Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Has Google Redefined Beta?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the finished-when-it's-finished dept.

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."

24 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 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

      --
      Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
    7. 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.

    8. 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 :-)

    9. 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.

  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 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.
    3. 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. "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]
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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!
  8. 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.

  9. 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.
  10. 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