Tracker is sadly going backwards

[devguy]

My perception is Tracker used to be a development-driven company. The original premise was fast, lean, stable PDF tools that just worked as an alternative to bloated Adobe products. Today it seems Tracker is more of a marketing-driven company and trying to catch up to Adobe in the bloat department.

The free viewer has doubled in size since 2011. Yet there's literally nothing in the new version I need that wasn't in the 2011 version. The new one is less usable on small screens, takes up more drive space, uses more memory, is slower, and has generally had more bugs.

What the product looks like is seemingly more important to Tracker management than usability. Adding "fluff" features, and bloat, is apparently more important, than say supporting mobile devices with small screens. Never mind that a great many people are moving more to tablets and small laptops/ultrabooks/hybrids/netbooks. This thread is a good example where this issue is identified as a "low priority" for new versions:

https://forum.pdf-xchange.com/ ... 62&t=23349

The above issue was discussed back in January and promised to be fixed. I'd hoped, by now, it might be properly addressed. But instead there are only work-arounds and it's a "low priority."

And what happened to Tracker's testing procedures? The massive bug introduced in February in the 312 build rendered the product all but unusable. It was the sort of blatant problem any decent sort of testing procedure should have caught. It was widely and easily reproducible using the default installation of the Pro product:

https://forum.pdf-xchange.com/ ... 62&t=23153

The new licensing scheme has also created problems for a great many people. It seems the new scheme was implemented to get more revenue from paid upgrades, but for many of us it's having the opposite effect. We don't want to cross the divide when the old products, using the old license, are often the preferred version. It creates a big mess to have two entirely different incompatible licensing schemes--especially for anyone with Tracker products on several PCs and when the old products are often preferable to the new ones.

I used to recommend PDF Xchange to everyone but, when they started complaining and uninstalling them, I stopped. It's too hard to explain the old products were really great and you can no longer buy a current license for the old versions. So anyone who doesn't have an old paid license is stuck with the current bloated buggy products. And many have just said "no thanks."

The support staff have been commendably responsive in these forums but, if you read between the lines, they seem frustrated as well with the choices management is making. They're stuck on the front lines dealing with all the complaints. It would be nice to hear from someone in senior management with responsibility for the direction of Tracker products as to why any of us with old licenses should give Tracker more money when the products, and quality, are going backwards?

I really hope Tracker can get back on track. I'd gladly pay to upgrade several licenses if they get back to their original core values. But, as it is now, it seems foolish to pay more money for less usable, and less stable, products.

[Will - Tracker Supp]

Hi devguy,

Thanks for the post - I must apologize, as the only person in the kind of management position that you're requesting, is currently unavailable, as he is out of the country dealing with pressing family matters, so his availability is sporadic at best. I'm currently the most senior support staff available to answer: I hope you don't mind? I certainly appreciate your reasons for asking this be forwarded on to him and, rest assured that it will be. I'll address the commercial aspect of your post first:

The licensing system was not updated just to draw in more revenue. it was updated for our own security, as well as the security of our users and, also, to simplify the licensing process, while offering users (and sys. admins.) more flexibility in the way that they distribute the licenses. There were issues with the new licensing system, with the initial builds, but these have been ironed out - if there are any we're unaware of, please do let us know so that we can fix them.

The licensing is now as simple as copy/paste or, if the product is already installed, downloading a license vault and double clicking it. The other benefit to this licensing system, is that we don't see the same issue with watermarks as we used to see with the old paradigm (i.e. Entry of a valid key did not always stop the placement of watermarks, and re-installation was necessary).

Furthermore, I don't believe that your assessment of the company as being "Marketing driven" to be entirely fair - for example we do not have a single dedicated staff member responsible for sales and we have multiple support and development team members helping with support!

We are driven by User's feedback and demand - what the majority of users want, we provide if/when at all possible. Also, do keep in mind, that a growth in profit is necessary for a company to survive: as our workforce grows, so too must our revenue, in order to not only continuing paying the employees, but to also pay them a good living wage and to employ enough support staff and Developers to keep the product line going. I'm sure that John (CEO) would agree with that assessment.

Also in the past year we have expanded our development team considerably and in just the last 4 months added 1/3rd more developers to help us improve product quality and speed from inception to market of products and features.

It creates a big mess to have two entirely different incompatible licensing schemes--especially for anyone with Tracker products on several PCs and when the old products are often preferable to the new ones.

I'm not entirely sure that I understand this - are you referring to the ability to use a key-string or a license file? If you could clarify what you mean here and the issue(s) suffered, then perhaps myself, or a colleague, could shed some light on this for you and other reading this post.

Regarding the product itself:

What the product looks like is seemingly more important to Tracker management than usability. Adding "fluff" features, and bloat, is apparently more important, than say supporting mobile devices with small screens

With all due respect, what 1 or even 10 users may call bloat, 1, 10, 1000 will see as necessary to their daily workflow. The Viewer was a great 'tried and true' product, no arguments there, but the evolution of a product line is essential for the continuity of a company. If we didn't periodically add new features, release new products, etc., we would stagnate. The Editor was developed to incorporate new features that the Viewer' code did not permit; a re-write was the only way. We also revamped the UI because, admittedly, the Viewer's is and was looking pretty outdated (some 12 years old).

What you may call a high priority, others would call a low priority - it's a very subjective term. As mentioned above, all of our feature implementations and even bug fixes, are priority driven and this priority level is dictated by the voice of our users. We can only go by the feedback presented to us and, unfortunately for some, we do not have a large number of tablet users, nor do tablet users represent a large percentage of the market share for PDF markup/editing.

Do please keep in mind that these forums do not represent anywhere close to the majority of requests or bug reports that we see. Our primary method of support is via email and this what you and other users aren't able to see, so please do bear in mind that even if 10 users ask for something to be done Option A on the forums, 100 may well be asking for Option B, by email.

It's not only our End User products that require our attention, but also our SDK's. We've been promising the release of the Editor SDK for over a year but, due to the sheer demand for our attention on the End User app, we've been simply unable to deliver all things to all people. The SDK is where our current main focus, for the next release cycle, sits.

Lastly I would urge you to try understand that we are not Adobe, our Developmental Armada is considerably smaller than theirs. Adobe has some 10,000 employees, several hundred (or more) will likely be developers. There is simply only so much that we can do for any one build and, I firmly believe and believe that many of our users would feel the same, that despite the nagging issues that have, indeed, been present recently, we do very well with what we have.

Having said all of the above, I don't want you to feel that your comments and concerns are being brushed aside and not taken seriously - they are and many of your concerns are valid concerns and have already been forwarded on to our CTO and CEO.

We really are here to give our users want they want, not force our own wants on users and this requires a balance of the (very cliché) "Needs of the many and the needs of the few".

Hopefully I haven't missed anything out and have done your concerns justice with my response. If I have left something out, or you need expansion on a particular aspect, or if you feel that I've not addressed your concerns in a suitable manner, please do let me know and I will do whatever I can to put that right.

Thanks for your patience,

[devguy]

Will,

I appreciate the detailed response. Tracker's support responsiveness is impressive. I just wish the new products were anywhere near as impressive.

I realize you can't please all of the customers all of the time and resources are limited. But when a product is made less usable (on devices with smaller screens) for purely aesthetic reasons I consider that marketing rather than genuinely improving the product. Tracker has made the product less usable than the older version--as evidenced by dozens of posts in these various forums. That's going backwards.

Several features were removed from the Viewer when it was supposedly "improved" and many here complained loudly. That's another example of going backwards.

Likewise having the sort of software quality problems Tracker has had since switching to the new licensing scheme, and the new look, is also a step backwards. So, more staff or not, it's all still going backwards.

Working on the API's does help explain some things. I gather someone at Tracker believes there's more money to be made via the API's then from your core products and existing customer base?

I think Tracker could learn a lot from Microsoft Office 2010 vs Office 2013. If you look on Amazon, or eBay, you'll find copies of the long discontinued Office 2010 products selling for roughly double the cost of their Office 2013 equivalents. Why would people pay more for a 5 year old product? Because Microsoft went backwards with Office 2013. They implemented a new un-loved licensing system with 2013, they changed the user interface generally for the worse (but hey at least it looks nice right?), 2013 is less stable and more bloated, and they mostly added features their core users didn't care about. Sound familiar?

The same is true of Windows 8. I'm sure Microsoft management thought both Office 2013 and Windows 8 were the best way forward. But neither turned out to get much love from business or individuals. Most everyone I know with Office 2010 is still on Office 2010. And few with Windows 7 felt any need to deal with the frustrations of upgrading to Windows 8. Microsoft gave them reasons not to upgrade--just as Tracker has done for some of your customers. Microsoft was forced to radically re-group with Office 365 and we'll see with Windows 10.

As for my issues with the Tracker licensing changes, the biggest one I mentioned in my first post--I can't legally run more copies of the old products with new licenses (unless something has changed that I'm unaware of). So not only has Tracker gone backwards with their new products, they've taken away the ability to add more seats of the old ones. With the old licensing system users could run any older version they wanted.

Did everyone at Tracker upgrade to Windows 8 when it came out and give up on Windows 7? No? Why not? Has anyone shopped new PCs and been annoyed most are only available with Windows 8 and not Windows 7? Just as Microsoft lost a lot of new users to OpenOffice, Apple and Linux, by going backwards, Tracker is losing customers as well. Hopefully you get the idea.

I would suggest it's hugely preferable to avoid going backwards when you release a new version. Don't remove functionality. Give users the option of retaining the old user interface even if there's also a new one. Don't force people to upgrade if they want to add more licensed computers. If Tracker doesn't have the resources to accomplish those reasonable things it can be argued the new products were released half-baked and should have been delayed.

[John - Tracker Supp]

Hi,

I would like to ask firstly what products have had functionality removed retrospectively and specifically what functionality has been removed - certainly to the best of my knowledge this is not the case.

Has some feature been modified to work differently and if so what ? For example the Viewer has not had any feature removed at all so far as I am aware.

Next - if you have a license for the Editor - provided you use the latest build of the Viewer - your license will work with both products - so if you still prefer the Viewer you have the right and ability to use that too and as I have stated above - apart from bug fixes and some small tweaks to resolve issues etc - it is the same Viewer as prior to our new licensing system with bug fixes and minor tweaks to resolve problems reported - no significant feature has been removed at all - if I am wrong please be specific and advise and I will investigate and respond accordingly.

We use and test in both Windows 7 and 8 and I agree with your view on Windows 8 - but I assure you not everybody does.

For our part we do listen to all our clients and whilst it may take time - we do 'turn the ship' to reflect what clients want and need and testing can be an issue, we have been guilty of putting out releases too early to try and appease users who have been having problems and needing functionality perhaps sooner than we should have. But in our defence when significant issues have arisen we have also been very quick to resolve and upload a resolution as quickly as possible. The major problem with build 312 you referred to was resolved and replaced within 24 hours.

I have to say that the overwhelming majority, I have to really, really press that statement - overwhelming majority - of clients who have used both the Editor and Viewer now feel the Editor has surpassed the Viewer in terms of preference and I am confident that we have a product now in the Editor that is superior in terms of functionality and ease of use than we previously had and is capable of favourable comparison with any competing product.

That's not to say we are complacent or feel we have it all - we have much to do always to do our best to satisfy our existing clients and keep them on board and garner new ones.

With regards your points relating to the costs of our licenses - yes costs of upgrades and maintenance have increased - but again I must ask you to compare the options available elsewhere and I am confident that overall - we are still extremely competitive on every level and these costs reflect our investment in expanding our team to allow us to provide what clients want and need and the subsequent support required.

As far as our focus on Developer products vs End User products - there is no conflict there at all, the End User products rely on the underlying developer functionality and whilst the Editor has been available for sometime and ready for release to developers - we have not been able to release it due to our need to commit all staff to the End User application development and support - so its developers who have suffered delays to releases at the expense of our end users products rather than vice versa - further it also means that revenue that could have been available from developer SDK clients to support product development for the benefit of all - has not been.

Hence our determination to restore this balance by ensuring the developer SDK was also released without further delay.

I appreciate your taking the time to let us know your thoughts and concerns and we will do all we can to address them - but this has to be balanced by input from others and our own commercial needs too.

I am satisfied for my part that we sit well in terms of product support, pricing and licensing and cannot agree with you on those points - but in terms of testing I have to concede we must do better, despite the difficulties we undoubtedly face with all the possible varieties and installation parameters of windows in use.

We also do need to do more in terms of our products functioning on other platforms than desktops and this will happen progressively this year and next - starting with tablets etc and moving on from there.

best.

[devguy]

John,

With respect to what's been removed I'm referring to several of your paid products--i.e. comparing the old paid ("pro") version of the Viewer to the new paid version of the Editor that replaced it. For some examples from other users (unless things have dramatically changed since January) see:

https://forum.pdf-xchange.com/ ... 62&t=23008

Your own product feature matrix shows several features in the free Viewer but not in the paid Xchange Standard. Prior to the Editor, I don't think that was true. If you bought Xchange Standard you got the paid "pro" version of the Viewer which had everything the free version did. Now you have to buy Xchange Pro and you're still stuck with problems like the new "fat" UI being a step backwards on small screen hardware.

https://www.pdf-xchange.com/pdf-xch ... ison-chart

You also have removed the paid portable versions of the products with the new license scheme. That was a really great option.

My point about licensing, unless I'm missing something, is I cannot add seats of the old paid "Pro" Viewer using the new License. And, as documented above, the current paid version of the Editor does not include everything the old paid Viewer did and you're stuck with the bloated UI--which Tracker has said is a "low priority" to improve despite the large trend away from desktop systems with big screens. I've provided links to other threads demonstrating I'm not the only customer who has these concerns.

It's unfortunate your software is not sold on Amazon. I'm fairly confident, like Office 2010 vs Office 2013, the newer Tracker products would average fewer stars in customer reviews than your older products. As it is now, it's difficult to confirm or disprove your "overwhelming majority" statement. I certainly would expect Tracker to promote their current offerings as their best yet--exactly as Microsoft did with Windows 8.

[John - Tracker Supp]

Hi,

thanks for your reply - let me be very specific in my answers ..

Your own product feature matrix shows several features in the free Viewer but not in the paid XChange Standard. Prior to the Editor, I don't think that was true. If you bought Xchange Standard you got the paid "pro" version of the Viewer which had everything the free version did. Now you have to buy XChange Pro and you're still stuck with problems like the new "fat" UI being a step backwards on small screen hardware.

PDF-XChange Standard has never - ever - included a full version of any other product - specifically the Viewer or Editor PRO versions and no free features in the Viewer have been removed in either that product - or the Editor. Rather we have continually added free features and expanded what was free as well as adding new features themselves.

You also have removed the paid portable versions of the products with the new license scheme. That was a really great option.

Again we have not removed the portable version from the Viewer and just as soon as we are able to resolve some technical issues with offering a portable version of the Editor - we will provide this.

And whilst we don't offer our products on Amazon (and never have) - a simple review of our own forums will lend support to my statement with regards the Editor's growing fan base - yes it has taken a while to mature into a fully rounded product and their are still area's we want to improve - like the UI customization - which is now possible to some extent - we do aim to do more and as I have said - we will be looking hard at the functionality and UI when it comes to a tablet version - though it should also be remembered that the Editor is not a 'simple' Viewer and in reality the vast majority of users that opt for the Editor 'PRO' are doing so for editing and manipulation functionality and this is not generally a primary desire of most tablet and portable users ...

However - there is most definitely a very good argument for a simplified version - with a lighter footprint for tablet use and we will be looking hard at this when it comes to portable/tablet use etc.

I am sure that neither of us has the time to continue a long winded debate on every aspect of each product, its marketing and use - we are aware there are differing priorities for different users and with our increased development team and ability to address markets and needs accordingly - you will see new products and new direction coming later this year (e.g. new PDF-Tools application coming later this summer, additional plugins from both ourselves and other developers in the Editor) and a good deal more.

I hope you stick with us to see these come to fruition ..

[devguy]

John & Will,

I appreciate the prompt and detailed follow ups. It really comes down to what direction Tracker takes in the near future. Put simply, $80 per seat (less a few percent for your multi-seat discounted packages) is a lot spend to avoid all the feature compromises with your other offerings. And the world is going mobile while Tracker, so far, is going in the opposite direction with less mobile-friendly new apps. Even your flagship product doesn't address that issue.

It would be great to have a simple, stable, family of small-screen friendly products, with consistent user interfaces, that simply add features as you spend more money versus the complex hodge-podge feature matrix you have now. The Pro product has also long been criticized for not being a single application. I think Tracker would see a huge increase in sales with a simplified, and more mobile-friendly, offering. You would certainly have my business and recommendations again.

[John - Tracker Supp]

Thanks for the reply - one of the reasons we have placed many new features in optional 'plugins' is to add functionality that can be disabled/removed and this will be the direction we take for many new features to avoid 'bloat' - so lets pick this up again later in the year when hopefully we can be talking from a different perspective ...

Cheers

[StoryBoarder]

You also have removed the paid portable versions of the products with the new license scheme. That was a really great option.

Again we have not removed the portable version from the Viewer and just as soon as we are able to resolve some technical issues with offering a portable version of the Editor - we will provide this.

Very glad to hear this is on your roadmap. Portable mode was essential to my buying decision.
Do you have an ETA for the portable Editor?

[Tracker Supp-Stefan]

Hello Stefan,

No ETA for this yet, as we are focusing on other things for build 313 that is due for release later this month. We will probably look into this after the release of 313.

Regards,
Stefan