ᴡᴅツ Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I want to do private testing on 4.0 when it gets closer to some pre-alpha phase. I care a lot about functionality, usability, and design. If you have a user base that is substantial enough, I suggest allowing them to help you mold the product as development progresses (Hint: I stuck around for 5 years; it means I care to some degree about the shape of the product). That way you can hear from more people about what they think about a certain functionality or the new look of 4.0. I know you do this already - I get the feeling it can be improved just from the mishaps that I've seen IPS have over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxxius Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Same here. Community 7 years old, lots of members. I wish I can participate too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makoto Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I don't think creating a thread asking for a MVP invitation will get you anywhere.If IPB wants to offer closed beta testing, they'll go about it however they deem best fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimace` Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 This topic just made me wet my pants :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ae9803 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I couldnt tell if he was being serious, lol. Well he did do this at 2:00am, maybe he was drunk? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ᴡᴅツ Posted April 13, 2013 Author Share Posted April 13, 2013 I don't think creating a thread asking for a MVP invitation will get you anywhere. If IPB wants to offer closed beta testing, they'll go about it however they deem best fit. You're right, it's irrelevant. I should've stated IPS should improve their testing methods so 4.0 doesn't become something developers like, but customers dislike. I also don't want to see huge mishaps like in Nexus where the shipping method stopped working. I also don't want to see ill-planned features such as looping fields in the database view of IP.Content by default. Did anyone stop to think why a customer would want it that way exactly? I also think more CUSTOMER-CENTRIC thought needs to be put into the software. Not just "let me make this and see what people think" but: Step 1: Let's think of things customers want and actually make it so that it makes sense. This applies more so to Content and Nexus. Step 2: Let's make alpha phases of it and bring in customers so we can get meaningful feedback in terms of how easy to use, satisfying, and effective the "feature" is Step 3: Make changes, keep reiterating Step 4: Do bigger private testings Step 5: Release Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmacleo Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 well I am also very helpful and I offer to help spend any funds you guys are putting into the next suite. just let me know :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimace` Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 You're right, it's irrelevant. I should've stated IPS should improve their testing methods so 4.0 doesn't become something developers like, but customers dislike. I also don't want to see huge mishaps like in Nexus where the shipping method stopped working. I also don't want to see ill-planned features such as looping fields in the database view of IP.Content by default. Did anyone stop to think why a customer would want it that way exactly? I also think more CUSTOMER-CENTRIC thought needs to be put into the software. Not just "let me make this and see what people think Which is why there are "Feedback forums" which I'm sure will be used by customers once there is a demo board of IPB4 available just like they did with IPB3, Perhaps you should make the most of that forum ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ᴡᴅツ Posted April 14, 2013 Author Share Posted April 14, 2013 Which is why there are "Feedback forums" which I'm sure will be used by customers once there is a demo board of IPB4 available just like they did with IPB3, Perhaps you should make the most of that forum ;) No, that's too late because when a demo board is usually available, A LOT of features are "set in stone" in such a manner that developers would be reluctant to make major changes. It's just a fact that the further you go in the development cycle, the less likely developers or the business in general would want to make changes to major features because they become expensive. I am saying to include a larger customer pool to do iterative testing along the way for 4.0 so that improvements can be made on a bi-monthly or periodic time cycle. I was being nice by offering to do it for free, but most companies have to fork over money for such services, so some of the other commenters should show a little respect (nothing personal, it's just rude when you assume someone is drunk for making meaningful suggestions). I'm not saying IPS does not do testing. They do a lot, most likely, and include customers internally / privately. But I am looking at their end products once it's been released as well as what they say (and especially don't say because that reveals a lot) during development, and noticing the testing protocol needs a huge overhaul. Does IPS have dedicated product researchers with backgrounds / degrees in experimental research design, statistics, product testing, user testing, etc.? I haven't seen any on the forum so I assume they don't. These people would be responsible for figuring out what features make sense to include, HOW to set them up (and their research to support their claims), and do iterative testing. The researchers would tell the developers how to mold the product based on customer data and progress would go forth that way. This is how large corporations who also offer SaaS operate. I'm voicing this early so 4.0 could have the potential of being a lot better than 3.0. I'm not doing this because of some negative intention. I'm doing it so IPS can have a better chance to succeed with a great product. I'm still a bit disappointed with how IP.Content and IP.Nexus didn't perform as successfuly as they could (they were still VERY good as a start and I have and do compliment them for it). The thought process is simple, actually, if you just take a moment to think about how customers would want to use your product. Take me for instance. I want to monetize IP.Content and I get my ideas from IP.Downloads (setting up download restrictions; except, apply this to articles in Content) and IP.Board (limiting topic view permission to only topics the user authored; this would apply to article posts or database posts), but I look at IP.Content and notice the features are missing. I ask myself .....why? Didn't anyone think about this...of how features in some app that could work in another app are missing? So I have a beast of a commerce system and a monster of an article management system, but I can't make them work in harmony? Now that's awful. And then I look at IP.Content and say, "hmm, I can use IP.Content to make custom applications. I already have a very good framework, don't I? Membership system...check, admin system...check, newsletter...somewhat of a check since this could be vastly improved (take a look at aweber, etc.)" but then I look at how to do it and notice the development system isn't as intuitive as I would've thought. In addition, the way the fields are outputted as a list makes little sense. I would never want to use it in a live setting like that. Look at the word "turnkey" solution. I want the apps IPS offers to live up to that name better. Let me just turn the keys and start cruising while making the minor alterations. Don't force me to strip apart the car just to make it do a reasonable task that is outside the scope of making left or right turns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misi Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Does IPS have dedicated product researchers with backgrounds / degrees in experimental research design, statistics, product testing, user testing, etc.? I haven't seen any on the forum so I assume they don't. These people would be responsible for figuring out what features make sense to include, HOW to set them up (and their research to support their claims), and do iterative testing. The researchers would tell the developers how to mold the product based on customer data and progress would go forth that way. This is how large corporations who also offer SaaS operate. vBulletin has them. Look at the result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ᴡᴅツ Posted April 14, 2013 Author Share Posted April 14, 2013 vBulletin has them. Look at the result. Can you be more detailed? What type, where, what have they done? Do you have links? I could say the same...Apple has them; look at their results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenLinks Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 A dedicated Pre Release group will always bring additional value to the product. vBulletin can't be used as a bad example here as the problems have nothing to do with Pre Release group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makoto Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 If you wanted to suggest that IPB offer alpha beta testing for the purpose of gathering actual feedback from the community (not just for debugging purposes) before making an official or even official beta release, you probably shouldn't have used a thread title that just gives the impression you just wanted exclusive access as a "private" tester. Because that's what "Can you add me as a private tester for 4.0?" implies for me. If you're just wanting to suggest IPB include the community more in the testing and building process of 4.0, I don't have any problems with that. I honestly think it's a good idea to offer early preview releases to gather feedback/suggestions. (To add some clarity to what I'm saying, as far as I'm aware beta releases for IPB like most software are almost strictly for debugging purposes. Rarely is any functionality ever added or changed during regular beta testing. So I'm saying I think offering alpha releases for testing and suggesting functionality at an early stage sounds like a good idea.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ᴡᴅツ Posted April 14, 2013 Author Share Posted April 14, 2013 If you wanted to suggest that IPB offer alpha beta testing for the purpose of gathering actual feedback from the community (not just for debugging purposes) before making an official or even official beta release, you probably shouldn't have used a thread title that just gives the impression you just wanted exclusive access as a "private" tester. Because that's what "Can you add me as a private tester for 4.0?" implies for me. If you're just wanting to suggest IPB include the community more in the testing and building process of 4.0, I don't have any problems with that. I honestly think it's a good idea to offer early preview releases to gather feedback/suggestions. (To add some clarity to what I'm saying, as far as I'm aware beta releases for IPB like most software are almost strictly for debugging purposes. Rarely is any functionality ever added or changed during regular beta testing. So I'm saying I think offering alpha releases for testing and suggesting functionality at an early stage sounds like a good idea.) Yes, i'll say it again, you're right. I can't change the bad title so let's just view it as a sentiment from those that agree with this topic like you. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makoto Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Yes, i'll say it again, you're right. I can't change the bad title so let's just view it as a sentiment from those that agree with this topic like you. :smile: I'm not sure how I didn't notice your other post to me. I've gone too many hours without sleep, sorry. I agree with you then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misi Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Can you be more detailed? What type, where, what have they done? Do you have links? vBulletin 5 Connect TM http://www.theadminzone.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=87 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 Naturally we will have private and subsequently public testing as always do. We've not yet started that phase but thanks for your interest :) By the way, you should read 37signal's Getting Real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyF Posted April 14, 2013 Share Posted April 14, 2013 I'm sure we'll be informed if / when IPS decides the product is ready for testing to take place, be that a private group for initial early feedback or (as was done with the first 3.0 board) setting it so it was client only for a while or suchlike. :smile: Then there's the QA group as well and finally normal beta testing. Certainly lots of options and I guess a case of "When its ready™" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mario Thomas Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 By the way, you should read 37signal's Getting Real. I love all the 37signal's stuff... RE-WORK is a really good reading as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfarber Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 For the record, when we were working on 3.0 we did make many changes after publicly revealing the product based on feedback. Minor point releases don't usually go this route (we can't rebuild how stuff is designed to work in a x.x.3 release), but major versions we are very open to feedback long before we consider releasing the software. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.