Homeseer 2.0 Ready for Release?

[DavidL]

Again, HST is following the normal software production development process. The beta was extensively tested. Build 1951 (production release) is a RELEASE. It is based on the many prior releases that each received much testing. HST also tests each release before it offers it as a download. If they waited weeks for additional internal testing, then WE would be waiting many months before ever seeing HS2.0. Anyway, I am signing off on this topic.

My suggestion:
If you intend on keeping a Homeseer system, you very likely will upgrade to HS2.0. Exception to this is if HS1.7 does everything you ever want it to do and you have stopped adding new functionality that might require someone else's plugin or script. With that situation, you can just keep the elecricity flowing to HS1.7 server and apply windows updates (which hopefully won't break anything).

But, if you do intend to further enhance your HS setup, upgrade now to save a few bucks. The next decision is whether you start your migration now, or after YOU are comfortable with the amount of time others have spent testing the latest release (which will continue to come) and HST continuing to respond to fix bugs, and add functionality.

If you are thinking of jumping on another HA platform (hardware or software based), then don't upgrade until you made that decision of what flavor.

 

[WayneW]

If memory serves, this is about the same thing that HST did with 1.7.200. There were beta builds for months, then all of a sudden 1.7.200 was declared a non beta build the moment that 1.7.200 was released. 1.7.200 should have been released as a beta for a week or two to make sure it was stable before called it an official release, then having to fix stuff in it quickly.

 

[smee]

Again, HST is following the normal software production development process. The beta was extensively tested. Build 1951 (production release) is a RELEASE. It is based on the many prior releases that each received much testing. HST also tests each release before it offers it as a download. If they waited weeks for additional internal testing, then WE would be waiting many months before ever seeing HS2.0. Anyway, I am signing off on this topic.

I'm not saying they should have done weeks of internal testing for each version.

What I'm saying is that they should have allowed a stable beta release (by stable, I mean "not changing," not "bug free") to be there for a while - rather than changing daily.

Then, after nothing is reported that will kill the release after a week (or so) [1], announce that the beta will become the release. Then they change the name and release it. After that, they can continue to release updates (or betas of the next release) if they want to.

If they don't let the beta stabilize, how do they know that they didn't accidentally break something that was working before?

By the way, I have every intention of upgrading to 2.0. I do not see anything else on the market that will meet my needs nearly as well as HS does.

[1] This does not mean "no bug reports." It means, no stoppers.

 

[WayneW]

For an example of the issue, look at the people still reporting issues with build 48, 49,& 50 AFTER 51 was released. Build 51 should have been made available as a public "release candidate" to let all the beta testers know to jump on it and make sure there was nothing critically wrong with it. I think that many people were staying behind a build or two because HST seemed to be breaking as much as they were fixing for a while. Then all of a sudden build 51 was dumped in their laps and called "Golden" and the clock started...

 

[Dean Roddey]

I'm not a HS user (of course), but I think that you have to be very careful in the HA business to not get a reputation for being buggy. Maybe HS' target audience (being somewhat more 'tweaky' oriented than ours) makes this not so much of a problem for them. But I don't think we'd get away with anything close to that without being killed. I test out the ying yang before we even put out the first beta, and our average public beta period is probably a few weeks before we go out with the official version, because the beta is already extremely close to release-worthy.

I don't even bother releasing a beta until it is quite tight and I'm already using it myself in my own system, so that I'm forced ot eat my own dogfood and know that the core features are very solid. I can't test every driver of course, since I don't have all of the supported devices, though I have a lot of them and I do test all the ones I have before each release.

 

[AccessX10]

Same thing happened to me. It's because I wanted to see the results before I voted. You then get a "null" vote.

Thanks Martin, that's exactly what I did.

 

[Rupp]

This is very interesting reading indeed. All I want to know is, who's forcing you from using HS1.7x? Don't tell me the intro price is because I'm still using 1.7x and that price didn't force me to 2.0. So it's very simple either keep using 1.7x, upgrade to 2.0, don't upgrade and buy low for future use, upgrade later and buy high or stop using the software. Why would you stop using a working (if it was working for you) software package? If it wasn't working for you then a rewrite of the same software on a new development platform certainly isn't going to.

 

[Skibum]

I think you are loosing sight of the original question.
Homeseer version 2.0 was released as a non-beta, ready for production use application.
All I asked, by poll was if you thought that the product was ready. So far the overwhelming answer is no.

If I take that answer, which comes from people currently using the product and add to it the limited time for purchasing an upgrade at an upgrade price.... I come up with a "what, are you kidding me" type of attitude. This seems to be indicative of the opinions expressed by the 90% of folks that said the product was not ready for release.

Is anyone forced to upgrade, well... no. Much like Homeseer 1.0 users, upgrading is really a necessity if you expect to continue the tech and product support that is now offered for the current release.

 

[DavidL]

Dean,
Your description of your development / test / beta / production (including usage on your own system to ensure it's "bulletproof") IS what HS did. There were many beta testers in a Private Beta test program (myself and Rupp included) that were part of this testing. I remember Mr. Tinker posting that his house was using the 2.0 the whole several month beta testing period (at least). I have also been using it as primary for several months now.

It seems the ones that were involved in the Private Beta are much more comfortable than those that were not. That makes perfect sense to me. As far as the number of forum posts of 2.0 issues, I used to see many 1.7 posted issues too! Most of the 2.0 issues I have read are mostly user adoption understanding issues, and not code issues at all.

 

[smee]

David:

You're missing the point. The final release of HS 2.0 (build 1951 (?)) was not tested for months. It's a revision of the previous day's release.

You (and others) may have been testing beta releases (note the plural) of 2.0 for months. But the final release was not tested for stability. It was released as soon as changes were made.

Build 1951 should have remained THE FINAL BETA version for at least some time before it was called final.

There is a big difference between the overall beta testing program and calling a beta version final.

 

[Rupp]

I think you are loosing sight of the original question.
Homeseer version 2.0 was released as a non-beta, ready for production use application.
All I asked, by poll was if you thought that the product was ready. So far the overwhelming answer is no.

If I take that answer, which comes from people currently using the product and add to it the limited time for purchasing an upgrade at an upgrade price.... I come up with a "what, are you kidding me" type of attitude. This seems to be indicative of the opinions expressed by the 90% of folks that said the product was not ready for release.

Is anyone forced to upgrade, well... no. Much like Homeseer 1.0 users, upgrading is really a necessity if you expect to continue the tech and product support that is now offered for the current release.

Ski,
That's a loaded question on a BB frequented by geeks like us. I would dare say that many users use the released version with minor problems. I know for a fact that a guy I work with who just started in HA about 2 months ago is using it with no problems what so ever but he only has 4 motion sensors and a couple of light switch's. It really depends on the level of use I believe. I have been running it on a separate server moving over devices and events one at a time and haven't had a problem. If you expect to move the whole wad over at once then I suspect you'll have many problems. So is it ready for everyone NO what software works for everyone but I'll bet for guys like you and I who use very few plugins it will work fine. I believe many HS users mad a very unwise choice of moving a problematic HS 1.7x install over to HS 2.0. I know for a fact that many of the HS users load plugins until they are blue in the face and then wonder why their HS install is unstable all the while removing pieces and parts of each of these plugins and leaving a mess.

 

[Skibum]

Assuming things are as rosy as you say...why the 30... now 28 day time limit?

We are speaking about loyal, long time HS users who now unless they fork out money for an untested product will be screwed for not purchasing in the next 28 days.

With a beta that came out 7 months after bring promised, what guarantee is there that HS2.0 will be fixed within those 28 days? There have just bee too many unfufilled promises from HST to accept that the software is ready for primetime.

A far more reasonable time limit for upgrading would have been 3-6 months.

 

[Rupp]

Ski,
I do not think they see the day limit as you do. I believe they realized how late they were and to cushion the blow chose to offer a period of time to upgrade at a lower cost. They in turn will continue as they always have putting out new version after new version until they come out with 3.0. If you ask me HS has always been in beta. I like the frequent release pattern and this makes what they call it insignificant. They can call it beta or release but I will still get another release in a few days/weeks.

 

[tech-home]

I know for a fact that many of the HS users load plugins until they are blue in the face and then wonder why their HS install is unstable all the while removing pieces and parts of each of these plugins and leaving a mess.

Maybe but when you sell it, it sould work together seamlessly. They have taken a will take a cut of the pie but if something happens it's the authors fault.

We buy plugins to enchance HS at a minimal effort. If they sell them they should work together with no problem.

 

[WayneW]

Ski,
I do not think they see the day limit as you do. I believe they realized how late they were and to cushion the blow chose to offer a period of time to upgrade at a lower cost. They in turn will continue as they always have putting out new version after new version until they come out with 3.0. If you ask me HS has always been in beta. I like the frequent release pattern and this makes what they call it insignificant. They can call it beta or release but I will still get another release in a few days/weeks.

cushion the blow? BS. I believe from day 1 they said the price would be $39.

but I don't WANT to BUY an unproven beta! I want to buy a product I can install, configure and trust from day 1. If the product isn't fully cooked AND VERIFIED, then the 30 trial and the upgrade price timers shouldn't be ticking away. People resent being told they have to buy something now to get a good price before the product is ready.

Part of the reason there is so much debate on this is because people DO CARE about HST & HS. They have invested a fair amount of resources into this and want to protect it. If people didn't care, they would simply walk away without commenting.