posted 02-11-2002 12:46 PM         

You're not receiving any money for your time or effort.

Do you do it? What is the defining factor between your yes or no decision? Do you have to be utilizing an earlier version of the software? Are you concerned about downloading these products?

posted 02-11-2002 02:01 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andrew80k:
If not then let them pay some QA folks in house to test it. Put some good QA folks back to work.

---

GREAT POINT!

Do you think that this practice (asking for free betatesting) has had an additional impact on our job market as QA/QC professionals?

posted 02-11-2002 02:11 PM         

------------------
Charles Reace

posted 02-11-2002 02:17 PM           

quote:

---

Originally posted by digits71:
You're not receiving any money for your time or effort.

---

I receive no money for posting here either and yet I (and many others) do it routinely to try to help others. And that takes, sometimes, a lot of time and effort as you respond to many posts. So just getting paid or just not wanting to use time or effort is not enough for me in all cases to dismiss beta testing.

With that said...

quote:

---

Do you do it? What is the defining factor between your yes or no decision?

---

Sometimes. One defining factor is simply whether I care at all about the type of product. If it is a product (or type of product) I use routinely, and I am curious about new features that I might be using, I might do a beta test and then submit my input. For example, when Allaire was coming out with HomeSite 5.0 I did the beta tests to see if I was going to bother even paying the upgrade price. As it turns out, I did not bother. The new features were simply not worth it. I certainly beta-tested Microsoft's .NET offering to determine if I wanted to plunk down the money for that.

A lot of times, to me, downloading a beta is really no different than downloading a trial version of some software to see if I want to purchase it. Of course, some beta programs are more or less unstable so one has to take that into account.

And of course a lot of times "beta testing" is not about functional testing to the company. It is more about usability testing and compatibility testing because they did not want to invest in strict usability studies or they did not have the compatibility labs and variances that are possible by distributing to (potentially) thousands of people.

Another defining factor is the company. If the company routinely churns out garbage and it is pretty obvious that, in fact, they are relying on the average user as a functional tester, I tend to avoid that. (The NSI product line is an example that comes to mind.) So it can depend on the company and how much like a trial version the "beta" program is.

And, of course, speaking purely practically, time is always a deciding factor. If I simply do not have the time to devote, then I simply do not do it.

quote:

---

Do you have to be utilizing an earlier version of the software?

---

That always depends on the nature of the software and the vendor. For all beta tests that I have ever done, I never had to have a previous version on the machine but sometimes you could not sign up for some betas unless you were on record as purchasing a previous version of the software.

quote:

---

Are you concerned about downloading these products?

---

Nope. I usually have a separate partition for software that I am not sure of. I often create what I call "toy partitions" to experiment with. Besides that, I also have programs like RegClean and CleanSweep so that I can look at exactly what was installed and what files were updated, added, modified, etc. I can then ensure complete removal.

posted 02-12-2002 04:00 AM         

If I am interested in the product and have time available, I'll participate.

Once I start looking at the product, I expect it to be of reasonable quality - so that I am not wasting my time playing with something that is clearly not yet ready for testing.

If I am not interested in the product, or don't happen to have the time necessary, I'll decline.

I have also participated in some closed Beta programs, where I was sincerely interested in purchasing the product. Here, I have been individually asked by the vendor to help test the product in it's Beta stage. I expect my level of committment to be significantly higher, and I expect my reward to be higher - usually at least a copy of the product when it is ready.

posted 02-12-2002 04:32 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrew:
If not then let them pay some QA folks in house to test it. Put some good QA folks back to work.

---

quote:

---

And then Digits said:
GREAT POINT!

Do you think that this practice (asking for free betatesting) has had an additional impact on our job market as QA/QC professionals?

---

Keep in mind, though, that in the traditional Software Development and Testing Life Cycles, beta testing does not occur in-house, and has much less impact on your QA/Test group than other phases of testing.

The point of Beta testing is to release a version of the software that has already been developed and tested into a 'live' environment with actual users to gain better undertanding of real-world issues and customer usability.

So, that being said, I disagree that participating in a beta test is taking jobs from anyone in our industry. And if a company is using Beta test as an actual Alpha test of their application, I wouldn't want to work there anyway (personally, though some might enjoy the challenge )

That being said, to answer your original question, I'll participate in Beta testing for products I use, or for games, because I find it interesting. I will download some Beta versions of web stuff, but *never* of a MS browser, because of the difficulty in reverting to an older version if I do have a major issue.

posted 02-12-2002 05:16 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by QAGirl:
So, that being said, I disagree that participating in a beta test is taking jobs from anyone in our industry.

---

posted 02-12-2002 06:09 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by testgeek:
I think we may be confusing "is" and "ought". Unfortunately, I think due to a slowing economy it is the case that companies are using beta testing and developers instead of a dedicated QA team. However, it ought not be that way.

---

Fair point, Tim. As companies attempt to cut back and save money, it may be used more than it would be otherwise, and it could very well impact things because of that.

Unfortunately, I think that by the same token, the companies who need to do this will do it with qualified or unqualified people, and may not have the alternative of giving the job to QA people. Still sounds like good enough reasoning not to participate, however. . .

posted 02-12-2002 06:45 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by QAGirl:
Keep in mind, though, that in the traditional Software Development and Testing Life Cycles, beta testing does not occur in-house, and has much less impact on your QA/Test group than other phases of testing.

The point of Beta testing is to release a version of the software that has already been developed and tested into a 'live' environment with actual users to gain better undertanding of real-world issues and customer usability.

So, that being said, I disagree that participating in a beta test is taking jobs from anyone in our industry. And if a company is using Beta test as an actual Alpha test of their application, I wouldn't want to work there anyway (personally, though some might enjoy the challenge )

---

I alpha and beta tested Sun Solaris 7. The beta test was ok but the alpha test was not fun. I got a free copy of the OS when it was released. And I do mean that companies use "beta" testing for alpha testing, I see it all the time. I can put any software I hacked together on the net and call it "beta" and get people to test it for me for free. I don't even have to have a Testing/QA staff. There are folks out there that get a perverse joy out of proving that your code is sh...uhhh... low-quality. I agree with you 100% that it should be that way. But I don't agree that's the way that it is.

posted 02-12-2002 07:39 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by QAGirl:
...if a company is using Beta test as an actual Alpha test of their application, I wouldn't want to work there anyway....

---

But couldn't they be doing this? They haven't told us the extent to which this was tested before they asked for our participation.

What about the jobs of usability labs? Aren't they just trying to get the public at large do this for free? Granted, it will not supply the granularity that a specific usability lab would when conducting a user test - but if they felt they could get a partial, touchy-feely version of it for free.... Aren’t we taking work away from that part of our own sector?

I can't think of any other industry where people will work for free to help a company develop their products on such a broad scale and so consistently.

Even when I was a kid - we'd get paid for those product trials. A group of kids get thrown into a room to play with toys and eat stuff. Parents get paid $50 or something for their time. Even those radio listening booklets that they send out and ask you to monitor your listening habits send you $2 or coupons or something.

I agree that one day you might gain from the product that you are testing today. But you'll be paying for it too! Twice even - once with your time and effort, again with your money. If you don't do it for free - they'll have to pay for it - like they should be doing in the first place.

Unless they're offering to pay for your efforts - I would humbly suggest that you say no thanks. In this economy of cut backs, lay offs and pay cuts - I don't see why an industry should be getting anything for free from the same group that is meeting very tough times.

IMHO

------------------

And yes, incentives, free copies, etc. I would consider payment. I don't however, depending on your time invested, feel that t shirts and mugs are appropriate for professional work - on a casual basis.

posted 02-12-2002 08:05 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by digits71:
In this economy of cut backs, lay offs and pay cuts - I don't see why an industry should be getting anything for free from the same group that is meeting very tough times.

---

I don't disagree. What I was attempting to state is that I'd be willing to guess (no facts to back this up) that a very small percentage of those who participate in non-compensated Betas (based on your def of money or free software - no mugs) are trained QA people, when compared to the amount of the whole.

Companies that complete bad practices are going to do so regardless of whether or not trained QA or usability experts are a part of that segment - my point is that I disagree with it as a practice, in general.

And, as I said, I rarely participate in a Beta that is not for a product I am already using, and very interested in.. Which has been a total of 3 products to date. (2 of which were online games that MUST do beta testing with 'real world' simulation, but after their inhouse testing is complete)