Author: Albert Silver
Date: 11:33:52 09/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2000 at 03:59:22, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>On September 05, 2000 at 22:47:28, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>I don't understand why chess software is on hallowed ground here, nor do I see
>>why you are condemning chess software developers to amateurism. I see nothing
>>'immoral' about receiving payment in order to help develop a program, but the
>>real question lies, in my opinion, in what a beta-tester consists. Uri is
>>offering his services as a developer, not as a beta-tester, as far as I see, as
>>the particular qualifications he is presenting as justifying payment are those
>>of a developer and not a beta-tester. On the other hand I can easily imagine a
>>professional (paid) beta-tester of programs in general, and I can easily believe
>>such a profession developing if it doesn't already exist.
>>
>> Albert Silver
>
>As I said before, if you choose to offer your services as betatester/developer
>stating your ambition clearly about revealing your ideas and thoughts only in
>exchange of money, then it's fine with me.
First of all, this idea that somehow getting paid for work is immoral has got to
be the oddest one I've seen in a long time. That being a developer should only
be a volontary job is also rather mysterious, though I'm sure all companies will
back you solidly on it... :-)
My point was that betatesting is NOT developing, and that any _development_
ideas forwarded by a betatester are indeed at his discretion. To tell a person
that they should work hard and creatively to _improve_ your product... for free
is completely insane. Remember that they will indeed be benefitting from your
endeavours through subsequent sales. Please understand that I believe that
betatesting is exactly that: Testing, making sure everything works and
bughunting. One should also add functional problems such as problems due to
design if the tester notices them. Anything else is outside of the scope of the
testing IMO as sitting down and trying to find ways to improve a product is an
entirely different job. This does not mean that I would hoard ideas that happen
to cross my mind were I to be testing a program, but a company cannot place
demands in this aspect. As for the general state of betatesting, it really is
organized in a way that makes me think of that story that should one leave 100
monkeys in front of a typewriter for zillions of years, chance would have it
that eventually the works of Shakespeare could appear. Betatesting seems to be
done in a similar fashion: a number of copies (I read that 10,000 (!!) were used
for Diablo II) are sent out and the developers/programmers cross their fingers
in the hopes that the faulty function (knock on wood), which they have not
found, will be identified. Under such circumstances the payment, to get a sneak
peak at a favorite program and a copy of the final product, is fair. I also
think that it needn't be that way, and that betatesting could be
professionalized, seriously improving the quality of it, but it would also be
fairly tedious if done right.
>I doubt the persons phone lines will
>be buzzing with activity though. It's the implied lack of willingness to part
>with all information unless you get a paycheck as well that bothers me.
If it is within the scope of the person's accepted responsibilities, I agree,
otherwise it is at the person's discretion IMO.
>Especially if you offer your services for free and voluntarily. I also take
>offense to the suggested lack of enthusiasm as a result of not getting paid.
>
>There are obviously a few people here, who think highly of their capabilities in
>this particular field. And most of them needs to have their sense of reality
>adjusted slightly, preferably recalibrated. Fortunately, it's very funny to
>read.
I don't understand what you are basing this on. Why is Uri's sense of reality
misadjusted? Do you know his ideas? Have you tested them or had someone identify
why they are no good? If Uri believes his ideas are good enough to warrant
payment then so be it. That's what a developer does. I see no reason to scoff at
him.
Albert Silver
>
>Mogens.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.