I whole heartedly Second WC1M's comments.
(And I own an Omni VI Plus)
Certain features omitted in the final release will/would cause tears
along the way.
When it is released, use it well.
Nuff said,
Jim K4SQR
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:57:19 -0400 "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
writes:
> I think Bob put it better than I could. I don't need a written
> agreement,
> either. Ask to join the beta test group if you feel you can
> contribute.
>
> Perhaps chaos was too strong a word. Different users have different
> priorities on what should be fixed, enhanced, etc. Judging from past
> traffic
> on this reflector, I can imagine a lot of crabbing about someone's
> personal
> bugaboo not getting fixed or implemented. The contentious tone of
> your posts
> on this subject is exactly what I would expect, multiplied by
> dozens, if
> Orion betas or their contents were to be made generally available.
>
> As I mentioned before, the engineers may try something new on an
> experimental basis, but decide to remove it for the final release.
> Trouble
> is, people will develop expectations about what will or will not be
> in the
> release, and tend not to respond well when their expectations aren't
> met. In
> other words, it's not a good idea to jerk large numbers of people
> around
> during a rapidly changing process like beta testing.
>
> I'm not familiar with AOL's beta testing procedures, but different
> companies
> have different meanings for the phrase "beta test", ranging from
> "hot off
> the press" to "almost fully tested". The "public" beta tests I've
> seen from
> other companies tend to be software that has been vigorously alpha
> tested by
> large teams of QA testers, and then perhaps pre-beta tested by key
> customers. What gets to the public is usually very well debugged and
> the
> manufacturer is trying to flush out the obscure stuff.
>
> Obviously, TT doesn't have the resources to fund a big QA team
> (wanna pay a
> lot more for your radio?) Further, it would be difficult and
> expensive for
> an internal QA team to test every variation of Orion hardware (there
> have
> been engineering changes over time.) Also, I would contend that beta
> testing
> an Orion requires considerably more technical expertise than testing
> a
> release of AOL's software. How many Orion owners out there have
> spectrum
> analyzers, oscilloscopes, frequency counters, etc., and know how to
> use
> them? How would the average Orion owner react to significant
> problems with a
> beta test version? IMHO, not well.
>
> I just don't think it's a good idea to make Orion betas generally
> available
> or pre-disclose what will be in the final release. This requires
> owners to
> be more patient and trusting, but is to their advantage in the long
> run.
> Note that TT has consistently improved the Orion firmware ever since
> the
> initial release. How many times have you gotten an update for your
> Yaesu,
> Icom or Kenwood radio?
>
> It's not my place to defend the practice, but I agree with it. 'Nuff
> said.
>
> 73, Dick WC1M
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Randy K7RAN [mailto:k7randy@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 11:00 AM
> > To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> > Cc: wc1m@msn.com
> > Subject: Re: [TenTec] 565 Orion v2.0 firmware released to beta
> testers
> >
> > Well, if there's no NDA, then there's no secret. I don't subscribe
> to
> > Dick's notion that vigorous reflector discussions necessarily
> provide
> > "distractions" for engineers.
> > In fact, most engineers are familiar with far more malevolent
> > distractions (like those in the executive suites with power who
> issue
> > impossible fatwas) than anything generated by a public affinity
> group.
> > In answer to Dick's "you can imagine the chaos" comment, the fact
> is
> > that I cannot imagine the chaos he suggests; these kinds of
> statements
> > reflect more of patriarchal propaganda than any empirical fact,
> which
> > I will offer
> > here: America Online (and many other companies, for that
> > matter) routinely conducts public beta tests where literally
> millions
> > of people can opt in and participate in vigorous discussions, and
> the
> > "imagined chaos" does not automatically follow. I am certainly
> open to
> > a better defense of this exclusive process than what Dick Green
> > attempted to provide.
> >
> > Randy, K7RAN
> >
> >
> > On Aug 24, 2005, at 10:34 AM, Dick Green WC1M wrote:
> >
> > > There's no written NDA, but the beta testers have agreed to keep
>
> > > information about beta releases and related discussions
> > private. This
> > > is necessary in order to provide an environment in which
> > the testers
> > > and engineers can do their job efficiently with minimal
> > distractions.
> > > It also allows for a certain level of experimentation with new
> > > features that may never see the light of day. You can imagine
> the
> > > chaos that would reign if every pre-release bug/feature
> > became grist
> > > for the public mill.
> > > Discussions among
> > > the beta test group are vigorous enough as it is.
> > >
> > > The Orion beta test group is pretty large and includes very
> > qualified
> > > participants with a wide range of operating interests and
> technical
> > > skills.
> > > IMHO, they've done an excellent job advocating for the interests
> of
> > > the Orion user community, and TT has done an excellent job
> > responding
> > > to problem reports and suggestions. In fact, every issue
> > discussed on
> > > the public reflectors has been the subject of in-depth
> discussions
> > > between the beta testers and engineers before public
> > release of each
> > > firmware version.
> > >
> > > 73, Dick WC1M
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Don Rasmussen [mailto:wb8yqj@yahoo.com]
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 11:59 AM
> > >> To: tentec@contesting.com
> > >> Subject: [TenTec] 565 Orion v2.0 firmware released to beta
> testers
> > >>
> > >> Any ver 1.x owners here to suggest the specific concerns that
> v2.0
> > >> should address?
> > >>
> > >> I expect that receiver lockups should become a thing of the
> past,
> > >> whether the sweep is engaged or not.
> > >>
> > >> What are the other "must" fixes?
> > >>
> > >> Can anyone here using v2.0 report if any specific issue has
> been
> > >> corrected, or are early adopters bound by a non-disclosure
> > agreement
> > >> for the beta test?
> > >>
> > >> -----------------------------------------------
> > >> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> > >> Subject: Re: [TenTec] 565 Orion v2.0 firmware released to beta
>
> > >> testers
> > >>
> > >> Great news, Scott. I wish you few if any bugs.
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Scott K4VWK
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TenTec mailing list
> > > TenTec@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> > >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|