Pre-Release Beta Approach (Friendly Suggestion)

karma17 wrote on 2/21/2020, 8:01 PM

As a die-hard fan and user of Vegas Pro, I would like to offer a friendly suggestion with regard to the development cycle of Vegas. (I took some heat for suggesting this before, but I'm suggesting it again on an Off Topic thread because I believe it will help the program to succeed.)

The current development cycle seems to be:

1. New Features Are Suggested and Planned

2. "Beta Testing" Is Done.

3. The New Version is Released

4. Many Bugs Are Then Discovered.

5. Multiple Re-Builds Are Done To Address Said Bugs.

6. Final Build Is Done.

7. Repeat to Step 1.

My concern about this way of doing it is that new users to the program or even those who are upgrading from a previous version can become extremely frustrated over the glitches and bugs. And I see no upside to this. Of course, this is a non-issue to some users or to those who can get the software to do what they need it to.

My friendly suggestion is that during Step 3, the New Version is released as a Pre-Release Beta and offered at a discounted price. This would serve primary purpose of addressing the above-mentioned concern.

It would let people know that it is extremely possible they might encounter a glitch or bug in the program but in exchange for that, they are getting a price discount; and therefore, there are no grounds on which to complain or be disappointed. They knew what they were buying and got a break for it.

In Magix's favor, at some point in Step 5, perhaps after the 2nd or 3rd rebuild, the Pre-Release Beta title and discount are dropped.

I am only suggesting this because this is what I have observed as a serious problem, and I'm suggesting it with the best of intentions. Vegas Pro is a great program, but this current way of handling development seems to be causing more harm than good. I totally get that Vegas is a complex piece of software with many moving parts and targets, and it can be very difficult to track down the source of a bug. However, I also get that it is not unreasonable for someone to expect a program they bought to work and to do what it says it can do. I also get that when Vegas crashes, it is not always the fault of the software.

Essentially, what I am suggesting involves no change to the actual development cycle, but more of a change in how the process is presented.

Thanks for listening.

 

 

 

 

Comments

EricLNZ wrote on 2/21/2020, 9:08 PM

Another alternative is to have a public beta. Like Wayne is doing with HOS and Serif do with their Affinity range. There are probably other software developers out there doing likewise.

walter-i. wrote on 2/22/2020, 2:00 AM

+1 to both

vkmast wrote on 2/22/2020, 4:30 AM

Re "a Pre-Release Beta ... offered at a discounted price". What would happen as regards the (now) free updates? Pay more every time an update was released?

FayFen wrote on 2/23/2020, 7:30 AM

Such cycle is not just in Vegas but in any software. even with those cost 1/4 of Vegas.

As a beta tester to a software, I don't know about magix stuff, but I can tell you that the most problematic issue is that R/D people never used the software, they never edit a single video.

Sells personnel has more say than R/D so software go out with stupid bugs.

Musicvid wrote on 2/23/2020, 8:08 PM

Charging customers to use a pre-release beta sounds like a tough sell to me -- of course Chevy has been doing so for a century...

Former user wrote on 2/23/2020, 8:32 PM

I was a beta tester for some software once. We all knew it was not ready to release, but it was time for an infusion of money, so the company released it. I never wanted to be a beta tester again.