TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
In recent years I have noted a sort of downward evolution
in the development of test software that crosses my desk.
"Alpha" builds have little or no documentation and usually
are also missing large chunks of functionality.
"Beta" builds are closer to completion, and usually come
with very rough docs, not so that testers can use them, but
so that they can be reviewed and critiqued.
What I used to see presented as "beta" or "gamma" now
comes with an "rc" designation. It's only at this point that
either the product or its docs reach a "pretty much final"
state.
I'm seeing this heirarchy in the semiconductor, biotech,
telecom and aircraft industries, where software is usually
an accessory to or component of a larger, hardware-based
system. What's going on in companies where software is
the only product, I can't speak to.
Gene Kim-Eng
----- Original Message -----
From: "McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>
> By the way, I wrote my little not-really-tongue-in-cheek post below from
> the perspective of Beta tests at my company.
>
> We send out Alphas with little/no documentation, because of the tight
> cooperation with the alpha-testers, as somebody else on this list
> described their conception of a beta-test program.
>
> We send out Betas as release candidates. That means they have
> pretty-much the final customer documentation accompanying the
> pretty-much final software and hardware.
>
> That alpha-beta distinction is why I approached the issue the way that I
> did, and why my approach differs from that of some other posters. To my
> mind, they were describing alpha testing, not beta. YMMV
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-