PokerTracker Support does not care anymore

[Paul B.]

I am writing this post to reveal the straight up indifference of Pat (ptrack pat) from the PokerTracker forum.

I know most posters here on 2p2 have had good experiences with Pat when it came to getting a new registration code, setting up PT, etc. I have, too. He is very timely with those simple tasks. However, when it comes to adding/improving features or dealing with unfamiliarity, Pat simply does not care.

For example, a year and a half ago, I made suggestions that would cut down on loading time and improve ease of use. Pat claimed that he added my suggestions to his list of things to do. As a programmer, I know that my suggestions could be implemented within a matter of a few hours... yet in the past year and a half, Pat has not found the time in his schedule to make those improvements.

The problem is that it's not just with me. If you look at his changelog, you will notice that he only fixes what is broken and rarely adds anything substantial. And when you look at those changes in relation to the number of reasonable and easily implementable feature suggestions that he receives, it's appalling that PT has such a good reputation.


I recently addressed a problem that I was having with PostgreSQL 8.2 on the PT forum. At some point, Pat took offense to one of my posts, referring to it as a "smart" reply, and decided to stop helping me. I called him an a-hole. You can criticize me for name-calling, but when support stops making an effort because I wrote a "smart" reply, I feel that I have the right to at least call him out on it.

At that point, he decided to ban me instead of trying to figure out what was wrong. In my opinion, this is completely messed up. I addressed a problem that many PT users could also potentially run into, but he chose to turn a blind eye. I'm hoping that Pat will read this post (email him at support@pokertracker.com ) and properly address the issues with his software.

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
I am writing this post to reveal the straight up indifference of Pat (ptrack pat) from the PokerTracker forum.

I know most posters here on 2p2 have had good experiences with Pat when it came to getting a new registration code, setting up PT, etc. I have, too. He is very timely with those simple tasks. However, when it comes to adding/improving features or dealing with unfamiliarity, Pat simply does not care.

For example, a year and a half ago, I made suggestions that would cut down on loading time and improve ease of use. Pat claimed that he added my suggestions to his list of things to do. As a programmer, I know that my suggestions could be implemented within a matter of a few hours... yet in the past year and a half, Pat has not found the time in his schedule to make those improvements.

The problem is that it's not just with me. If you look at his changelog, you will notice that he only fixes what is broken and rarely adds anything substantial. And when you look at those changes in relation to the number of reasonable and easily implementable feature suggestions that he receives, it's appalling that he has a good reputation.


I recently addressed a problem that I was having with PostgreSQL 8.2 on the PT forum. At some point, Pat took offense to one of my posts, referring to it as a "smart" reply, and decided to stop helping me. I called him an a-hole. You can criticize me for name-calling, but when support stops making an effort because I wrote a "smart" reply, I feel that I have the right to at least call him out on it.

At that point, he decided to ban me instead of trying to figure out what was wrong. In my opinion, this is completely messed up. I addressed a problem that many PT users could also potentially run into, but he chose to turn a blind eye. I'm hoping that Pat will read this post (email him at support@pokertracker.com ) and properly address the issues with his software.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fact that PokerManager worked as good with 3 million hands as with 10k hands made me realize this ages ago.

Sadly PT has a monopoly, and I doubt anybody else will try to compete with him again.

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[john kane]

i always way preferred pokeroffice becuase it had an overlap feature built into it.

[runstop]

Yeah, i agree with Juk. If PT (which is made with powerbuilder as far as I can tell.. UGH) didn't have a the market pretty much cornered, they (well Pat) would have to provide solid customer support to all users. However, as it stands now, he's making more money creating off-shoot products like pt stud and omaha to really have time.

This is how i see it anyway.

So, someone sit down with VC++ and make a real application with actual threading and optimized database performance, etc. and i'll pay $200 for it. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

runstop

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
So, someone sit down with VC++ and make a real application with actual threading and optimized database performance, etc. and i'll pay $200 for it. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]Same.

[runstop]

So who wants to be project manager? We're gonna make a million dollars.

[Distillery]

[ QUOTE ]

Sadly PT has a monopoly, and I doubt anybody else will try to compete with him again.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure Poker Office has grown quite a bit in the last year. In any case, Poker Tracker doesn't have a monopoly, that's for sure.

[The Icon]

One time I was browsing the PT forum and a user voiced his opinion of changing the NL bb/100 to actual big blinds instead of big bets. This way people don't have to say ptbb/100. This opinion was supported and backed up by other users however Pat's response was thats the way things have always been so theres no point changing it. That lack of flexibility shocked me.

[demon102]

At that point, he decided to ban me instead of trying to figure out what was wrong.


If this is true then pat needs to learn that he is in a business and that actions like this will kill his business. If there is a better product out there I will go after it.

[Statutory]

The problem is there is no money to be made in upgrading the product.

If he had a subscription instead of a one time fee, the user would have more to bargain with.