to beta, or not to beta?
I used to think that a Beta release indicated a couple of facts:
- The software/website/thing being released is in a test phase. There may well be real concerns over whether the software/website/thing - is actually stable.
- The software/website/thing being released isn't all there yet. It isn't fully formed, or it doesn't quite have all the components or functionality it was required to have.
But, in recent 'internet times' the term Beta has become synonymous with a load of other things, most notably:
- Glamour. I think people in the internet community have come to love the term. Having a website in Beta is seen as fashionable, no doubt about it. The term is used with the mis-guided (in my view) perception that it will, in itself, create excitement and buzz around a product. Or maybe it just makes people feel clever? Honestly, I'm not sure anymore.
- Pretty lame marketing tactics.Related to the above, the marketing ploy you see used is attempting to cash in on the promise of being privy to something really great, FIRST. Beta is very often now used as a viral method of attracting early adopters and generating referrals/word of mouth. Though there is nothing really wrong with this, and it can be really successful, I think metaphors for 'Beta' inevitably get mixed and confused.
In my view, the plain truth about most releases on the web is that they are just, well, NEW. Further to that, I think we should generally be more confident in the scope of what we release and leave the consumer to decide whether this product is indeed new, exciting, glamorous, worth telling friends about - all those things the more contemporary use of a 'Beta label' seems to want to claim.
So, when thinking about releasing the question is not: Shall we put our product out as a Beta release? It's really more answering the question: What's the minimum I can have to release my product and be happy?
Unsurprisingly, in answer to the ultimate question: to Beta, or not to Beta? I'm going to have to say; not to Beta.
What would you say? I'd really love to know what you think on this subject...
Carl Knibbs
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (6)
This is one of my favorite topics. I don't mind people using the term beta if it actually means - "use this at your own risk, it's not quite finished yet" but when the beta period seems to go on and on (as in the case of gmail, a product that was in beta with millions of users for over 5 years) it starts to feel like an excuse for poor quality product. Saying "Hey, don't blame us if it crashes, it's just the beta!" sounds crass to me if there seems to me no real roadmap to a non-beta product.
I agree with you that the term "beta" is increasingly being used as a "new" badge on products and frankly, for many B2C web products, I don't believe users care or even distinguish between a beta and a non-beta service. Marketers need to be careful though. Customers aren't always looking for "new" and I've had fun poking my competitors about their "not ready for prime-time software" that still hasn't come out of "beta." Gmail is a good example of a product that had to lose the "beta" tag to be taken seriously as an enterprise tool.
April
Thanks for the comment April! Yes, I agree that applying the Beta label often implies a certain lack of commitment/confidence in a product. That's a really good point. It's particularly negative for a product when, like the gmail example, the label sticks around for so long. (I think this could become a favorite topic of mine, too!) Best, Carl
Best blog post yet Carl. I've got nothing against signing up to receive an invitation to use a new website or service; although I do discriminate if what's being offered is weak. Does the beta tag make a difference or even mean anything anymore? Nope. It's over. A bit like animated gifs.
Thanks Gav. Agreed, not sure it does mean anything...other than, 'ohhh, we are not sure about this yet so don't blame us if it breaks' - which isn't great, is it? Carl.
The flip side of the coin, from someone who doesn't often use the 'Beta' moniker on his products, is perhaps that it gives more scope to take risks. To play with features which as a business we might just be a bit scared of. It also gives us room to admit failure when we get something wrong, which rarely happens often enough!
Thanks Henry, that's probably another reason why the label is used so often isn't it? The only danger for me is if you put something out 'not really sure' it could be you are almost undermining your idea - or it could work against you and mean you don't give it the 'polish' you really should for a finished product. (You can see I am in the no Beta camp still...!) Great point about admitting failure, I think that's something that probably doesn't happen enough in my experience (and could be a topic for a new post, so thanks!)
All the best, Carl