6.7 Beta Testers?!?

[Andy R]

Whats up with the 6.7 beta testers? How could they have missed all the MIDI bugs we 've found after a few hours of using 6.7?

Digi might want to have some of us test in the future.

[Pirate Post]

From the outside it all sounds so simple. Digi has one of the best, most organized beta programs I've ever seen. They work very hard to make it all come together. Trust me they are trying to make a great product.

[Chief Technician]

It's real simple Andy. The ßeta testers probably didn't try to do what you are trying to do. It's not uncommon for someone to use a feature in a way it wasn't intended to be used and discover a bug. THe same goes for conceiving of a way to use a feature.

[MAXIMUSIC]

From the outside it all sounds so simple. Digi has one of the best, most organized beta programs I've ever seen. They work very hard to make it all come together. Trust me they are trying to make a great product.

I have to second this words, furthermore, the real issue with beta testing is that there are so many different scenarios in witch you would have to "stress" the App. to have a better idea on how well it is functioning that makes it close to impossible to pin down every single issue. In other words... I have seen so many issues here at the DUC that unfortunately for all of us are product of either lack of knowledge or lack of interest in following the well spread database of setups and "tune ups" to get the App. to perform at it's best.
I'm definitely NOT saying that aren't real issues but just acknowledging that WE as users sometimes do not give our best to make sure WE are following carefully the instructions.
ProTools is a very complex App., much like a Formula One race car, on the edge of the technology and having to adapt to the circumstances presented along the races (Change of OS, a poring rain of new plugins, Virtual instruments that eat the CPU alive... to name a few)
I feel very strongly that WE the users have to try to understand as much as WE can about the intricate details of the tool that is our (in some cases) way of making money. again, much like a F1 car, the racer knows every single detail involved on the construction and maintenance of his car.... his life depends on it.
Sorry if I got carried away, but I have learned in the hard way that many, many times I was not doing what I was supposed to do and turned the blame somewhere else unintentionally due to lack of knowledge.

PEACE

[Andy R]

I totally understand where your coming from, and I appreciate the effort by all; but assigning more than one patch to a multitimbral device crashes Pro Tools? Thats more than enough to raise concern with digi's choice of beta testers, at the very least. Sorry if that offends any beta testers out there.

Maybe I can understand missing bugs like selecting and deleting pitch automation deletes MIDI notes, or that patch xml would not function until the apple MIDI prefs were trashed, or that selecting a patch and then canceling causes Pro Tools to crash, but the multi patch bug...no way.

With the exception of the pitch automation bug, I ran into all the above bugs within the first two hours of using 6.7.

[TiPo]

Interesting thing is that when version 6.0 came out there were several problems. Some of them that I stumbled upon in the first few minutes were MIDI, Beat Detective related heavy problems! Also there was a problem with half speed recording!!
None of these problems were due to a specific user setup. They were very BASIC, EYE POPPING and SURPRISING!!
I was very surprised how come the WELL ORGANIZED BETA TESTERS did not find these problems out of months of testing.
Version 6.0 was first scheduled for release before the end of 2002 then it was delayed and again scheduled for the beginning of 2003 and finally it was released on February 15 2003. I know that it was a big jump to OS X from Mac OS 9 but it took them too long to do so. There should have been enough time to point out and shoot the BIG BUGS.
From a WELL ORGANIZED SOFTWARE DEVELOPER company this the least we should expect. But they released version 6.0 with obvious and right into the face problems.

[Jeff Ulmer]

The problem is that basic, eye popping and surprising on your system may not affect another. Bugs are obvious once you've found them, but discovering them in the first place is often chance - doing things in a certain order on a certain machine with certain third party software.

It is also quite possible to introduce a new bug while fixing an old one. Testers are asked to make sure something is fixed - and it is - but somewhere else something broke, something that was working in the last build.

That doesn't excuse fatal bugs making their way into the release stream, but hopefully people realise that upgrading can be hazardous, and have taken precautions (backups) against anything catastrophic. how many Apple OS releases have we seen recalled due to major problems at release? When you are developing against a moving target (OS updates) and a wide range of machines, there are bound to be issues somewhere. If you don't assume the upgrade is flawless and allow time to prove itself, you will face far less stress in the process.

[TiPo]

If you don't assume the upgrade is flawless and allow time to prove itself, you will face far less stress in the process.

Exactly!
The temptation is always there to upgrade to the latest versions to use the long waited new features but you are right! It is better to stand back for a little until the dust settle and if there are “bugs flying in the air” let the pest control do their job till the air is clean.
Although I should mention that we are lucky that software developers are not releasing cars. Imagine that you are driving your new car for the first time just to realize there is no break, one tire suddenly start to spin to the opposite direction then finally the wheel brakes off and you are trying to save what you can by holding the wheel rod in your hands while your speed is around 75Mph on a crowded highway.
I know it is a rather harsh comparison but than software developers shouldn’t release the first, usually whole numbered versions to the public to use them as WELL ORGANIZED BETA TESTERS. On top of everything we the customers pay for the beta testing!!! How convenient this is to the software developer companies.

[Alécio Costa]

Here at my studio we are working with some non stop Cd productions and we decided to stay a little bit more with an old reliable system, which is the now the "legacy" 5.1.3/OS 9.2. BTw.. which is the most stable PT version with OS X? 6.2.3?
We are not really worried about ADC and color coding.

[roberts]

I think from wht I have seen from the beta testing process is that there are thousands of features to test not to mention several harware configurations then do all that times two plaforms XP and Mac. Rmeber back not so long ago Mac would come out followed by Windows and LE. Now its all uniform not to mention tha tthe testers must read all the bugs on Mac and PC and there gets to be a lot of information to keep on top of. Plus there is the marketing dept they have deadlines and what stuff released ASAP. There are always lots of bugs found that are often deffered to the next update and release. There are also lots of legacy bugs (bugs that never get fixed-sometimes).
From waht I have seen all major show stoppers (does not play/record, does not BTD etc) are fixed before the SW goes to a gold master. But there are always lots of bugs that don't get noticed with so many possibilities sometimes things get by.