At 08:49 AM 5/15/2002 -0700, Brad Velander wrote:
>[...]"Another impact on revenue figures for this half is the re-scheduling
>of our next major product release. Protel DXP, which is now expected
>to go into external beta testing in May and released for sale in July
>2002."
>
>So I guess anybody can talk about May beta testing occuring all they want
>because Altium has already released such information publically.

Actually, they did not make it public that they were entering beta test, 
and, in fact, we don't have any report that it is actually in beta test, 
only that a user or users have received an invitation. That might be sent 
out in advance of the actual release to beta.

What they said, as quoted, was that it was *scheduled* for external beta in 
May. Small point, perhaps, and perhaps it is moot.

Personally, I think the secrecy is not only unnecessary but 
counterproductive; if it were up to me I'd probably make the beta release 
open to all licensees; an agreement might be necessary, but it would be one 
along the lines of a promise to uninstall when the beta period is over, if 
one does not buy or otherwise lawfully receive the upgrade.

People expect beta release software to be buggy.... It is much more 
important to find the bugs and fix them before full release than it is to 
keep it all hush-hush.... Bugs in the final release generate a lot of 
negative opinion about the program, the fewer the better.

And as far as the competition goes, I think that if the competition 
seriously wanted to look at the Protel beta, they would find a way.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to