this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
205 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
37699 readers
262 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Precisely my point.
If people don't want to be part of the internal testing, or part of the QA testing, then they shouldn't be running "Insider" or "Preview" stuff.
Insiders are not MS employees, though. That is also not the same as trained QA or security. You or I can join the insiders program. It is essentially public beta
More like alpha. Public beta are the normal (non-Insider) "Preview" versions... then they use a staged update deployment for QA.
And yes, MS is saving a lot of money on trained employees by using paying customers as testers.
Alpha is For sure more accurate. But for me that also means big security holes like that should be plugged before insider. I'm also a bit biased being a QA engineer