Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I am really not trying to be negative..

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wayne Luke
    replied
    You will probably never see a X.9 release of any version. What if we had named 3.5 as 4.0? 3.7 had enough feature additions that we could have called it 5.0.

    Version number has nothing to do with the life of the software or whether it is done or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark.B
    replied
    Originally posted by Solitaire View Post
    But Mark, you are one of the ones throwing out the "it's only a beta" like it is supposed to mean something to us, when in fact it means nothing now. If it was the case then why didn't we see betas 1-9? Why is it that vb has released alphas to the public before? It means nothing, and it just isn't worth arguing over anymore because we aren't going to gain any clear understanding on the stage of development of the software from it.

    All we can go by is what we know now: that it isn't finished, it isn't production ready, and probably should not have been released in the state it is in.(even Wayne admitted the presentation could have been done a lot better)

    It's only a beta is not a valid excuse.
    I'm not offering anything as an excuse. I'm not here to make excuses for anybody, I'm just a volunteer tester. What I'm giving you is the facts - the beta designation simply means it's public.

    Paul's explained the beta 1-9 thing here.
    Originally posted by Paul M View Post
    Yes, I know, long story, but basically the label got switched last week when the website switch was planned, but technical issues caused it to get postponed.
    Since it was already switched, it was left that way, there have been builds every day (and sometimes more than 1 a day) since then, so the number has quickly climbed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Solitaire
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark.B View Post
    No it isn't. It's how things have been done for a while.

    - - - Updated - - -


    Which is precisely what I said.
    But Mark, you are one of the ones throwing out the "it's only a beta" like it is supposed to mean something to us, when in fact it means nothing now. If it was the case then why didn't we see betas 1-9? Why is it that vb has released alphas to the public before? It means nothing, and it just isn't worth arguing over anymore because we aren't going to gain any clear understanding on the stage of development of the software from it.

    All we can go by is what we know now: that it isn't finished, it isn't production ready, and probably should not have been released in the state it is in.(even Wayne admitted the presentation could have been done a lot better)

    It's only a beta is not a valid excuse.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark.B
    replied
    Originally posted by zelnik View Post
    As pointed out by Henrik that is just absolute nonsense made up to protect the embarrassment that is what has been put on show.
    No it isn't. It's how things have been done for a while.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Originally posted by Solitaire View Post
    Its not finished, and they are offering it for sale. bottom line.
    Which is precisely what I said.

    Leave a comment:


  • zelnik
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark.B View Post
    Just to clarify here, it's been stated by Paul M that alpha and beta labels mean something different here.

    Alpha = non public
    Beta = public

    The only reason this is labelled a beta is because it's now public.

    Nobody knows the planned final release date. What you currently see is simply where development is at at the moment.
    As pointed out by Henrik that is just absolute nonsense made up to protect the embarrassment that is what has been put on show.

    It's all well and good to change terminology if you are pioneers in a specific field or have such a loyal customer base that you can get away with it, but alas the train wreck that was vB4 and the year after has removed any possibility for IB to get away with such silly masks of "alpha = internal & beta = external" nonsense.

    I have no problem with Paul, in fact he may be one of the saviours of the product and he's only just towing the company line but really what shower do IB think we as customers came down from? Once we (I) fell for it with vB4 but a second time? you have got to be kidding.

    But that is NOT to say I do not hope for a well rounded final product as I do, but these cheap and tacky money grab attempts have to stop as it just reeks of desperation and greed. If you're going to release an alpha, then do it but as least call it such so people arn't so disappointed when they see an obvious EARLY alpha being masked as a beta product which then the vast majority of people are just going to think "oh god not again"

    Another big 'own goal' for IB and vBulletin in my humble opinion.
    Last edited by zelnik; Fri 14th Sep '12, 3:00pm.

    Leave a comment:


  • Solitaire
    replied
    I think it can be agreed by all that "beta 10" is just a label that was slapped on the software and doesn't represent any kind of accurate naming convention or practice by most software developers. Trying to figure out why or where vb5 is in terms of development by the beta designation is a lost cause right now, so lets just give that up.

    Its not finished, and they are offering it for sale. bottom line.

    Leave a comment:


  • rexxxy
    replied
    Originally posted by HenrikHansen View Post
    When exactly has that been told to be new practice? As far as I can see, as late as May 2012, 4.2 alpha was released to public
    https://www.vbulletin.com/forum/show...-PROD-INSTALLS)

    Honestly, I do not think Vbulletin has any official practice that alphas are non-public and betas public

    This post made me chuckle lol

    Leave a comment:


  • HenrikHansen
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark.B View Post
    Just to clarify here, it's been stated by Paul M that alpha and beta labels mean something different here.

    Alpha = non public
    Beta = public

    The only reason this is labelled a beta is because it's now public.
    When exactly has that been told to be new practice? As far as I can see, as late as May 2012, 4.2 alpha was released to public
    https://www.vbulletin.com/forum/show...-PROD-INSTALLS)

    Honestly, I do not think Vbulletin has any official practice that alphas are non-public and betas public

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark.B
    replied
    Originally posted by zelnik View Post
    Well I had wrote a post about how IB have not learnt anything from the train wreck which was the vB4 initial release and the year after but then I thought actually they have learnt something. This time we got to 'see' the product before buying so for that I am grateful.

    IB supporters are throwing the words "it's a beta" around, IMO it's nowhere near a beta, at best an alpha release and what's worse is it looks like the test site was thrown up in such a hurry it makes my own test site look professional (and it's not lol) and the speed? my god that is the really scary part.

    So IB ; thank you for the 'beta' site, it has helped me decide and that is all I can ask for and I hope the product is something to be proud of when it comes out of beta, otherwise like myself I fear that many of us who have been through the pain of the initial releases of vB4 and possibly now vB5 will almost certainly be off to a competitors product.
    Just to clarify here, it's been stated by Paul M that alpha and beta labels mean something different here.

    Alpha = non public
    Beta = public

    The only reason this is labelled a beta is because it's now public.

    Nobody knows the planned final release date. What you currently see is simply where development is at at the moment.

    Leave a comment:


  • zelnik
    replied
    Well I had wrote a post about how IB have not learnt anything from the train wreck which was the vB4 initial release and the year after but then I thought actually they have learnt something. This time we got to 'see' the product before buying so for that I am grateful.

    IB supporters are throwing the words "it's a beta" around, IMO it's nowhere near a beta, at best an alpha release and what's worse is it looks like the test site was thrown up in such a hurry it makes my own test site look professional (and it's not lol) and the speed? my god that is the really scary part.

    So IB ; thank you for the 'beta' site, it has helped me decide and that is all I can ask for and I hope the product is something to be proud of when it comes out of beta, otherwise like myself I fear that many of us who have been through the pain of the initial releases of vB4 and possibly now vB5 will almost certainly be off to a competitors product.
    Last edited by zelnik; Fri 14th Sep '12, 12:17pm.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lizard King
    replied
    Originally posted by HenrikHansen View Post
    Yes, it was, we have your word for that, according to your statement 24. october 2010, 4.0.8 is beta.
    That can be read here: https://www.vbulletin.com/forum/show...=1#post2062423
    Touché

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexanderT
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • HenrikHansen
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark.B View Post
    4.0.0 was not a beta.
    Yes, it was, we have your word for that, according to your statement 24. october 2010, 4.0.8 is beta.
    That can be read here: https://www.vbulletin.com/forum/show...=1#post2062423

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Right, but a purchase was made, and the product wasn't satisfactory... this was IB's response to my BBB complaint, calling my statement that the software had numerous bugs "vague", which I then sent the BBB the list of reported bugs from JIRA. I was then offered a refund, minus some kind of $25 "processing fee".
    .
    The Company previously addressed Mr. Dotson's petition for a refund in a support ticket he submitted to the customer service section of its website. We provided Mr. Dotson with some options for curing the problems he suggested he was experiencing, including an exchange for a different product. However, he refused to consider the options provided and pressed again for a full refund. His assertions that the software is "buggy" and not "ready for production" are both vague and not supported by the experience of hundreds of other customers who have successfully implemented and used the new software product. And his claims that the Company engaged in "unethical selling practices" are baseless and without merit.
    Initial Response Summary
    His assertions that the software has bugs is vague and not supported by the experience of hundreds of other customers who have successfully implemented and used it.No Refunds.
    The BBB doesn't care if the product is Alpha, Beta, Charlie, or "Gold". All I'm saying, is, if you felt your were mislead about your purchase, beta or not, that is one way you can try to get a refund. The sooner you file the better.

    Now we can get back on topic.
    Last edited by SneakyDave; Fri 14th Sep '12, 11:25am.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark.B
    replied
    Originally posted by SneakyDave View Post
    That's what I did with vB4 when Machol laughed off my BBB complaint about "over 100 bugs" in the product. I documented the URL to the company's own list of vB4 bugs, which was over 200 at the time. I suggest anybody filing a complaint with the BBB do the same to avoid the argument from IB saying that the product doesn't have 100+ bugs.
    4.0.0 was not a beta.

    Leave a comment:

Related Topics

Collapse

Working...
X