Betanews posted the 0.65 build 44 beta yesterday and it already got a bad review and I guess it's just the beginning. Hope it doesn't affect the opoion of the ppl and they won't flood the forums about a bad build and stuff...I already acted and wrote a "review" to make it clear it's not a "stable" build:

Version Reviewed: 0.65 Beta Build 44
Reviewed by: Kidman
Date: April 9th, 2002 6:56 AM

It's not a disappointment, because this version is NOT for public use. It is an internal beta for testing purpose. It's said to be non-functional in many points (like broken file download). It's mainly a port to the Mozilla 0.9.9 source (after the first version of 0.65 build 44 what was a port to 0.9.8, that was even less functional) with some K-Meleon-specific bugfixes in it. The developers working on completing it. Too bad this beta was leaked to betanews (okok..it was mentioned 2 or 3 times at the forums, but always with the note it's NOT fully functional) and now ppl start to being scaring away from this unstable and buggy piece of s**t (some ppl like argue like this) or start flooding the forums with complains about that poor build. So I say it again: IT'S NO VERSION FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE!!! Stay with 0.6 until the official page has a download of it mentioned on the first page!

Rating: *****

To the contrary, I find the .65 beta to be much better than 0.6. It's super fast and stable (enough) on my system to become my favorite browser (vs. IE, Opera 6, N'scape, Enigma, and EasyBrowser).
With my cable connection .65 easily beats all of them speedwise, and all are configured and tweaked for max. speed.

GHM

well..I tried the 0.9.8 version of the beta and it was totally messed up. Nothing worked etc. Although ppl on the forum cheered about it, how great and stable and awesome it is...but as I stated my problems one of the devs also said, that he was wondering, why all the ppl were cheering about a messed version.
And the actual one on 0.9.9 (or is there a new one?!?!) is said to have broken download. And I think a browser with broken download is far away from being any useful....

Every site I tried to load under W2K SP2 crashed this new build of K-Meleon. ,:-) Oh well, guess I'll have to wait for the actual release. For the record, I'm not one of those ppl that gave a bad review over at BN, though once I tried this build I knew it was only a matter of time before the "comments" started to roll in. :-)

You mean you people actually pay attention to the reviews? The only reason I ever read them is when I need a laugh from idiots who don't know what the fsck they are doing or talking about.

Well..I normally don't care those reviews. But ppl, that aren't that deep into anything and looking for a replacement browser...looking at the reviews and just seeing bad stuff written down und about "unstable" and "crashes"...it will scare them away. Same for ppl, that never liked it, it's a change to flame it and bring some ppl away from it. Etc. dozens of scenarios...such thinsg could weaken the position of K-Meleon. At the moment this browser has a very good reputation and dextryoing a part of it by a non-functional internal beta posted on a big site would be really bad...

von, you and I know better, but the average user (esp. non KM users), don't. You know how people are: perception is _everything_. Sadly, most people are too ignorant (lacking knowledge and understanding) to form a correct perception (aka opinion- one representative of reality.) So when some idiot goes and posts software not ready for mainstream consumption, people don't put the state of the software in the proper context. Thus, it tarnishes the reputation of the program. It's not program's fault, it's the idiot that posted to BN to begin with, and the small-mindedness of people in general that are to blame. I bet the fool that posted to BN thought he was doing the right thing too. *sigh*

i read some of those reviews and some of them were true about the new beta version, especially the ones stating problems with accepting cookies.

> i read some of those reviews and some of them
> were true about the new beta version, especially
> the ones stating problems with accepting cookies.

i think the point being made here isn't that the reviews were untrue, but that they shouldn't have existed in the first place, since the build in question is actually probably more of an _alpha_ version, _known_ to be non-functional in many respects, primarily for the use of other developers or people involved in the project in some greater sense than passive consumption. the result of "pop beta testing" as a sort of 'get-cosumers-excited' tactic has been to make the term 'beta' useless... it will, at best, be taken to mean 'release candidate', and, at worst, 'be the first on your block!'... maybe a re-defining of terms is in order...

I agree. Surely only the KM Team can release a beta to such outlets... a 'beta testers' beta (i.e. alpha) is never for Joe Bloggs to use - and is always geared up to test known bugs with the good working code stripped (or turned off) to allow testing.

Anyway, I use KM 6.0 all the time now... it's a god send. Thank you.

Nick

quote: >> i think the point being made here isn't that the reviews were untrue, but that they shouldn't have existed in the first place, since the build in question is actually probably more of an _alpha_ version, _known_ to be non-functional in many respects, primarily for the use of other developers or people involved in the project in some greater sense than passive consumption. <<

i can undestand your point, but why submit a beta version to Betanews (a well known site for BETAS) when you don't want it to be reviewed? it should be pretty darn obvious that you take the chance of getting good reviews as much as bad reviews, so unless a user submitted this beta (and i dont think that's the way this works), the authors should be aware of such a risk. don't get me wrong, i'm not saying those reviews are deserved or not, but you can't keep people away from commenting on a program that has been made publicly availabe, be it a beta or not. if this beta was submitted by other person, other than the author(s), then that's another story and should be taken care of.

Mike,

As far as I know, no one from the K-Meleon team passed along the beta. The biggest problem is that when Jeff released the betas to the developer's list, he made clear the limitations of the beta and for what reasons it was being released. None of that is covered at beta news. But, we'll deal with it. I've seen releases that are a lot more broken than what they are passing along.

Andrew

where can i get the kmeleon 0.6.5 beta 44 plz i'd like to try it

thx +a+

Headless,

E-mail me - my address is under Help - About K-Meleon - and I'll send you the link.

Andrew

users CAN submit betas to betanews...'nuff said

just looked at betanews again and no new reviews have beem there since then. seems like ppl are smart enuff to read and not bitching around. I am surprised in a positive way )