Fire SWREG

[RNFolsom]

PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST. I have already donated an enormous amount of time to alerting Tracker-Software to the ton of incomplete information and plain inconsistencies I have endured while upgrading from PDF-XChange Viewer version FREE 2.0 to version PRO 2.5.

For details, see the thread https://forum.pdf-xchange.com/ ... =35&t=9930

But tonight was the straw that breaks the camel's (or donkey's) back.

After finding out how to do that transition from FREE 2.0 to PRO 2.5 (thanks to Stefan in the thread cited above), I completed the transition. In the process I received a Registration Email from Tracker, an Order-Invoice/Receipt email from SWREG, and a "Thank you for your order" email from SWREG. Sweg's "Thank you for your order" email included the following instruction:
"please ensure you can receive mail from this address without it being placed in your junk/spam folders: info@swreg.org"
So I went into my ISP's TMDA (Tagged Message Delivery Agent) anti-spam filter and whitelisted "info@swreg.org" as instructed.

Today I checked my TMDA pending spam list because I was expecting something I needed to be stuck in it, and found also another message from SWREG: "Reminder of Your Recent Order" which was almost an exact duplicate of the "Thank you for your order" email I had received previously, including the same "info@swreg.org" instruction. OK, so SWEG was following up. But despite the instruction to whitelist "info@swreg.org," this Reminder message came from support@swreg.org, which is why it got stuck in the TMDA anti-spam filter.

The confusion between what is a KeyCode and what is a Serial Number (see the thread cited above) is bad enough. Can't Tracker find a service company that at least knows its own address?

I say again: PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST. I have no intention of ever visiting this location again. Instead, how about doing a better job of using terms and addresses consistently?

R.N. (Roger) Folsom

[John - Tracker Supp]

Well Roger - just because you dont intend to read this does not mean others will not - so it demands an answer.

I appreciate your frustrated and we have already acknowledged directly to you that there is an unhelpful proliferation in terms used for the serial number/keycode etc and have committed to modify all we can at our end to ensure this is unified.

In so far as SWREG are concerned - they do an excellent job for us in processing our credit card payments and I make no apology for using them - in almost every way they are unrivalled - but that does not mean that they cannot improve - as we indeed can do and I will forward your comments to them.

Other than that - if you contact us directly anytime we always do our utmost to help and I believe we do a very good job supporting our clients as the vast bulk of posts on this forum and direct emails we receive attest.

I cannot help but feel your post here is a little unfair - perhaps colored by your frustration and I am dissapointed you have chosen to use the rhetoric you have to convey this in such a public way - rather than discuss with us directly.

In closing let me say to the wider audience (as you will not be reading this anyway) - that I honestly believe you are in a minority when it comes to your disatisfaction with the support you have received - but we will certainly do more to streamline the communications issued by ourselves and our card processors.

[RNFolsom]

John, Tracker Support:

I changed my mind about not coming back to this location, because it occurred to me that since I had made my point, I ought to revisit this location and delete my message that opened this thread. I see now that I cannot do that. But if you want to delete my message, feel free to do so.

But meanwhile I will make one more comment (which you are welcome also to delete, with or without deleting my initial message in this thread). You wrote:

> In closing let me say to the wider audience (as you will not be reading this anyway) - that I honestly believe you are in a minority when it comes to your dissatisfaction with the support you have received - but we will certainly do more to streamline the communications issued by ourselves and our card processors. <

I probably am in a minority --- I certainly hope so. But I am not dissatisfied with the support I have received, as I have noted with clearly stated "Thanks" and "Thank you" and "Thanks for the help" etc., not only in my "Sequence to Replace Free PDFViewer 2.0 by PRO 2.5" thread at https://forum.pdf-xchange.com/ ... =35&t=9930, but also in private emails to Paul O'Rorke and to Stefan. In quantity and quality, the support I have received has been excellent, as I have said elsewhere.

My point here is simply that so much support (and so many suggestions) should not have been needed.

Roger Folsom

[John - Tracker Supp]

Hi Roger,

thanks for coming back and I appreciate your taking the time to do so.

We have been in touch with SWREG and managed to modify around 90% of the issues mentioned in terms of making phrases and text common in both ours and their systems - one or 2 matters still require resolution in terms of the text used - specifically in our product interfaces to make them common throughout and also adjust our help files to match, this will be done in the coming build or 2 as time allows.

I appreciate your recognition of the help received by support staff here and also agree it would help you and us to negate the necessity for this by ensuring the above is resolved in full.

So I guess best to say - all's well that ends well and we do appreciate your positive criticisms which will help us improve the experience of all our clients to the benefit of all involved.

Have a good one !

[RNFolsom]

John:

We have been in touch with SWREG and managed to modify around 90% of the issues mentioned in terms of making phrases and text common in both ours and their systems . . . .

All of that was really good news. Thanks for posting it.

A final thought: Although I had never heard of SWREG until I discovered Tracker-Software using it, I am fairly sure that over the past 20 years or so I have purchased a variety of software where the order initially seemed to be placed with the software company but was re-routed to Digital River (unless there is a different company with a very similar name), with DR visibly taking the payment and sending a receipt, which included a description of what had been purchased. No problem there. (Exception: the receipt often warned, correctly, that the order would show up on my monthly credit card statement as coming from DR with no mention of the product purchased. That was annoying, especially if I was setting up a new computer and my life was in software acquisition mode.)

But my recollection is that technical information, such as installation information (preferably including the always-needed info --- since there's no consistency across different software products --- about whether or not to uninstall a previous version before installing the new version) came from the software company itself.
(Later, new version announcements came either from the software company, or from a third party other than Digital River.)

So getting a "Thank you for your order" email from Digital River's SWREG unit that included not only an order receipt (obtained by clicking a link located at the bottom of the "Thank you for your order" email), but also installation information, was a bit disconcerting, and would have been mildly disconcerting even if the installation information had been correct.

Tracker-Software may have very good reasons (which are none of my business) for having DR's SWREG distribute installation instructions. But from an outsider's perspective, and from having heard many stories of outsourcing malfunctions (and also outsourcing efficiencies, when appropriate) from military and civilian students, in the long run Tracker may discover that it is more efficient to send its own installation instructions. Inter-organization communications often fail if they need to be very detailed. [As a dramatic example, not really relevant here but irresistible anyway, consider Boeing's Dreamliner!]

Just some "food for thought." Once again, no need to reply!

Cordially, Roger Folsom

----------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. At https://www.pdf-xchange.com/product/downloads, the PDFVManual version number is not listed, but today I downloaded the website PDFVManual (to see if there was a more recent version than 2.5.188). After unzipping, the website downloaded PDFVManual size is 6,932,053 bytes, which is still the old manual for Viewer version 2.0, instead of the new manual (7,034,518 bytes) for current Viewer version 2.5.191.

I could make that comparison because I had retained the old manual, and had obtained the new manual when I upgraded from PDF-XChange Viewer Free 2.0 to PRO 2.5.191.

Also, right-clicking EITHER the old or new PDFVManual and selecting Properties, PDF Information tab, gives the "title" as PDF-XChange Viewer 2.0. The new manual title should be PDF-XChange Viewer 2.5, or (if my memory is correct) a more detailed version number would be PDF-XChange Viewer 2.5.188.

Still again, no need to reply to this P.S.!

[John - Tracker Supp]

Hi Roger,

1: The latest manual is 2.5188 - we dont update the manual with every build as new builds are available too frequently and the changes usually minor - so we tend to do every 3-4 months, an update is in progress now and may or may not be ready with build 192 due this next 7 days or so. I note the 2.5188/ 2.0.... discrepancy

2: In regards SWREG who are indeed just one of the many DR subsidiaries (thye were taken over by DR about 6 years ago) the reason they insist on an email also originating from them is to ensure the user is notified a purchase has been made on their CC to trap any fraudulent misuse etc - and potential abuse by unscrupulous vendors ...

Other points noted ...