by Teknojnky » Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:41 pm
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that stating my opinion was insulting.
That said, beta testing is optional. However I think it is safe to say, that we do it because we want to see MM improve and be the best it can be.
I don't know if the dev's are interested in giving out 'free' gold licences to active beta testers (who do provide debug logs, pictures, detailed reproduction steps, etc), it 'would be nice', but is hardly a requirement.
As far as beta testing, it is both a priviledge to the user and also a favor to the developers. Users get to see and use the application during the development, and developers get access to a wide variety of feedback and bug reports.
The other side is that they could have simply done a closed alpha/beta (or none) and then most would not have access for testing/feedback.
I would guess that since MM is a relatively small shop, they are not as interested in giving out free gold, as say microsoft or other large companies that give out free full versions to testers.
Basically, In my opinion, it comes down to how much you want to support mediamonkey development. If you want to support by beta testing the free features, then by all means. If you want to support by purchasing (lifetime) gold (I know that version 3 only gold license is not currently available) without beta testing thats fine too. If you want to support it by getting gold AND beta testing, then thats even better.
In any case, I think the only thing that could have been done better regarding 3.0 licensing is making the 3.0 only/upgrade gold more readily available for purchase once the alpha was released, as it is currently only lifetime gold users get the full gold features.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that stating my opinion was insulting.
That said, beta testing is optional. However I think it is safe to say, that we do it because we want to see MM improve and be the best it can be.
I don't know if the dev's are interested in giving out 'free' gold licences to active beta testers (who do provide debug logs, pictures, detailed reproduction steps, etc), it 'would be nice', but is hardly a requirement.
As far as beta testing, it is both a priviledge to the user and also a favor to the developers. Users get to see and use the application during the development, and developers get access to a wide variety of feedback and bug reports.
The other side is that they could have simply done a closed alpha/beta (or none) and then most would not have access for testing/feedback.
I would guess that since MM is a relatively small shop, they are not as interested in giving out free gold, as say microsoft or other large companies that give out free full versions to testers.
Basically, In my opinion, it comes down to how much you want to support mediamonkey development. If you want to support by beta testing the free features, then by all means. If you want to support by purchasing (lifetime) gold (I know that version 3 only gold license is not currently available) without beta testing thats fine too. If you want to support it by getting gold AND beta testing, then thats even better.
In any case, I think the only thing that could have been done better regarding 3.0 licensing is making the 3.0 only/upgrade gold more readily available for purchase once the alpha was released, as it is currently only lifetime gold users get the full gold features.