Slashdot Mirror


Has Google Redefined Beta?

netbuzz writes "Someone finally took the time to do a count of all the Google apps marked 'beta.' And with fully 45% of its products carrying that familiar tag — including 4-year-old Gmail — Google says there's an explanation: Beta doesn't mean to them what it has long meant to the rest of the tech community. 'We believe beta has a different meaning when applied to applications on the Web,' says a company spokesman."

41 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. That's just plain stupid by rallymatte · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What are we going to call actual beta web software then? Alpha? But then what would we call Alpha software?
    I mean, just because you're still adding features to it, doesn't mean that it has to be called beta, does it?

    Also, what I quite don't understand is why they would want to call it beta, I mean, it's not like it's got a good cling to it. It just makes it sound like something unstable and unreliable. Google are tryint o get people to buy the premium version of Gmail. Why would someone want to pay for beta-testing something for someone?

    --
    Champagne should be cold, dry and free.

    1. Re:That's just plain stupid by dintlu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Us: If you don't like the definition, use a different word.
      Google: If you don't like the definition, change the definition.

      It's just how language works. If you're important enough you can do whatever you want.

    2. Re:That's just plain stupid by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who, aside from people using GMail as some sort of enterprise mail application, gives a shit what they call it? I don't, it's something I'm using for "free" and it works.

      YMMV.

    3. Re:That's just plain stupid by samkass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google hasn't "changed the definition"... no one else is using it like Google uses it.

      They're just using the word wrong.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    4. Re:That's just plain stupid by SQLGuru · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Might I suggest that they use the term Gamma? It seems obvious to me. It is more advanced than Beta but not officially "Gold Master".

      Layne

    5. Re:That's just plain stupid by JuanCarlosII · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's just how life works. If you're important enough you can do whatever you want.

      There, fixed it for you.

    6. Re:That's just plain stupid by Vellmont · · Score: 3, Interesting


      Also, what I quite don't understand is why they would want to call it beta, I mean, it's not like it's got a good cling to it.

      No it's not. I really don't know why they continue to use "beta" when a product is clearly mature.

      My honest guess? It's a compromise between the marketing people and the developers. Developers want to add new things continuously and not go through these product development stages where they do endless testing to see if people like a new feature. Marketing people get all nervous about new features "ruining their brand". The developers are still in charge at Google (being a young company), so the compromise is just to call everything "beta" (A pretty stupid compromise IMO).

      You're entirely right about the "pay for premium" though. Google needs to drop the stupid beta word, and pick something that's more representative of what the product is. I'd choose something more like a "lifestage" kind of label. Toddler, teenage, adult, mature, senior, elderly would be good starts.

      --
      AccountKiller
    7. Re:That's just plain stupid by Threni · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They're just hedging their bets. People are used to using their beta software and, like Gmail, it's generally pretty solid so it doesn't have the same air of flakiness about it as other beta software might. But if anything goes wrong they can say "well, it's just beta...and besides, you didn't pay anything for that".

    8. Re:That's just plain stupid by es330td · · Score: 3, Informative

      My guess is that they call everything "beta" so as to limit the amount of complaints they get when something breaks. "Oh, wait, you were using a beta application to conduct your important company communications? I'm sorry, didn't anyone tell you that beta software doesn't come with the same expectations for reliability and data integrity as released, production code? Silly rabbit!"

      With beta software they can break or alter anything at will and our only course of action is to say "Thank you; may I please have another?"

    9. Re:That's just plain stupid by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well for a company that can't spell Googol correctly, I'm not surprised they would not be using the word Beta correctly. We're just lucky they haven't started spelling it Baitah, Beata, or Bayta.
       
      Jonah HEX

    10. Re:That's just plain stupid by swabeui · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From my experience, their 'beta' is often better than most releases from other companies. Why does a label like 'beta' have to define the quality of a product, why can't the brand provide that?

    11. Re:That's just plain stupid by darth+dickinson · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ask your wife/girlfriend/SO if getting a BJ from someone else is considered sexual relations. Go ahead, we'll wait.

    12. Re:That's just plain stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's just how life works. If you're important enough you can do whatever you want.

      There, fixed it for you.

      See, you replaced a word, while google would've changed the definition :-)

    13. Re:That's just plain stupid by initdeep · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly.

      Google can absolve itself of any responsibility for using their "beta" applications (even though they are pushing corporate customers to do so) simply by using the ole "point and claim beta" trick.

      The best part is that more mature (older meaning) software companies put out a product that is feature complete (not really) and MOSTLY bug free (considering how complex the software is) and don't rely upon the "beta" tag to cover their ass.
      Instead, they continue to update, improve, correct, and generally act like real software companies and they get derided by the same people who simply accept it from Google because of the "beta" tag.

      These are the same type of morons who think it's simple to make an operating system without bugs and problems, yet seemingly accept them from their favorite flavor of =nix all the time.

      Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, et al have been making software a lot longer than Google, and have, in my opinion, been doing it a lot better too.
      They may have bugs in their products, and may require updates to correct these, however at least they aren't trying to hide behind a "but it's still beta" moniker simply becuase they know their drooling masses of fans will nerdgasm over everything they put out and just accept the flows as it's still being "worked on".

    14. Re:That's just plain stupid by tknd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because if a company isn't willing to stand behind their product 100%, it just means on the first catastrophic failure they will blame it on being a "beta". This is just more BS to get away with less responsibility. I know this trick because I purposely left an app in "beta" so that when the managers found something they didn't like or something that didn't work I always had the "it's a beta" card. When people talk about Google's beta policy they really want Google to "man up" and take responsibility for the quality of all their apps when they release them to the general public.

    15. Re:That's just plain stupid by Evanisincontrol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, et al have been making software a lot longer than Google, and have, in my opinion, been doing it a lot better too.

      Their products also cost money.

      Those "drooling masses of fans" that "nerdgasm" over Google's products are probably willing to accept flaws because the price is significantly lower than the Apple/MS/Adobe equivalent. Infinitely lower, actually.

      These are the same type of morons who..

      ...know their drooling masses of fans will...

      <personal opinion>You're an anti-google troll, and so be it. However, please don't go around calling a large group of people "drooling masses" and "morons" because you happen to be a fan of a competing product. It just makes you look like the complete asshole you are.</personal opinion>

    16. Re:That's just plain stupid by aztektum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Name one other company that says they'll cough up money or take the blame when their post-beta, ready for consumption software goes tits up and loses data or creates for downtime?

      Most EULA's I've read say the maker cannot be held at fault. Even the GPL has an "As-Is" clause. So how exactly does this make Google less "manly"?

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
  2. I prefer the old definitions: by Chemisor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Alpha: it doesn't work.
    Beta: it still doesn't work.

    1. Re:I prefer the old definitions: by Daimanta · · Score: 5, Funny

      And to continue on that

      Release Candidate: It might work, but it probably won't
      Gold: It still doesn't work, but users are great bugtester
      SP1: Still not done, has some bugs left and misses some funtionality
      SP2: This one might actually be done, try at your own risk though

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    2. Re:I prefer the old definitions: by Smivs · · Score: 4, Funny

      Re Gmail being beta, does this mean when it's 'finished' it will be Alpha mail?

    3. Re:I prefer the old definitions: by idlehanz · · Score: 5, Funny

      And one more SP3: The last release you'll see for this product because getting revenue from a new product is cheaper than fixing any more bugs.

      --
      Changing the world... one research project at a time.
    4. Re:I prefer the old definitions: by clickety6 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Software Development Lifecycle

      Alpha- short for "It's alpha-lly crap"

      Beta - short for "It's still alpha-ally crap, but it's beta than it was"

      Release - short for "it still release-tinks, but we've gotta publish"

      Gold - Short for "it's gold-arn awful, but at least it's out the door"

      --
      ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
  3. Google may not know what beta means... by nycguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but their spokesperson sure knows what bullshit means.

  4. Why label it beta at all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, by that logic, every piece of software that can be updated is beta. Windows, Linux, OSX, etc.

    I guess it gives them an excuse if their shit don't work.

  5. "Has Google Redefined Beta?" by geckipede · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can we just tag this "yes" and move on?

    1. Re:"Has Google Redefined Beta?" by Phylarr · · Score: 5, Funny

      I would, but the tags are still in Beta.

      --
      "Choosing to refrain from producing another person demonstrates a profound love for all life" [vhemt.org]
  6. I think its fair enough by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Beta means "it may change without warning". With traditional apps you have a choice to upgrade or not, but not with web applications. As long as there is active development then it is essentially a beta. Maybe they should have used a different term, but I think it is useful to have a warning that there may be frequent and substantial changes.

    1. Re:I think its fair enough by apathy+maybe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually that isn't quite true.

      Even right now I have the choice of three (3) Yahoo email interfaces. The very old version that isn't supported any more and still uses frames (but doesn't require JavaScript). The "new" Yahoo interface that has been around for a number of years, and the new-"new" interface that looks more like a desktop app.

      When Yahoo introduced the "new" look and feel (the current look and feel), there was a long time between introducing it and forcing it on everyone.

      Yahoo has had the lastest look and feel available for ages, and I've stuck with the old "new" look, and will continue to. (I don't like the very heavy interface that pretending to be a desktop app brings. Especially on slow connections.)

      Even Google offers cutting edge features to people to test them out, before introducing them into the main stream product line.

      So basically Google are talking bullshit and mis-using an established computing term.

      --
      I wank in the shower.
  7. Perhaps they should be more wary.... by mblase · · Score: 3, Funny

    I seem to recall that Stavro Muller intentionally added the Beta label to one of his own restaurants, with catastrophic results.

  8. BS by MrMickS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What a load of BS. Its a matter of liability. By saying that the products are still in 'Beta' they have a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card if there are any problems. Its odd that the G1 phone is tied to using services that are still labelled as beta.

    --
    You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
    1. Re:BS by gsslay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It also means they can change the product in any way they wish, including withdrawing it completely, without explanation.

      No other company could get away with this, but because the products are, in effect, free I guess they can do what they want. But I bet the lawsuits would fly if they ever dared pull something like GMail.

      But remember folks, you get what you pay for.

  9. MS redefined beta a long time ago by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft redefined "release" to be what we previously called "beta", a long time ago. That's why "Google's 'beta' products like Gmail and Google Docs are about as good as anyone would expect" -- we've been brought to expect software and services which are barely tested. Google is returning to the old meaning and perhaps going a bit further.

  10. Change? No. Excuse? Yes. by Bieeanda · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Companies have been hiding behind the title 'beta' for years, and numerous end-users have no idea what the Hell the term means anyway. It's just an excuse to shovel half-completed applications out and fiddle with them at leisure. Missing functionality? Oh, it's just beta code. Broken functionality? Oh, just wait for the patch. Completely redesigned UI, data loss, unannounced restrictions? Silly, it's a beta! You shouldn't be using it for mission-critical purposes, even though we're always suggesting that you do.

    Christ, game companies have been using 'beta' as a dodge for shitty demos since Shiny squeezed Messiah out. The fact that the same 'it's just a beta, it'll get better!' promises and pleas have trickled upward and outward is clear indication that gravity itself is in beta, because shit certainly doesn't just flow downhill any more.

  11. Actually no.. by sw155kn1f3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Several companies used "beta" to indicate that product is just not supported. For instance ICQ was beta for like 4-5 years? Don't remember exactly.
    So nothing new here actually.

    --
    - Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
    - Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
  12. Re: *NOT* The True Meaning of Beta by schon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they've bought it back to what it SHOULD be

    No, they haven't.

    usable and feature-complete software which is just undergoing stringent testing for subtle defects and bugs

    You missed the last part of that, which reads by a limited number of testers.

    If an app is delivered to end users, then it's not beta.

  13. Let's be honest by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Modern software engineering *everywhere* has redefined "beta"... which is why "software engineering" exists only at NASA and a few other such places.

    The rest of software "engineers" throw half-ready rubbish over the wall to meet idiotic management's "vision" and "development schedule" and pray that someone else's job will go to India when the self-serving suits at the top decide to go for big bonuses by slashing the payroll.

    On the other hand, evolution itself is constant beta, with losers and winners, periodically re-set by catastrophic terrestrial events that wipe out all lawyers.

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
  14. Still in Beta?!? by r33per · · Score: 3, Funny

    All I can say is that we're out of beta: we're releasing on time.

  15. Beta = Everything old is NEW again! by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While we wait, if any of you should have a theory of your own, please share with the group.

    My theory is that by always having 'beta' next to something, this ensures that anyone who uses their tools will always think they are using the latest and greatest.

    Or, maybe they want to remind people of a fish, that swims alone from the crowd with a brilliant display of features.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  16. Google is Following in Humpty Dumpty's Footsteps by SwashbucklingCowboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.

    --- Humpty Dumpty

  17. as if anyone is in a position to argue? by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    google could redefine a cucumber as a small nocturnal mammal, and the whole world would fall in line. google search is all of our collective recall. it's the 800 pound gorilla of the web. it can make any word mean anything they want it to

    call it a "google mind trick"

    World: Let us see Gmail move out of beta.
    Google: [with a small tweak of the spider] You don't need to see Gmail move out of beta.
    World: We don't need to Gmail move out of beta.
    Google: Beta does not have the meaning you think it has.
    World: Beta does not have the meaning I think it has.
    Google: You believe beta has a different meaning when applied to applications on the Web.
    World: I believe beta has a different meaning when applied to applications on the Web.
    Gmail: Move along.
    World: Move along... move along.

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  18. Yes... by stoofa · · Score: 3, Funny

    And they have redefined 'no evil' too.