Comments on: Qmobilesoft Releases CallRec 5.1 Update

The recent release of the latest update to Qmobilesoft’s CallRec program, version 5.0, contained a number of crippling bugs for users of the various Palm OS Treos. Many users (myself included) reported spontaneous crashes and endless reset loops that could only be cured by completely deleting version 5.0 or reverting back to an older version. Since the program defaults to auto-record incoming and outgoing calls on the Treo, this could lead to disastrous results for nearly all users of the program.

Fortunately, Qmobilesoft has responded swiftly to their customers’ concerns with the quiet release of version 5.1 of the program. Initial testing on a Verizon 700p shows a significant improvement in stability and recording performance with none of the spontaneous reboots or crashes that plagued the earlier version.

Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments


The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down

Great support

a_nonamiss @ 6/29/2007 9:20:53 PM # Q
I can't compliment their support enough. While it would be nice not to ever have any bugs in your software, I work for a software publisher, and realize that's a pipe dream. The next best thing is to have a responsive support staff. I installed 5.0 on my VZON 700p phone (previously running 4.0 without a problem) and instantly started seeing random resets. I filled out their support request on their website, and within a few minutes received a response telling me that they were looking into the issue. A short time after that, they sent me a beta version to test. Then a second beta. Then a link to the 5.1 software. They didn't try to blame it on me and my dozens of 3rd party software. (Which I readily admitted to them might be a factor in the problem.) All told, they had the issue resolved within one day.

I'm sure I wasn't the only person contacting support, but the fact that they offered me information every step of the way, even when things weren't right, makes me appreciate developers like this, and glad that I supported them by purchasing the software.

Man, other companies could really learn a thing or two from these folks about customer service in the face of a problem software release.


Palm Pilot 1000 > Palm Pilot Professional > Palm III > Palm M100 > Sony Clié PEG-T415 > Palm T|T3 > Samsung SCH-i730 > Palm 700p

RE: Great support
bbtkd @ 6/30/2007 8:28:41 AM # Q
Palm should fire their current development staff (including management), buy this company, and have them take over Palm POS development.

RE: Great support
joad @ 7/1/2007 1:47:26 AM # Q
Yup - 5.0 wasn't ready for prime time... but the difference between this developer and Palm was that this developer listened to the customer feedback about the problems and fixed the bugs in about a week. Palm will give you a year of baloney and then release a milquetoast MR as it gets EOL'd and out of warranty...

Reply to this comment

Palm- Um, Don't Buy QMobilSoft

CompeauFawkes @ 7/3/2007 2:11:12 PM # Q
Sorry QMobilSoft--
Though I'm sure you could use the cash(!)-- As has been shown time and time again when Palm buys small software companies (they've tried their hand at this countless times by now), all they end up doing is absorbing the great technology, forgetting why thy bought it in the first place, engaging in endless p***ing matches and turf wars about whether the acquired technology and paradigm is or is not superior to the ongoing exploratory project that has been simmering in a lab for X months already (or compare it to the last two companies' tech they bought). Then, with aplomb, they sap the empowerment out of the entrepreneurs they've just hired with endless meetings, stick them away in a pasture with jobs that have them chasing their tails free from any innovative possibilities to freely develop solutions customers might wish to use, and provide a lowest common denominator solution to the market that is a hollow shell of the former product.

uh, no. Don't let's see that again pleeese. :)

Mike Compeau

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top


Register Register | Login Log in