Why Beta Sucks (Rant)
Bukola on July 16th, 2008
Some people are really struggling with beta; both the definition of the word and its execution. This is a problem that I’ve encountered with many applications online, as well as with certain Internet moon games.
Speaking as a former software development manager, I get it. You’ve just coded a really cool app, and you want to release it. You know that it’s not quite ready for prime time so you slap the ‘beta’ label on it, perhaps thinking that end users will be happy to help you iron out the kinks. Well, you’re probably wrong.
Today, “beta” seems to be an excuse for crappy coding and poor planning. Applications are released in extended, or perpetual beta, which is a public dumping of crappy code by developers who refuse to inform users of a solid release date. Twitter’s team didn’t even bother to label their micro-blogging client “beta,” they simply dumped their garbage code and listened to people complain about it on a daily basis.
Something similar happened to LunarWars. When the game opened it experienced a gold rush of new users who left after they had buggy experiences. With limited budgets to spend on advertising, Indie games live and die by word of mouth marketing, and if new players encounter a broken game they will not recommend it to their friends.
I don’t like to complain/report/post about three bugs while hundreds of other people complain about the same three bugs. Don’t you think its easier to manage the complaints of a smaller group of people who actually want to help you fix the problems they come across? The creators of SocialMedian think so. The developers knew their code wasn’t perfect so they released the app in private alpha to a devoted group of beta testers (including myself). This used to be the norm, but now it’s actually newsworthy.
Back in the day software developers released their first confident batch of code in alpha form to a tiny group of people, then a beta version of the product was made open to a wider (but still limited) group of folks before it was finally released to the public. To me, this seemed like a pretty good system. What happened?
Random Salad is full of things much less interesting than this. Whether you've come to this page by a link or by voodoo sex magic, pay a visit to the homescreen before you go.

July 16th, 2008 at 6:54 am
I think there are different assumed definitions of “beta” for different kinds of applications.
Obviously with software it means that the program is still incomplete and probably full of bugs. Beta releases are normally made available publicly using the “beta” label as a disclaimer, before a full commercial release is shipped.
With online applications things change quite a bit. The fact that users don’t have to download each new version makes all the difference, and because of that the changes are all incremental. For me, it’s assumed that any website is going to be continually improved and modified, but with online apps the term “perpetual beta” became something of a buzzword. I blame Flickr for popularizing it.
When it comes to browser-based games, the “beta” suffix really does give the impression that it’s incomplete, and for me it comes with the assumption that everything will be reset at some point. Lunar Wars is one case where the developer decided “perpetual beta” applied to games in the same way it does to cloud computing, which was probably a bad decision. The difference between a game and something like Google Docs being that when Google developers update the code for their Spreadsheets app, the data in my spreadsheets isn’t going to change.
I don’t really have a problem with Web 2.0 companies saying that everything is in “perpetual beta”, because version numbers for incremental changes would only be more confusing and less useful, but I’d really like to play a completed game.