Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ecsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!ecsvax!hes
From: hes@ecsvax.UUCP (Henry Schaffer)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: The Final Word version 2
Message-ID: <524@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-Oct-85 12:00:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.524
Posted: Fri Oct  4 12:00:42 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 7-Oct-85 03:18:12 EDT
References: <1789@brl-tgr.UUCP> <97800007@ima.UUCP> <278@kepler.UUCP>
Organization: NC State Univ.
Lines: 20

> In article <97800007@ima.UUCP> johnl@ima.UUCP writes:
> >We have been a beta-test site for Final Word 2 for about six months.
> 
> My question to the net is this:  Since Final Word obviously did give
> permission to their beta testers to discuss the product, do you think
> it was a good business decision?
> -- 
> Mojo

For *true* beta test (i.e., first use outside the developing company) it
makes no sense to allow disclosure.

However, much "beta" testing is really "pre-release", or early low volume
shipment.  It is really taste testing, or consumer survey - mislabeled to 
make the "tester" feel good.  In such a case disclosure is usually allowed 
(or encouraged) because that's part of the purpose.  Then when it turns out 
that there are major bugs/defects, the developer squawks at the bad publicity.

Since I can't read Final Word's mind ...  ?
--henry schaffer  ncsu