Re: Zipper , an example (software testing)

[andy butler <akbutler@tiscali.co.uk>]

Charles Zwicky wrote:
> 
> It really falls on the Beta testers. If they don't use the devices the 
> way that us on the cutting edge might then these things slip past them. 

Roland knew about some of the RC-50 issues already.
Don't think they have much of a clue really, apart from being top notch at 
profits.

Complex loop devices really need something more than to rely on the poor 
old "Beta Tester", as in someone who plays their music in the way they 
like to see if it works out on the new device.

Indeed, it's highly desirable to have a beta tester like Andre Lafosse 
who'll push the technology to it's limit, but  how realistic is that hope?

As cpr hints, it's either down to the programmer to ensure that there's no 
way to crash the device for any possible sequence of button presses, or 
they should get someone else to do it. Typically, the programmer isn't the 
best tester of their own product, as they already "know to use it". 

As looping devices increase in capability, there's 2 ways I can see this 
going.

1) Actually pay someone to test, it's a skilled job.
2) Make it known that purchasers/users are "testers" right from the 
beginning, and have good provision for dealing with that.

> This is why the RC-50 gets complaints here but the LP-1 and 2880 
> don't...and vice versa in the mainstream press.

The reason the LP-1 doesn't get complaints here is that these are dealt 
with on the LP-1 forum.
There's not that many LP-1's in the world, so users get their answers 
direct from Bob Amstadt.
Probably the 2880 is just too simple to have a lot of problems.


Isn't the RC-50 the first looper by a major company to have these sort of 
problems?
It's a lot easier to create bug free software if all the features are 
known before programming starts, and I'm guessing that's how the majors do 
it. The independent loop developers are usually open to change their 
product on the fly, which is no bad thing, but eventually tends to create 
difficulties and complications in the software. 


If we want to be on the "cutting edge" as loopers, I think we're going to 
be testers :-)

andy butler