Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta
-
Beta is important because it means if you do use it, and something breaks or changes on you, you have zero recourse. You could never, ever go after a vendor that didn't support it, didn't maintain it, just changed formats, dropped it, or whatever. In any contract or legal dispute, or just trying to go after them publicly, they'd point out that you had acknowledged that you weren't using a finished product and were just looking at a preview that they were playing around with for testing and that you could not have had those expectations of it.
Like how the Spice points on SW are still in beta and can be removed or changed at any time
-
This matters a lot for the other thread where someone was upset that Ubiquiti wasn't supporting the product that he bought. But it was a beta and not a product made yet by the vendor. So hard to understand how he expected support on something that doesn't even exist yet. No matter how much he complained, it didn't change the fact that the vendor (the same one as here) had not yet made the product that he was claiming that they owed him support on.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
Beta is important because it means if you do use it, and something breaks or changes on you, you have zero recourse. You could never, ever go after a vendor that didn't support it, didn't maintain it, just changed formats, dropped it, or whatever. In any contract or legal dispute, or just trying to go after them publicly, they'd point out that you had acknowledged that you weren't using a finished product and were just looking at a preview that they were playing around with for testing and that you could not have had those expectations of it.
Actually, no. Beta does not mean anything like that. The software license agreement defines that. If the agreement defines that beta has no recourse, then yes. But only because it is defined in the license agreement.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
This matters a lot for the other thread where someone was upset that Ubiquiti wasn't supporting the product that he bought. But it was a beta and not a product made yet by the vendor. So hard to understand how he expected support on something that doesn't even exist yet. No matter how much he complained, it didn't change the fact that the vendor (the same one as here) had not yet made the product that he was claiming that they owed him support on.
And like I just said, this mattered because of the agreement defining it as such.
-
@jaredbusch said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
Beta is important because it means if you do use it, and something breaks or changes on you, you have zero recourse. You could never, ever go after a vendor that didn't support it, didn't maintain it, just changed formats, dropped it, or whatever. In any contract or legal dispute, or just trying to go after them publicly, they'd point out that you had acknowledged that you weren't using a finished product and were just looking at a preview that they were playing around with for testing and that you could not have had those expectations of it.
Actually, no. Beta does not mean anything like that. The software license agreement defines that. If the agreement defines that beta has no recourse, then yes. But only because it is defined in the license agreement.
Even so, beta in the title means something and would provide strong legal backing that the customer was told up front that the product was released yet. If there is conflicting documentation, that's a problem, but it would be in conflict with that documentation.
-
@jaredbusch said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
This matters a lot for the other thread where someone was upset that Ubiquiti wasn't supporting the product that he bought. But it was a beta and not a product made yet by the vendor. So hard to understand how he expected support on something that doesn't even exist yet. No matter how much he complained, it didn't change the fact that the vendor (the same one as here) had not yet made the product that he was claiming that they owed him support on.
And like I just said, this mattered because of the agreement defining it as such.
The agreement just agreed with the beta title. No extra agreement is needed for an unreleased product. That he got the product at all meant that someone along the chain had taken something that wasn't released yet and sold it like it was. That's the break point and where there was a problem. The product itself doesn't yet exist, that alone is all that matters. UBNT doesn't need special paperwork to "not support products they don't make."
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
-
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
-
Their website still shows the "Download Beta" link.
-
This challenges the "what does supported" mean, problem. It's like Ubuntu LTS and Ubuntu normal. Both get support. But one gets more support than the other. Not all support is equal. Typically, a beta will get support, but certainly not the level of support that production would get. The expectation is that support is expected to sometimes end with "well it just doesn't work." Whereas production support is expected to ensure that the device works, gets fixed, gets replaced, etc.
-
Along with every other page, that I'm clicking on about UNMS.
Probably just a slow web developer who hasn't gotten the required paperwork.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
-
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
Expect <> free.
-
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
Expect <> free.
But free software has all the same release guidelines as commercial software. And MS products aren't normally free.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
Expect <> free.
But free software has all the same release guidelines as commercial software. And MS products aren't normally free.
Again - what does cost have to do with anything?
As I also said - you'd all probably disagree with me.
-
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
Expect <> free.
But free software has all the same release guidelines as commercial software. And MS products aren't normally free.
Again - what does cost have to do with anything?
As I also said - you'd all probably disagree with me.
Because you mentioned it in the post I quoted.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
Expect <> free.
But free software has all the same release guidelines as commercial software. And MS products aren't normally free.
Again - what does cost have to do with anything?
As I also said - you'd all probably disagree with me.
Because you mentioned it in the post I quoted.
Please highlight the part where I mentioned costs.
-
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.
These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.
While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.
That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?
Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.
So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.
What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?
Expect <> free.
But free software has all the same release guidelines as commercial software. And MS products aren't normally free.
Again - what does cost have to do with anything?
As I also said - you'd all probably disagree with me.
Because you mentioned it in the post I quoted.
Please highlight the part where I mentioned costs.
Same thing I quoted and you responded to.
