runtime software - thanks for nothing

[16k_zx81]

Hello Techs,

This is Jody from Runtime Software, the person who has had correspondence to Jim Stewart or whatever name he goes by here. There are a few things that need to be clarified:

yadda yadda yadda

Is it the best on the market; no. Is it the fastest on the market; no.

Thanks Jody for your response.

I will take the opportunity here to provide some feedback on my experience. I hope this is useful to you.

1. My initial email requesting support was not responded to. At all. Nothing from you. I waited 2 days with no reply.

I then emailed again, prompting a 'canned' reply, that was marked as an automated response. You did not acknowledge my first email to you. Even for a 'free version with no support' - there should have been an acknowledgement that you had received the email, a canned response, or were intending to respond with a canned email. No response - at all - to a customer query is, frankly, unprofessional.

2. Your initial response, when it finally came was completely useless. You were aware of the situation, and could just as easily replied, "the image is dead. You cant use it. Sorry, but our software cant cope with too many files". (see, three short sentences. Not that difficult). What you did send was a bunch of links and a youtube video; none of which had any bearing on the problem I had experienced.

Note that this would probably not constitute 'tech support' - rather, just an honest admission that your software doesnt work properly in certain circumstances.

If you had replied to this effect, or with any level of acknowledgement of the problem that had been communicated to you, the matter would have gone no further.

3. No response to my subsequent email. (Not a surprise at this point). No indication it had been received. (again). At this point, I posted here, and advised you as such.

4. I completely understand, now, that your software comes with no tech support. That puts technicians in a commercial environment in a very difficult situation in terms of trialling your software. What I read in your replies here is that we either (a) purchase the software up front in order to trial it in our workshops, or (b) do not use it in our workshops.

Not a lot of options there from Runtime, given that your competition offers commercial trials of their software. But this is up to you I guess. Just bearing this out here so that its clear for other techs considering DXML as a backup option. Technicians are much better catered to in terms of customer service by other companies offering similar, (apparently better), products and customer service.

5. Ive never heard of Acronis or Paragon or Shadowprotect balking at 'too many files' - you might want to look at that, or at least provide a disclaimer that your product is not functional in this regard.

Frankly, I think you guys might want to reconsider how you treat technicians (ie your customer base) next time you receive a support request. I get that you dont want to field support requests from end-users or unpaying customers. I completley understand that that might be time-consuming and unproductive for you. You might want to figure out how to differentiate the two (end users, commercial trial use) in the systems and options you currently have in place. (see my comments re Paragon's tech support for their commercial trials earlier in this thread). Again, your competition clearly communicates that they want commercial business, and are prepared to offer us proper commercial trials and proper technical support.

I dont think there's anything else to say. I completely take responsibility for my error in this matter - which was trying your software in the first place.

Jim

 

[bertie40]

1. All 32-bit applications have a limit which is 2GB of memory used. Every file entry that is stored takes up some of that memory. When you load the XML, it must be loaded into memory. Therefore, once you have too many files, you will get an out of memory error. This will be solved with a 64-bit version when we do release one.
.

-----------

Interesting, seeing as the runtime website makes no mention of this potential problem.

Quote.
"Q. What Operating Systems are supported?

A. With the software installed on a PC, supported file systems are Windows XP, Server 2003, Server 2008, Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8, 32 and 64 bit."

-----------
Runtime website tells us 64 bit is supported.
Runtime post suggests that it isn't.

I would suggest mentioning the 64bit limitation on the website, or remove the 64 bit compatibility reference. specifically the "number of files" limit.

Ie, Under certain circumstances, use of this utility in a 64 bit environment may lead to damaged archives.
-----------

We arn't dealing with floppy disks any more.

With more and more HD product, it isn't unusual for single files in excess of 10 Gigs these days. In large numbers.

64 bit OS, and Memory in excess of 2GB is now the norm.

These are not niche file sizes, this is now common practice.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Seems to me you may have missed an opportunity. Rather than respond as you did, perhaps you should consider the impact of providing outstanding customer service, despite the fact that you weren't "required" to do so. Then perhaps the title of this thread could have been "Runtime Software - thanks for everything".

And then they get their door beat down by people that used the free product..and expect support on it...because they saw on a forum that someone else got free support on the free version? Settings precedents like that can be dangerously overwhelming.

 

[SilverLeaf]

And then they get their door beat down by people that used the free product..and expect support on it...because they saw on a forum that someone else got free support on the free version? Settings precedents like that can be dangerously overwhelming.

True. However, this may be outweighed by the costs of having to defend your software and customer service policies on a forum populated with many potential customers for your premium (non-free) products.

Had the OP's experience been a positive one instead, perhaps the exposure generated by a report of great support "above and beyond the call", would justify the risks in this case. Hard to say.

Then again, this is all water under the bridge now.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

True. However, this may be outweighed by the costs of having to defend your software and customer service policies on a forum populated with many potential customers for your premium (non-free) products. .

How much do you think it "cost" them to have someone post here? User might even be some joker that signed up posing as a Runtime staffer to make a game of things...I've seen it before.

OTOH...If that user under the alias of Runtime is actual Runtime staff....agreed...harsh posts he/she made...and although I never considered purchasing their software before...the experience of his/her attitude will ensure that I never purchase their products in the future. While I might agree that support is not an option for free versions of the product and they can't cross the line....his/her "tones" or attitude in the replies came across as harsh and with a "fv__you" attitude. Certainly could have been handled with much more tact, IMO. And I agree with some of your point..he/she (runtime person that posted here) should have realized that the audience here is a bunch of shop owners (thus....AHEM....potential customers), and it should be a "holy crap I really shot myself in the foot opening my mouth like that in front of this big crowd!"

Suggestion I might make.....what I had learned years ago...when you are considering a piece of software to start using as part of your services....contact a sales rep first. Talk about you/your shops, your needs..and that you would like to trial their software for possible use and start building a partner/reseller relationship. They will usually give you an NFR license, or a 30 day trial of their pro version...for evaluation. The important thing that I'm getting to...is you will usually have their support behind their "trial/evaluation"...because you've struck up a relationship with sales there, and they now want you as a customer. So they will back their product.

 

[Runtime Software]

-----------

-----------
Runtime website tells us 64 bit is supported.
Runtime post suggests that it isn't.

I would suggest mentioning the 64bit limitation on the website, or remove the 64 bit compatibility reference. specifically the "number of files" limit.

Ie, Under certain circumstances, use of this utility in a 64 bit environment may lead to damaged archives.
-----------
.

It has nothing to do with 64-bit or not. I am not sure why you took what I wrote and came to this conclusion. You can run all of our software on a 64-bit OS with no issue, including DriveImage. Our products are only 32-bit applications which still have a 32-bit limitation of 2GB per application. This is the same for 75% of the products being installed today. You can tell which applications are 32-bit, they are placed in the Program Files (x86) folder instead of just the Program Files folder. I am sure some of your favorite programs are still 32-bit applications.

GetDataBack has the same limitation. If you have over 5 million files on your drive, you will run out of memory. This happens to less than 5% of the people who use the software, but it does happen. A 64-bit version will require a complete rewrite of the software and we are working on it, but it will take another 2 years at least.

So my point is that it does not matter what Windows OS you run it on, it is still a 32-bit application. Running it in an x64 environment does not make it unstable or unusable.

 

[angry_geek]

You know, I had forgotten all about this thread until you dredged it back up. In the past, I've liked your company and enjoyed using your products. The more you keep arguing here, the less faith I have in your company.

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

In short, you may consider forgetting this argument before we begin forgetting about runtime.

 

[allanc]

Seems to me you may have missed an opportunity. Rather than respond as you did, perhaps you should consider the impact of providing outstanding customer service, despite the fact that you weren't "required" to do so. Then perhaps the title of this thread could have been "Runtime Software - thanks for everything".

I agree completely.
All of the reading that I have done recently in terms of marketing and public relations reinforces your suggestion and states that the supplier of product or service should make it 'a magic moment'.
I was discussing this thread with my girlfriend and her suggestion was that RunTime should have offered to provide support *if* a license was purchased even after the fact. In other words, as amnesty or a goodwill gesture.

 

[basic]

Seems to me you may have missed an opportunity. Rather than respond as you did, perhaps you should consider the impact of providing outstanding customer service, despite the fact that you weren't "required" to do so. Then perhaps the title of this thread could have been "Runtime Software - thanks for everything".

Perhaps, but I think it would be a bit hypocritical of us, since many technicians are wary about giving free advice or help since it could potentially lead to "time wasters" and more headaches than its worth. I'm sure 16k_zx81 would have been a good opportunity for Runtime to win over another customer but there are probably millions of others that would abuse the free version if they found out they could force Runtime to give support for their free software. In my opinion, it was stated clearly that no support was given and I can't place blame on Runtime. It's unfortunate this occurred.

 

[16k_zx81]

Perhaps, but I think it would be a bit hypocritical of us, since many technicians are wary about giving free advice or help since it could potentially lead to "time wasters" and more headaches than its worth. I'm sure 16k_zx81 would have been a good opportunity for Runtime to win over another customer but there are probably millions of others that would abuse the free version if they found out they could force Runtime to give support for their free software. In my opinion, it was stated clearly that no support was given and I can't place blame on Runtime. It's unfortunate this occurred.

i was just looking over this thread, several months after the fact, following a current discussion in another thread by someone using DXML. I wanted to revisit after a 'fresh' reading.

The take-away for anyone considering using DXML is that it will produce a useless image on 2% or 5% of drives (Jody quotes both figures, and I am not sure quite where she gets them from, but lets assume they are roughly valid).

It will not provide an error message at the time of making these 2-5% of images to advise that its backup process is failed. This will only be evident when an attempt is made to reconstitute the images. If no other backup method has been applied, the drive will be unrecoverable.

DXML is not a suitable product for professional use. Period.

Jim