. Trucks, cars, SUVs, mini-vans... why not?

[gnomeuser]

Examining the competition my good man, aside that if Microsoft produces a good product, considering so many people rely on their software we all win. Better tools for the people.

I would much rather beat an opponent when he is trying his best than when he is limping along with several disfiguring illnesses.

[Screwdriver0815]

Well... it's not quite the same thing, Screwdriver0815.

Car manufacturers absolutely do beta-test (so-to-speak) every car they release as well as all the other variants and concepts that seem promising. The difference is that normally it's people connected with the designing, engineering and manufacturing who typically test-drive these vehicles for a while.

Would I beta-test a car for a company? Sure! In fact, I wouldn't mind beta-testing cars, model after model and year after year as an alternate to having to even own my own car.

You get the senior people at your car company to contact me and, if we can come to agreement on terms, I'll be happy to beta test your vehicles. Trucks, cars, SUVs, mini-vans... why not?
with this opinion you are a very rare example of customer :D most of the people wouldn't do that. And they complain for every single issue... as I would with windows :D

[Warpnow]

Offer me an "in development" car free of charge and I guarantee you I'll accept the position of beta tester.

[lovinglinux]

Because I get bored easily. Ubuntu doesn't require much maintenance and aside from some fixes after an upgrade, there is nothing to fix in this "boring" OS :). Windows is a never ending maintenance experience, ideal for those boring raining days.

[starcannon]

I think a lot of people are beta testing 7 because they are not happy with Vista. I beta tested 7 just so I could learn my way around so that eventually when a client needs help with that OS I won't be clueless. So for me it wasn't that I was beta testing, I was training myself for the next virus magnet.. or would that be magnate? >:)

[blastus]

It is sort of interesting to see what the Borg is up to since Vista ascendancy never happened.

[schauerlich]

By the time I really got "into" computers, I had already bought my MacBook. I've got a decent amount of experience with both Mac OS X and Linux, but I have very little experience with Windows. I'm not naive enough to think I'll never need to use Windows, and I want to be competent with it when that happens. I've been testing Windows 7 for two weeks or so, and besides suspend/hibernate being a bit spotty, it's worked just fine.

[inobe]

something about beta testing a proprietary operating system disturbs me, it almost sounds like a dealer is giving me a taste then charging me for it later, but that's if you find the stuff good in comparison to what we are already hooked on.

[schauerlich]

something about beta testing a proprietary operating system disturbs me, it almost sounds like a dealer is giving me a taste then charging me for it later, but that's if you find the stuff good in comparison to what we are already hooked on.

Would you rather they did it Apple style, where you have to pay a ton of money to get into the Apple Developer Program to get a development version of the next OS, which comes with an NDA?

[monsterstack]

Would you rather they did it Apple style, where you have to pay a ton of money to get into the Apple Developer Program to get a development version of the next OS, which comes with an NDA?

I can't speak for him, but my guess would probably be no.

[.Maleficus.]

and you don't know if they really care for your error reports, feature requests and so on...
They do, and that's the point of the betas and RCs. Even if 2% of the people using the beta send error reports, that's a ton more bugs they can work out beforehand.


Also, cool tags guys. You never cease to amaze me.

[cookieofdoom]

I beta test 7 because Vista is so bad. I need to have a version of Windows on my laptop. I don't want to buy XP. I don't like Vista... 7 is the perfect solution. I may switch back to Vista when my beta ends or I may buy 7, depending on the press it's getting and how much it costs to upgrade.

[pwnst*r]

"testing" includes giving/sending feedback which i'm sure 99.37% of those that are using it on these boards are not doing.

[justjoshingyou]

We don't want the next "Dominant OS" of the whole world to suck any more than it already does.

[pwnst*r]

"just joshing"

[monsterstack]

We don't want the next "Dominant OS" of the whole world to suck any more than it already does.

Why the hell not? It's important to be aware of the competition if you're a developer, but for average Linux users, how good Windows is or isn't shouldn't make a difference.

[MikeTheC]

It is sort of interesting to see what the Borg is up to since Vista ascendancy never happened.

Well said!

[MikeTheC]

We don't want the next "Dominant OS" of the whole world to suck any more than it already does.

Well, actually, I wouldn't have a problem with that. The more customers Microsoft can hemorrhage to both Apple and F/OSS, the better for the general public. I'm all about breaking their hegemony.

[Depressed Man]

Because I like to beta-test things.. even when it's not smart *cough* Alphas *cough*

[Screwdriver0815]

We don't want the next "Dominant OS" of the whole world to suck any more than it already does.

can you explain that? Why do you want that the next dominant OS sucks less than its predecessor? Why?

If someone does not do his work in the right way he will either get in trouble or lose completely.
My comparison in car industry: GM, Chrysler.
Their products suck (maybe not, but the company leaders suck for sure) - they lose, nobody is there and says: "I'll tell you for free in my spare time how to lead a company so that your products don't suck anymore."
Only the american taxpayer has to pay the bill... but thats a different story...

Why is it different in the software/ computer industry?

I mean of course most of the people do not actually test it and file bug reports and so on. They play around with it and maybe buy it later on.
But also here: why? Okay for the testing reasons but when you are satisfied with the OS you are using now, why test another one which you have to pay for?

Being bored is a good reason :D - the only one, I understand until now :D