Forum feedback: CNET disappointed me
Friday -- week 2
by AsparaGus - 10/28/05 7:52 AM In reply to: CNET disappointed me by AsparaGusThe silence from RadarSync is deafening. I wrote again to Susan and tried to remain reasonable that a response from Support, that the problem is not understood or even an automated acknowledgement of receipt, would have been preferable to the course of inaction they have taken. There is no excuse for this.
I will refrain till Wednesday from writing my review, but you know what it will say. Errors or problems may be inevitable (for such an ambitious program) but Support that does not respond in any fashion is simply unforgiveable.
Me too!
by DaveExNav - 12/30/05 10:47 PM In reply to: Friday -- week 2 by AsparaGusAsparagus I sympathize with your frustration. I wish I had seen this before I subscribed.
I too have gone the multiple email with no response route. PayPal reports they HAVE been paid but NO reponse has been recieved from Support@radarsync or sales@radarsync.
Unlike you I have been irritated to the point that I posted negatively to the C|Net and ZDNet boards about this scam and am headed over to the DSLReports board to post there too.
If they were to show enough interest to at least respond I might be willing to post addendums to my original posts with the results but at this point I only see this company as a scam, one that also makes C|Net look bad since they recommended the service.
Addendum
by DaveExNav - 1/1/06 11:51 AM In reply to: Me too! by DaveExNavAs promised:
Within 48 hours of this post I recieved three email responses. Two stated that my original email had been misrouted by their mail server and put in an incoming spam box, the third (and last)simply acknowledged the original email. All three stated that the respondent had personally activated my subscription.
I can now access the service and will try it for a few days as Asparagus did and report the results back
Saturday
by AsparaGus - 10/29/05 2:57 PM In reply to: CNET disappointed me by AsparaGusSusan was good enough to reply to my email about not hearing from support. It seems the emails are being blocked somewhere. I use Verizon DSL and I am aware of their Spam Detector (I turned it off last year as soon as I read about it in the Langa List.) The thing I find strange is her emails from a radarsync.com address do get through as well as the do-not-reply mailbox that sent the welcome note -- while apparently support is a spammer and can't get email either. Very mysterious to me.
In a continuing gesture of good faith on my part, I downloaded the horrible little program again and played with it for most of the afternoon. On the positive side, the online version has corrected the missing file link mentioned above and has added a disclaimer about updates being to freeware/shareware programs which may be different than the version you paid for -- but it doesn't distinguish between them in any way.
(I believe it may also detect things as installed programs which are actually only freely available codecs associated with some programs, but I cannot be certain.) I've once again written to support and CCed it to emails which may or may not go through -- though Susan's seems to be reliable. I am adding the body of my email here:
------------------------------
It is me still trying to get through to support. (I'm thinking suport may
have disabled html or rich text emails so that may have been a problem with
them receiving mine.)
http://cnet.radarsync.com/Downloads.htm downloaded 10/28
I selected 10 items
Age of Empires done
Opened 2 folders -- before I realized I would have to dig into them to find
the setup.exe
1)VIA HyperionPro V504A
VIA Installed components :
VIA Machine INF 2.50A
VIA IDE Driver 1.20D
2)A1mu620b
(Vinyl Audio codecs -- warning not approved for use with XP)
I did these two and chose to restart my computer later (RadarSync was still
running and I had the open folders. The first time 2 weeks ago I stopped
after each install when I could.)
Did Age of empires update a second time
It again opened a folder which for a moment I thought was the same it had
already done -- it wasn't. The contents were the same though.
VIA CPU toAGP2 (VIA HyperionPro V504A -- same thing different download?)
Installed components :
VIA Machine INF 2.50A
VIA IDE Driver 1.20D
It again did this update from a different folder.
VIA AC97 Enhanced Audio Controler (WDM)
(A1u580c)
(same Audio codecs -- warning not approved for XP)
NVIDIA GEFORCE 5200
(Warning not approved for XP)
After these were done I restarted (to find out if I had made any progress --
I hadn't really it found 15 items that included the ones I had just done.)
selected only 3 items 2 for the ethernet card and the ubiquitous Age of
Empires
it updated a LAN but failed to update the seond and (of course, it always
update Age of Empires)
It found 13 items most of the ones it had already done I picked 4 the LAN it
had done, the ethernet card, Netscape and Age of Empires
The ethernet card download was not found. Notably Netscape updated in under
a second (though I knew I did have the latest version 8.04 before it was
detected as needing updating.)
It continues to find between 10 and 15 items many of which it has already
done and the downloaded client makes no distinction between updates and
upgrades which I noted is now made in the online version by a statement
between the hardware items and the software (I think.) I wasn't impressed 2
weeks ago and not much has changed.
Their reply (from a new tech)
by AsparaGus - 10/31/05 2:34 AM In reply to: Saturday by AsparaGusDear Jim,
Sorry about that but we did answer all the emails.
Can you please run the scan again and when you reach the results page, please click on REPORT BAD LINK next to those "repeated" updates and email us. Write the problem at the email. This will enable our mapping department to correct this issue in an accurate way.
Thanks in advance,
Anat
RadarSync
---------------------------
Obviously this person is only minimally aware that I ran the scan from the downloaded program and that the online scan produced roughly the same repetitious results. I had CCed the results to both Susan and Slava who haven't addressed it (but it isn't their job by narrow definition so I am not faulting them.)
Susan did reply with a copy of Slava's initial letter:
------
Jim – this is a copy of one of the emails I saw that was sent to you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Slava Rivkin Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 1:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jim.
I've been asked by our tech support to assist you solving your problems with our software.
From the information I received - you used RadarSync 2, in it's software version, and had a long list of problems.
My question is - did you try to use RadarSync Online, (http://go.radarsync.com)? (You can use same login and password there)
If you didn't, please try, and tell me if you experience same problems.
I'm really looking forward to understand what was causing all this, as we serve many thousands users daily, and most of them don't experience any issues.
Another thing you have to understand is that we can't be fully responsible for quality of updates, as they are provided to us by the original manufacturers as is. All we can do is to check them for viruses and other worms, and let our customers decide if they need it or not.
Thank you, and regards
Slava Rivkin
-------------------------------------------------
Obviously, Slava didn't see this thread (but that is my bad for not referring to it sooner. In my own defense the email troubles were not anticipated so there would have been no reason to do so. Tech Support shouldn't have to jump through hoops just to find out a problem. Then again neither should customers in reporting problems. But apparently changes and updates at radarsync.com are another element in this mess.)
From the outset, I have been very sympathetic to this company (radarsync) because it is trying to fill a void left by CNET and ZDNET when they abandoned the updates and catchup services. The goal is a most noble one. That I've found difficulties is regretable, but the true disappointment is with CNET in offering it in an email. Doing so implied a level of endorsement I continue to feel is inappropriate. That it was most likely a paid advertisement and not clearly marked as such, that only 2 moderators have chosen to comment and that nothing more official is appearing troubles me deeply and will be reflected in my review.
Monday
by AsparaGus - 10/31/05 3:03 AM In reply to: CNET disappointed me by AsparaGusFollowing up on the suggestion by Anat I redid an online scan with the same repetitive results and sent the following:
Hi Anat, Slava, and most especially Susan,
This has a long history which you may want to read at http://reviews.cnet.com/5208-7598-0.html?forumID=51&threadID=130809&messageID=1476348 -- the item I am reporting is just one of many that RadarSync finds, updates and continues to find after the successful update.
It appears to be the same or similar in both the online scan and from the downloaded program. Technically, I can't see that this is a bad link (though there have been some where the file was mislabelled on the server or in the link to it.) There is something else wrong with the detection being done.
From looking at the long thread I have written, I hope you can see that I wish you well in your efforts. Still I am not impressed with the program or the online scan performance. My initial run resulted in serious RunTime errors and I have refrained from restoring my computer to allow you a chance to sort things out for several weeks.
There is also something wrong with email (I'm certain it is not at my end and have spoken with Tech Support at Verizon which claims it has no block on your email -- though clearly some do get through and others do not. I suspect changes in your website configuration may be a part of the puzzle some help pages from the program do redirect and others do not.)
Sincerely,
Jim Andrews
Your disappointment
by taboma - 1/1/06 8:42 PM In reply to: CNET disappointed me by AsparaGusThank you for sharing an old wound with me.
That's what I get out of it.
ZNET is still haunting you?
Why did you download an old program?
Why is this post still here from last October 14th??
Simply amazing.
One Born Every Minute
by John Bradley - 1/3/06 2:04 PM In reply to: Your disappointment by tabomaI like everyone else received the eMail from Cnet
with the so called "Special Offer"
But what's angered me is that I received my eMail in December, well after the difficulies had been flaged
by other members. Like a fool I did'nt cheak to see if there was any thing posted regarding this product. I like so many others put my TRUST in the fact that this product was being endorsed by Cnet.
My own experience of this Vendor is as follows:
On the 27/12/2005 I logged onto RadarSync for the trial download, I then proceeded to register and download the Software. After two days of trying to get this software to do what RadarSync claimed it could do, I eventually gave up and uninstalled.
I naturally contacted the company to register my annoyance and demand a refund, I got a short reply saying in Effect They had not had been aware of any problems and credit would be organised.
Two days Later, I was contacted by RadarSync confirming that my credit had gone through and suggesting that perhaps the problem may have arisen
because I used a Bad link aqnd maybe I should try a new link which they provided, like a fool, I accepted the probability that I messed up the download in some way and agreed to try again which I did.
This time I followed the instructions that were provided in the link and got nothing other than a message "Internal Application Error"I again eMailed
vendor, The Answer back was that their Server was down. I again tried to download And Again failed to receive the software.
The result is That I have registered 3 Times and on each occasion I was assured that a credit had been arranged, in fact no credits have been received. they seem to say the first thing that comes into their heads anything to move you on. These People are at the very least incompitant and bordering on criminal.
I am MOST surprised at CNET sending out eMails in support of this company on the 27/12 when these complaints are being register as far back as October.
I beleive Someone in Cnet needs to answer this question, and I intend to do everything in my power to see that the answer is forthcoming.
The Battle continues
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
