6.1.1 has faster rx. overall smooth, but crashes a few times daily on vista and seven. XP machines are fine. A few unusual bugs that we had not seen before including reversed vaccine dates and unusual "updated by" entries. Still a work in progress.
I just don't understand this. It seems like one version fixes one thing and breaks another. In most software updates, it will say fixed x, y, and z and it is improved. Then three months later a few bugs are found or tweaked.
Here is the thing. And, I know this is a fast-release beta. But, we shouldn't have to have threads like these where people (me included) don't update until others test the waters. We are actually beta testing in production.
Now, CCHIT and MU did change the landscape a bit. And, I know that Jon states he does upgrades and beta testing differently. I just, and this is just my opinion, think doing it differently would work better. Again, just an opinion.
Don't talk about upcoming releases. Let a version be the officially released version for a while. If you discover a problem, issue a small update or patch. When you are ready for a new version, go through the normal alpha and beta testing with completely behind the scenes. After it has been thoroughly tested over and over and over and it seems flawless with no showstoppers, then announce it is release.
