As I was just saying to a friend of mine on here, the methodology of how versions are done in AC seems complex and confusing.
For instance, take Backup Assist, my backup software. I have the current version on my server. Then every six months or so, I be asked to be a beta tester which will give me the next version and support free, but comes wit the price of possible bugs and answering questions from scenarios that are so difficult that I just don't have the time to do. Thus, only 1% of the users are beta testers. We don't communicate as we don't even know each other. Then after all the best testing is done (behind the scenes -- most users aren't even aware beta testing is occurring), a new version is released. Which is relatively bug-free. There isn't a 5.00 on
www.backupassist.com and then a 5.01 followed by a 5.02 each one requiring another installation and a small learning curve. Those are for the beta testers.
Here, there are some who are beta testing prior to the version even appearing, then at some point, the BETA is released as stated above. So, now we are all downloading beta versions every few weeks to fix the bugs that the entire community have found. I guess there is some benefit to that as you end up with a lot of beta testers.
I may be viewing this wrong. But, again, you don't see WIN 7.1 and then WIN 7.2, etc. until the final release is out called WIN 7.777
********
John,
How many people have reported the message bug? I am not sure. Also, as an FYI, I didn't go to the 5.1 due to the TSP800 issue, which is supposed to be fixed in 6.0. I still find it amusing that the newest beta or version or whatevr it should be referred to broke the very printer that is advertised on the website.
