Siri is in beta because the technology requires significant use to to develop and understand it's user base to eventually be as comprehensive and intuitive as possible. All requests are sent to Apple's servers to be analyzed and processed. It's a system of learning and can't simply be mastered in a few revisions. This is a work in progress. If Siri wasn't in beta, people would lose their minds if it went down or didn't handle a request as the wished. I personally have no gripes to think of (I own a 4S) and am anticipating some welcome changes in iOS 6.
If the argument is that you don't think Siri works as well as it does in the commercials where dramatizations speed up requests, then maybe you should be upset with the rest of the marketing world as well. Do a fancy pair of basketball shoes make you better at basketball? Does an expensive liquor make you classy? Will a Happy Meal actually make you happy when you finally consume it? More people than you'd think are walking around with their intellect off and respond to pure emotional stimulation. It's an advertisers job to cater to that market since they're the mass majority. There will always more stupid people (less inquisitive and more dependent) than smart people and stupid people are an easy sale. Smart people are more inquisitive and require more stimulation to their intellect, rather their senses and emotions. The "green" market is one example for the more intellectual -- which also helps Apples market share being that their products use highly recyclable components. The Toyota Prius is another example for that market base.
When intelligent people are forced to consume, they do research and use their knowledge to determine what is best for them.
If you need all you information from a commercial and are mad at Apple for somehow misleading you with theirs, I know where you stand.
As fas as tests go, I require specifics. I don't trust percentages. For example, if you were to hear on the news or read poll results that say 80% of the voters are against legalizing marijuana, I'd want to know how many voters there were and what was their demography? Meanwhile, the polls may have been answered by elderly republicans or religious fanatics (more republicans, lol) that still think the movie Reefer Madness holds water and had no idea that the paper companies were behind the misleading propaganda to eliminate the competition (hemp).
Off topic..
How many haters actually use Apple products? I've met a few Apple haters in my time and they've all converted because their tired old rhetoric was just that. They saw the light when their friends were using MBPs while they were replacing or repairing laptops too frequently and wasting money. Not to mention all the bloatware, spyware and other common malicious attacks that are inherent to nearly all Windows machines. Unfortunately, most are still forced to use Windows for work, but that works on the same hardware so there's no problem there.
People commonly make the mistake of buying a PC thinking the higher spec'd hardware will outperform and Mac. This is still true in some areas. Apple uses quality hardware that run at a more comfortable pace. PCs put a bunch of top performing hardware in a plastic shell. Time after time the higher performing hardware will burn itself out. Apple products are a more refined technology and manage performance in a more optimal and reliable manner. Personally, I wouldn't buy any other machine unless, like others have mentions, they totally screw up big like Nokia and RIM, which seems unlikely being that Apple is the one putting them in their place. My first computers were hand-me-down PCs. My first purchase was a Mac.
I can still remember the day I was driving home with my new iPod classic in '04 and I said to my passenger "Now if they'd only make a phone out of this so I won't have to carry both." Sure enough, Apple did and wow has the market changed because of them.
