Archicad 26: the beta test is not (semi-) public anymore

[Romans]

Instead of involving the Archicad community even more and in a broader way in the development and testing of new versions and features, this year, the beta test of the upcoming Archicad 26 release is even more limited than it already was before.

No public applications were offered, but only a 'bubble' of selected and approved users were invited.

I rather doubt this strategy because the view, the tests, and the comments will be very limited (narrowed) to a few users' individual experiences and opinions.

Don't get me wrong: I do not doubt the qualification and skills of these testers.

But I am afraid of the less open and reduced testing opportunities (usage scenarios). 

[Romans]

There was definitely a lack of good and necessary marketing. This was a longstanding problem of GS (especially in comparison to the methods of the dark side, aka Autodesk).
Now the focus is on marketing and not (user-targeted) Software-development. That is the problem.
Both areas need to be addressed.
Anyway, it would be scary through if they are suffering a lack of developers. This is even more critical....

[Hmooslechner]

What Graphisoft should do in my opinion:  

Send the AC-CEO's into the next desert and replace them with new ones which are "real Archicad-working" Architects - Architects", which use Archicad in their normal working-time.

BUT - Not architects- which let "their stuff "use Archicad - they really should work themselves with it !!

It should be someone, who "loves to play with Archicad", who loves to tryout the suggestions of other Architects here in the forums - also the German forum and the suggestions of the developers by himself in real work conditions.

It should be someone, who is able to deal with extern developers and to buy and implement their ideas for good prices, if they are good.

It should be someone, who answers by himself in the forums (also the German😉 forum, because there are some really good ideas and intentions on the program and till now, we have the feeling, the German forum is just a garbage-place for Graphisoft)

It should be someone, who does not fear to bring the good ideas to the competitors, if the good ideas are implemented in the program !!!  It should be someone, who trusts his developers and the community to come up with even better ideas, so the competitors are always steps behind!

Just my 2ct's..

[thesleepofreason]

Circling back to this with the new yearly release cycle presented. One of it's stated benefits is:

• Further improved product quality by applying rigorous beta testing principles and allowing significantly more users to test our products during the public Technology Preview period.

It is quite unclear how this is actually suppose to work. Reading that one might think that rigorous beta testing is something that happens under the technology preview period but from the material and the presentation at the building together event it is obvious that the beta period is a separate phase and that the purpose of the technology preview is to give users time to transition to the new version and at the same time catch any issues or bugs that slipped by the closed beta.

Given how something like the attribute disaster passed both alpha and beta just to have the old manager put back in the last second - I don't see how the new release cycle will work to improve product quality. Or am I missing something?

[thesleepofreason]

And if I'm not mistaken - wasn't there a link to apply for the tech preview during the building together digital event? Can't seem to find it anywhere after the event.

[Jp1138]

There was. I can´t find it now either, but I signed during the event and received a confirmation email.

I suppose it will appear again somewhere in the near future, though 🤔

[Eduardo Rolon]

FYI, the new Attribute Manager didn't pass the Beta period.

During the Beta was when we were able to forcibly convince them to bring back the original one.

The reason that it showed up was that GS couldn't fix it in time since we wasted a lot of time during demonstrating all the mistakes in the New Attributes.

[thesleepofreason]

Didn't mean to imply that it wasn't picked up by testers as an issue but rather that there obviously was a lack of "rigorous beta testing principles" as the main principle seemed to be to put things on the backlog.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

I'm surprised to learn they actually listen to Beta testers about anything.

I was always of the opinion that beta testers were nothing more than glorified bug-testers. or debuggers.

I'll always recall a story of how when they released the Stair Tool in ArchiCAD 21, there was an issue with the in-built arrow tool only ever pointing in one direction, which was a problem when you got to the top of the building and the stair arrow could only indicate "UP" even when there was no other floor above.
Which meant that on that level you were forced to turn it off and then draw in an arrow manually indicating the stair direction - particularly as in some municipalities this was required by code to show which direction the stair was headed and you couldn't just leave it blank.
So the beta testers talked about how they repeatedly told the GS developers that this was the case and it was an issue that needed to be rectified and they were rebuffed and told that they (the developers) had it on good authority that this is how a good number of architects work and that's why they made it that way.

Except it wasn't.
And they found out the hard way when they actually released the version and got a good backlash from users pointing out this problem and they were forced to release a custom "arrow" object you could load with the stair as a separate library object in one of the hotfixes.

It just belied to me how stupid the whole process was, and begged the question, what was the point of having beta testers if you never listened to them for stuff like this.

So colour me pleasantly surprised that they actually listened to you guys on this one.

I still don't really understand what the purpose of this new "Technology Preview" deal is, given that it's (still) a closed sign-up process (with an NDA) and the function of traditional and conventional 'Technology preview' process with other software companies is to have a sort of soft-launch to publicize some of the new features and create a buzz about the new version.
This (the way Graphisoft are doing it) just seems like a rebranded extended beta-test stage to give themselves more time to work on the release.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Which is fine, if that's the case - more time to work on a release for a more stable version is always great -  but then please spare us all the PR buzzword-ey nonsense and hollow marketing gimmicks and tricks.

[Eduardo Rolon]

It was not easy, they had to be "forced" to listen, a lot of Beta testers basically started calling their reps and every single GS contact they could find and informing about the approaching train wreck. Multiple calls and videos showing how everybody used attributes and why the new ones were unacceptable. Same with folders and the removal of Layer Palette buttons, etc.

I think that at some point I was writing that I would prefer to go back to AC08 than use 26 as it was during the Beta.

[Bricklyne Clarence]

That just sounds insane to me.

I've always been resistant to taking part in the Beta-testing process - partly because I've always felt it was a giant waste of time, particularly if my feedback was going to be basically useless beyond "this is broken" and "this is not working"

As much as I've gotten criticized for complaining when I don't put some skin in the game via the beta testing process.

But when this is what the process is actually like, then what the hell, really?