What is the point of having a beta demo????

I know right off the bat that I will get a crapload of flack for saying this, but I'm used to that.
First let me say that I enjoy COD4. It is a good game. Notice, GOOD, not GREAT. It has a decent fun factor and if you game with the right crew there could be loads of strategy.
All that being said, I am disappointed with Infinity Ward.  Maybe it is because I view things in a slightly different light? I think that whichever industry a company is in, they should strive to deliver the highest possible product for their customers (I know...what a concept). I also think that used to be the standard. Look at most companies today....gone are the days where "the customer is always right" applies. Why? I believe it is all the public's fault. Either they abused the concept (scamming the company), or we have become too complacent; allowing the companies to take advantage of us. Companies, specially in the software business seem to have developed the mentality that it is OK to deliver a subpar product, since they can always "update" it. How long did IW have to develop, test, re-test COD4? How many programmers did they have on payroll? How many testers did they have on staff? How many of us participated in the beta? Yet, they could not have the logical, deductive foresight to understand that not having the capability of a migrating host night be a bad idea? The fact that we complained time and again about the accuracy (lack thereof) of the sniper rifles and ACOG scope went utterly unnoticed? By the way....how is it that an ACOG scope diminishes accuracy???? (I'm referring to the stats shown when you equip the ACOG). Did their consultants have no experience with ACOGs? From first hand experience I can tell you that up to 300 meters the Trijicon ACOG (the one depicted on the game) is gold for accuracy. Zero that puppy in and you can have keyhole shots ad nauseum.
Back to the point.......for over two months we have been waiting for a patch. A patch that should never have needed to be there...if IW would work with the mentality that they should deliver a solid product to begin with. Are you really going to tell me that the issues that are prevalent on COD4 were completely unforeseeable??? To me, the issues are directly related to the basics of online gaming. By now everyone in the industry should know to have migrating hosts. By now, everyone in the industry should know that if you make an FPS the gamer expects accuracy from their weapon. And the excuse that their patch did not pass MS's screening....are you shitting me?? Does MS keep the information of the requirements for patches a secret? I seriously doubt it. I am fairly certain that MS lets all their developers know: This is the coding that needs to be used for patches, this is what you can have in a patch, this is what you can't have in a patch. Again, basic proper prior planning, and attention to detail will prevent this stuff.
I might understand these issues if this were a start-up company. I might understand if this were IW's first rodeo on the 360. Neither applies. Remember COD2? How long did we have to wait on a patch for that game? Anyone? Over 3 months! Sound familiar? Maybe they should address COD4 before they start working on COD6?????
My point is that IW has no reason or excuse to not have:
a) Put the game out correctly to begin with (except the profit margin faced by meeting the deadline) or
b) Gotten the patch out already!

Now, go ahead and flame. Before you do though...try using logic and not allow your fanaticism or "online friendship" with IW developers over-run common sense. Again, COD4 is a good game and IW should be praised for it, however they should also be accountable for their shortcomings.