There isn't anything wrong with "control" per se if there is a "controlled" beta. Since the beta is an open one, IBM kinda let the cat out of the bag without control--as its own title suggests. An "open" beta means there aren't any control points to any of it. A controlled beta would imply invitation-only, and thus a more likely amount of control, or some kind of supervised monitoring of how people use the product.

So it would probably be smart of IBM to listen to chatter here as well as over at IBM since they themselves opened it up to the public-at-large. That means they should be willing to take input from a variety of sources. Next time, IBM should offer a controlled, invitation-only beta and you can then have people agree to all sorts of NDAs, and other requirements, before downloading the engine. Seems like you could actually have both an open beta and an invitation-only beta at the same time, and get two different points of view, and use. For what it's worth I'd sooner listen over here than at IBM's site simply because it's easier for me.

-t-

Madison Pruet wrote:
> Ian Michael Gumby wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: "Jean Georges Perrin" <jgp@jgp.net>
>>> To: "'Mark Jamison'" <majp51@yahoo.com>,<informix-list@iiug.org>
>>>
>>> IBM can (and does) monitor CDI too. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Right.
>>
>> But I think the idea is to steer all beta talk over to IBM so that
>> they can control the conversation(s).
>
> not so much control...
>
> It's just that we have folks in R&D acting as beta tech support folks
> there to respond to questions.
>
>>
>> __________________________________________________ _______________
>> Don’t miss your chance to WIN 10 hours of private jet travel from
>> Microsoft® Office Live
>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub...mrt/direct/01/
>>

--
*
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVS3k...elated&search=
*