Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
I am technically adept thanks, and have taken part in many trials.
|
And at no point in my rebuke did I refute that, or even make mention of it. Your technical credentials were not called into question, I merely remarked that you missed my point. No need to get so defensive!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
I don't think it is down to poor testing at all, but just the way some people are expecting it to work like their stand alone router isn't how VM envisioned the super hub I think.
|
It's clearly poor testing and poor design when core functionality is often intermittant for several users. I know what VM envisioned for the Super Hub, roughly, and I can tell you that my particular unit in no way fits the bill; a finding echoed by several others on here and the official VM community forums, enough to be featured in a number of web articles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
Poor wireless functionality? I have had mine running for months and not had a single drop out.
|
And exactly how much pressure are you putting it under? As I've pointed out, light web browsing and the odd file transfer won't kill it. Moving large amounts of data probably will. This and other factors mean it fails at doing basic routing functions most people take for granted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
Am sure you would like to help but when testing firmware you would usually be given some scripts to follow then provide feedback. Although in the case of customers doing some final testing then they would just be looking for a bit of feedback concern the firmware after it was already internally trialled.
|
This is the problem, obviously. Thanks for sharing, because now I have a better idea of where VM are failing: rigorous dedication to scripts. We're not talking actors on a stage reciting dialogue - real life situations don't tend to respond well to scripts. This appears to be a fatal flaw, a complete misjudgement.
Sure, have a script, but allow testers to elaborate and have some dialogue with the engineers, maybe an IM session where they can accurately ascertain where the problems might lie through use of open-ended questions. When both the VMNG300, the Hub and the Super Hub are full of problems at launch requiring firmware fixes a rethink is clearly required.
This lame attempt at damage control does no-one any favours. I'm sorry, that's just as polite as I can make it. I'm giving creative feedback on how VM could do things better, but to take a line from The Simpsons I guess "no one wants to listen to the nonsensical ravings of a loudmouthed malcontent".
Your move, chief.
---
PS: Chrysalis, your comments at the end of page 1 were outstanding. Could not have said it better myself though that doesn't stop me trying.