One important thing to note is that "Simple update" was turned off in the beta so that it doesn't interfere with the stable/main version. Don't worry though - simple update will be available in the final 6.9 release, as normal. Currently, though, if you want to remotely update your Hosts to the beta version, you should use method 2 or 3 described on this page, in the Updating Hosts section (i.e. method 1 "Automatic" won't work for beta).
For example, when I connect to the host with my laptop, it displays "Laptop" and with my iPad it displays "iPad". If it displayed the name given in the settings like the Username or the machine name like "Chas's iPad" this would help in identifying the user.
Do you mean the ability to specify a custom name what to display in the notification panel when you are being connected. If so, this suggestion has already been on our wishlist. We will implement it together with other important changes to the notification panel later this year (there are plans on how to improve the whole thing).
There is backward compatibility between versions meaning that you should be able to connect from newer Viewer to older Hosts (but not vice versa). That lets you remotely upgrade your Hosts once you updated your Viewer, which is a recommended sequence - first Viewer, then Hosts.
By the way, you can update the Viewer and a few of your Hosts just to test the waters. Even better, you can leave your existing Viewer installation intact and, if you want to try the Beta, download and run the Portable Viewer 6.9 Beta. This will let you quickly roll back/return to your stable version if the current beta won't work for you for some reason.
Regardless of the terminology and intentions, we need a solution please.
I understand. But what kind of solution can we provide? As I mentioned, this 188.8.131.52 installer has been around for almost a year and clear of all a/v detections except just a couple of benign "riskware" classifications. There are hundreds of thousands of users who downloaded and use this very build. Also neither Symantec nor McAfee and TrendMicro treated this file as dangerous.
For some reason, similar [competitors] software isn't stopped by BD. We just tried 4 different ones on our machines. All good. There must be something not right within the code of RU what triggers alarm.
The code didn't change, it's the same code as it has been since August 2017.
We are in constant contact with major antivirus software vendors (e.g. Kaspersky, Webroot etc.) and all of them are very helpful and responsive when it comes to fixing the detection issues. However, some antivirus vendors are not as good in this respect. Still, we will try contacting them today and figure out the issue. In fact, we will be asking them to treat their own customers better and not to block legitimate software on their computers, however strange that may sound. Well, if they cannot take care about their own customers (who paid them money for their "antivirus solution"), we will.