0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
If TI tested 3.2, wouldn't it be apparent on some level that it is much slower than 3.1. And if that is true, does that indicate that TI doesn't do much testing but counts on the customer to find their screw ups for them, for free of course. That's the only way I can understand why the os updates are constantly flawed, and I wonder how math teachers have time to do things like develope lesson plans when they are constantly reacting to new os bugs and other hardware issues if they use nspires to teach.
The thing is, TI let's many teachers beta test the software so I have no idea how this could not be noticed. Anyway, you are right. They shouldn't depend on teachers/others to test it.
I don't think they knew about it. The release was already postponed to solve some issues .. so I think they would not have released it if they knew about it.The people (who are on a pretty high level with TI) did not know about the bug, and they already fixed some of the ones we reported.
Quote from: jimbauwens on June 13, 2012, 07:54:34 amI don't think they knew about it. The release was already postponed to solve some issues .. so I think they would not have released it if they knew about it.The people (who are on a pretty high level with TI) did not know about the bug, and they already fixed some of the ones we reported.Anyway it's clear evident that they have not trust in their own quality assurance anymore. But still focusing on "fixing" the Ndless issue... How irresponsible and irrelevant.
That such major bugs as the slowness were not discovered, or fixed before the release, means that their beta-testing is severely inadequate, and/or that they don't care.