Here is a follow-up from Manifest about Haig’s answers:
Here's some answers to those:
1 - Were was the open beta sign up, so that those in critical need and best talent can request these newer drivers?
There wasn't no open beta sign up. I chose these people in private from what I have seen them do and say on these forums. Eventhough at some points they were critical of Matrox (constructive criticism is the key here!!), their hardware and troubleshooting knwoledge was excellent.
I'm sure that I missed a few folks but right now, I do not have any means to expand this beta team.
Manfiest: Correct, it was a “personal” choice on the part of a Matrox employee to leave other possibly more qualified users or those in critical circumstances without representation in this beta program. These choices have far reaching consequences on current G200 card owners that are trying to make the best with the current driver situation. Matrox as a company could of made a better decision here. We, the users of your product, are suffering and in need a bit of attention.
2 - How do we know that those that should have the beta drivers for testing really do?
Huh? Really do what? Have the drivers or really beta test? You can believe what you want but I won't start telling anyone what bugs they have found just to prove this point.
Manifest: Bugs can be found even by the novice, but in light of the perceived casualness of choosing the beta testers, I am questioning the complete representation of the entire G200 community in this beta program. Currently, my opinion is that there are only a very few involved. Your comments back this up in that you are unable to support larger amounts of beta testers than what you now currently have. Considering the current record of driver releases of lack thereof, I bring out that these current beta drivers may be no better than the 4.51 drivers of old. Then we are back to the original question. Are the current beta drivers in the right hands?
3 - Yes, the qualifications of the beta testers are really in question here...
Qualifications is a matter of opinion. Read answer to Q1.
Manifest: I agree, and therefore I place the issue in the context of the message.
4 - Lack of a talent pool (due to no open beta), means that we may still be getting substandard drivers even after these new
ones are released. Matrox is the culprit of this fiasco, not the beta testers. Matrox should be the focal point to the release of
information on the beta program, not the beta testers. Matrox should give us updates on the status of the drivers, not the
beta testers. Matrox should be keeping their customers satisfied that they are correcting the problems of the past, not the
beta testers... I for one would like matrox to handle this correctly, therefore I would have no need to get "firsthand"
information from beta testers and then question their integrity.
Maybe some other dep't can do this but as long as I'm here in Technical Support, I nor anyone else in Technical Support is not about to give out a daily report to anyone.
Manifest: Sorry to make this personal for you Haig, that is not the intention. Please let me explain further my comments above.
Lack of talent pool – This really goes back to my answer on question 2. I currently believe that we have substandard drivers and I for one would not like to see this repeated. No open beta or even a signup for one is moving back down this road. With the current diversity in this industry it is very unlikely that a small group of beta testers will convey to you the results that you are going to need to succeed. Look to Windows 2000 beta cycle and compare it to Windows 95 or 98 betas. The progression is a larger and larger pool of testers to track down and report these bugs. What makes matrox different that these techniques should not be used?
Matrox the focal point of information – You should really care about this one. Matrox as a company really cares, and so wants us, your customers, to believe such when it says this. (even if you or other co-workers really do or do not believe this) Therefore all information good or bad should be in your control as much as possible. This does not mean release daily reports on bugs and such, but the release of desensitized information in progress format is not only good but forward thinking. It must “always” show progress and hope for those that are interested. That we, the G200 customer base, are still interested, to spend the time to look for information on this topic, goes a long way to show our loyalty. We do not want to pry information from beta testers.
Matrox should give us updates - Relevant information should be posted from matrox in a timely manner. This information should not come from the beta testers. Face it, they are on a need to know basis and only know what parts of the program they are entitled to. The likelihood of incorrect or damaging information from these users is a great risk. If matrox was to post information on the subject, there would be no need for the beta testers to speak out at all.
Matrox should be keeping their customers satisfied that they are correcting the problems of the past, not the beta testers... As we look at the above steps, this will fit in nicely with a positive corporate image. Look at how long it has taken Chrysler to turn around its corporate and product image. This image is not only earned but nurtured, and should not be risked in the hands of a few beta testers.
These messages are long and thought out, please take them with the professionalism they were designed to evoke.
Here's some answers to those:
1 - Were was the open beta sign up, so that those in critical need and best talent can request these newer drivers?
There wasn't no open beta sign up. I chose these people in private from what I have seen them do and say on these forums. Eventhough at some points they were critical of Matrox (constructive criticism is the key here!!), their hardware and troubleshooting knwoledge was excellent.
I'm sure that I missed a few folks but right now, I do not have any means to expand this beta team.
Manfiest: Correct, it was a “personal” choice on the part of a Matrox employee to leave other possibly more qualified users or those in critical circumstances without representation in this beta program. These choices have far reaching consequences on current G200 card owners that are trying to make the best with the current driver situation. Matrox as a company could of made a better decision here. We, the users of your product, are suffering and in need a bit of attention.
2 - How do we know that those that should have the beta drivers for testing really do?
Huh? Really do what? Have the drivers or really beta test? You can believe what you want but I won't start telling anyone what bugs they have found just to prove this point.
Manifest: Bugs can be found even by the novice, but in light of the perceived casualness of choosing the beta testers, I am questioning the complete representation of the entire G200 community in this beta program. Currently, my opinion is that there are only a very few involved. Your comments back this up in that you are unable to support larger amounts of beta testers than what you now currently have. Considering the current record of driver releases of lack thereof, I bring out that these current beta drivers may be no better than the 4.51 drivers of old. Then we are back to the original question. Are the current beta drivers in the right hands?
3 - Yes, the qualifications of the beta testers are really in question here...
Qualifications is a matter of opinion. Read answer to Q1.
Manifest: I agree, and therefore I place the issue in the context of the message.
4 - Lack of a talent pool (due to no open beta), means that we may still be getting substandard drivers even after these new
ones are released. Matrox is the culprit of this fiasco, not the beta testers. Matrox should be the focal point to the release of
information on the beta program, not the beta testers. Matrox should give us updates on the status of the drivers, not the
beta testers. Matrox should be keeping their customers satisfied that they are correcting the problems of the past, not the
beta testers... I for one would like matrox to handle this correctly, therefore I would have no need to get "firsthand"
information from beta testers and then question their integrity.
Maybe some other dep't can do this but as long as I'm here in Technical Support, I nor anyone else in Technical Support is not about to give out a daily report to anyone.
Manifest: Sorry to make this personal for you Haig, that is not the intention. Please let me explain further my comments above.
Lack of talent pool – This really goes back to my answer on question 2. I currently believe that we have substandard drivers and I for one would not like to see this repeated. No open beta or even a signup for one is moving back down this road. With the current diversity in this industry it is very unlikely that a small group of beta testers will convey to you the results that you are going to need to succeed. Look to Windows 2000 beta cycle and compare it to Windows 95 or 98 betas. The progression is a larger and larger pool of testers to track down and report these bugs. What makes matrox different that these techniques should not be used?
Matrox the focal point of information – You should really care about this one. Matrox as a company really cares, and so wants us, your customers, to believe such when it says this. (even if you or other co-workers really do or do not believe this) Therefore all information good or bad should be in your control as much as possible. This does not mean release daily reports on bugs and such, but the release of desensitized information in progress format is not only good but forward thinking. It must “always” show progress and hope for those that are interested. That we, the G200 customer base, are still interested, to spend the time to look for information on this topic, goes a long way to show our loyalty. We do not want to pry information from beta testers.
Matrox should give us updates - Relevant information should be posted from matrox in a timely manner. This information should not come from the beta testers. Face it, they are on a need to know basis and only know what parts of the program they are entitled to. The likelihood of incorrect or damaging information from these users is a great risk. If matrox was to post information on the subject, there would be no need for the beta testers to speak out at all.
Matrox should be keeping their customers satisfied that they are correcting the problems of the past, not the beta testers... As we look at the above steps, this will fit in nicely with a positive corporate image. Look at how long it has taken Chrysler to turn around its corporate and product image. This image is not only earned but nurtured, and should not be risked in the hands of a few beta testers.
These messages are long and thought out, please take them with the professionalism they were designed to evoke.
Comment