To quote an old sage: "Test groups are sometimes called professional idiots...people who are good at designing incorrect data." Test groups test data they do not design data. If the program was designed correctly in the first place, then there would be no need for any further investigation. Testing streams is for computers to do. They can follow a path far faster and they are completely objective...on/off...works/does not work...trash it or put it on the shelf.

"test cases are hard to design " and for that reason, poorly designed software hits the streets with more hype than it deserves. We get sucked into paying for ware that White Box testers can't be bothered spending the time to do it in the first place. There would be much more confidence in computers and the software they use if there was more integrity among your superiours. Apply you logic to an automobile. Imagine winging down the turnpike and a wheel falls off. Traced back to the garage where you had the wheels rotated, and we may find that the mechanic couldn't be bothered double checking that the lug nuts are ALL on tight. Neither do I want to use that premis when I go to get lasik surgery on my eyes...get real. At some point accountablility must be the order of the day, underpinned by valitidity...and the ease of reaching a clearly defined objective!

"Why not use the correct testing proceedure of clearbox testing.....ohhhh so sorry...you need to have some working knowledge of the problem to do that!"

Oh, I love that one. ergo...every consumer must not be allowed to purchase any product that he/she has not been tested on. And if the product is crap, then whose fault is that. Once its in the box, the assumption is, that the product works as it is supposed to...and for as long as necessary...that is why we have warranties...to cover up the mistakes and incompetence among software and hardware makers...who release their products too soon, and then wait for the complaints. Do we get our money back. Not likely. Why should the user be you testing ground? That's fraudulent...bait and switch.

You are a technocrat...like me, others are use-o-crats We don't give a hoot about the guts of the matter, the codes and such, just provide a product that works, no excuses. And if that is too difficult...take up gardening instead.

This is so hilarious.

Plain and simple...blackbox testing is garbage testing.....whitebox/clearbox or what other name you wish to use is the true test.

Your premise from the auto tire is crap. you can't compare the stupidity of the operator for the failure of the product. The lug nut and bolts were tested previously to be sound by experienced testers and test procedures. The failure to tighten is the responsibility of the shop for improper training of the employees on how to tighten the lug nut. It is not a premise that the bolt or nut failed...but of the employee that failed.

Again, you have taken something and tried to reinvent it. If a program is designed to do a certain thing then test it for that objective purpose. Don't test it for things it was not designed to do as it will all ways fail in that regard....That sir is why "black box testing" is garbage testing, it is constantly being subjected by unskilled testers to do what it was never designed to do.

Again with the out of context crap...all testing should be conducted prior to marketing the product....beta testing is done as pre- marketing testing so that the users can actually put the product under real time usage and then report the bugs to the designers so they can be repaired before the product is sold.....That is what you do....you do not buy the product then beta test it....unless you are not a part of the beta testing and are nothing but a wanna-be.

Yes, when it is put on the shelf and sold as a viable product, then it is expected to work as described...if it doesn't, then we have laws that guarantee that we get our money back....they are called "Tort Laws". That is our protection from the incompetent designers and manufacturers that you describe. Unfortunately, there are unscrupulous people out there that take advantage of the internet and send out bogus programs. There are just as many bogus testers that certify that something works as designed or testify that they use it and it works as ,if not better, than described. Don't believe me just watch TV in the early AM and you will see lots of them!

Your problem sir is the blackbox testing, you have taken it too much to heart and use it to read betweeen the lines when there are no hidden words at all.
You dissect a statement and subject it to all kinds of what if's and lose sight of what the statement really says.

And yes I am a technocrat in the sense that I am :
1) An advocate of technocracy.
2)An expert in some technology, especially one in a managerial or administrative role.
3)An individual who makes decisions based solely on technical information and not personal or public opinion.