Scoop’s Views

It’s no secret to many people who know me that I’m active alpha- (or pre-beta, as some tests call it) and beta-test participant. In fact, I love beta testing for many reasons, and for almost 20 years now, I’ve been beta testing.

Today, though, has brought about thoughts and resentment in me that, well, has me ticked off. In fact, that’s putting it very mildly.

Although many people know I am active in beta tests, no one knows which companies I am currently doing beta tests for, or what companies I’ve beta tested for in the past. Because of some of the non-disclosure agreements (a few were real sticklers), I won’t release the names of any of the companies I’ve beta-tested for, but I will say I’ve beta tested (and in a few cases, alpha-testing) operating systems, office suites, illustration/graphic software, tax preparation software, printing equipment, databases, video editing utilities, and much more.

Back in the early days, you usually got “one” of whatever you were testing, plus some extra goodies, basically as a thank you from the company behind the product. As time went on, into the mid-to-late 90s, the benefits often included a cash stipend or reward, as some companies called it, along with one of whatever was being tested, such as a copy of a software product, hardware product, or gadget.

The dot-com bubble burst and things changed. Except for a handful of companies, most didn’t even consider giving cash rewards to beta testers, which is sad. Many beta testers put in hours testing the item in beta, such as office suite or graphics program. In beta testing, the idea is to use the program — as you normally would, but harder. Use it but be “Joe User” or “Josephine User” and really try to break the product through normal or abnormal use. As long as your not malicious, all things are fair.

Yes, I’ve chalked up my fair share of bug reports, detailing problems I found with hardware, software, or other items, including printers, and serial and USB devices. I’ve crashed programs, installed them without uninstalling the old version first, and installed them after partially uninstalling the old program. I’ve also installed the beta software, uninstalled it, installed old software, then the beta software, just to see how it would survive in that type of environment. Yes, I’ve caused many crashes, but those crashes shouldn’t happen, and that’s what beta testing is designed to catch: crashes and other problems before the item is released to consumers. In my testing, I’ve also logged my fair share of ideas and suggestions, whether for the design, layout, wording, or other issue.

With one of the latest betas I’ve been involved with, a storage solution, I’ve just gotten notice that I’ve been bitten, at least in terms of its “incentive” item. The incentive is the “reward” you get for the beta test.

During the beta, I had a large storage device to test. After the beta was over, we were all told that we could keep the item we tested. That was sweet, well, for most of the people testing that or similar devices. The one I had never was recognized on any of my computers. Not on Windows Vista, Windows XP, Windows 2000 Pro, or either of two Linux-based boxes. I spent hours downloading software, updates, and rolling my system back to “clean install” images. I even did a low-level format on my hard drive one weekend, wiping everything off my hard drive, installing the operating system, then, before adding anything else, I added the software for the device I was testing. Nothing. It simply wasn’t recognized. Why? I have no idea, and none of the engineers involved with the beta offered ideas, either. It seems as though they, too, were stumped.

Just about five weeks ago, after the beta ended, I received an email telling me to return the storage device for “an exchange,” and that the new one would be sent upon receipt of the old unit. Great! I was actually looking to buy a device of the same size as the one I tested — over 1 terabyte — so this would be perfect.

Today, though, all the beta testers involved in this product’s test received an email saying: “After much discussion, it has been determined that the incentive will be the small, 500 gigabyte storage device.” It went on to say that those of us who had received larger units could keep them, but consider them “a bonus,” and those of us who had to return units because of defects, even if it was larger, would be getting the smaller, 500 gigabyte unit, in return. The shipping date, also, isn’t known yet, though my defective storage device from the beta test was returned about three-and-a-half weeks ago, and I was told the new one would “ship quickly.”

The replacement has not shipped quickly, nor will I be receiving back an exchange. I will be getting downsized — a reduction — of my incentive — despite a promise.

Yes, I did follow-up quickly. I wrote:

Huh? That’s wrong. It’s sort of like the U.S. signing treaties with the indigenous people of the U.S., then later, forcing us injuns to adhere to all provisions of the treaties, yet not honoring more than a handful of over 600 treaties signed.

Since the unit I sent back was never recognized by any of the five computers I connected it to during the beta, there’s no use in me saying, “Send it back, as I want the larger one as an incentive.”

So, now with this revision, reminiscent of when I was in the Army, getting Directive 29-A-2(a)(1)(b)(3a)(1)(a)(rev.29), do you have any idea when the new, smaller (aka DOWNSIZED) unit will be shipped?

What did I expect? Not too much. I was told, “We’re working on getting them shipped as quickly as possible from the manufacturer. Great. Maybe in another two or three months I will see a much smaller “incentive” for the nice, full-size storage device I tested.

Some days I kick myself because I do what’s ethically right. Under the NDA for this beta, I can discuss the company, and the item, I believe. But I won’t. I could badmouth everyone involved. But I won’t. I am ticked off, though, as this is just wrong. It’s unprofessional, and yes, if I really wanted to press it, legally, I’m sure I could. And win, too.

Is that me? Not a chance. But maybe I won’t be a diligent on the next beta with this company. Why should I be? If they make a promise to me, saying, “This will be your reward for the time and commitment and hours you spent — above and beyond, even,” and then, three weeks or a month later, come to me and say, “By the way: screw you!”, why should I be diligent in all I do? Because it’s my nature to do — and accomplish — what I say and what I agree to do.

What the two companies involved in this one test did, though, even to the point of screwing the people who made one company a lot of money and helped the other company ensure the storage devices and related software were ready-to-ship, has no bearing on my actions. It also goes to demonstrate the ethics involved, as a person of integrity, a person with a strong ethical code, will stand by his or her word, and the same holds true for a company whose leaders are people of integrity and people with strong ethical codes.

While I may, in the future, agree to do beta tests for the company, you can bet your bottom dollar that I will never buy another one of its products. That’s in stark contrast to the reality in one corner of the office: five devices from that very company.