Best Software SB, Inc.

1 reviews & complaints.

Beware of Upgrading to ACT! 2005
Posted by on
NORCROSS, GEORGIA -- I've been an ACT! contact management software user for over 10 years, and their new 2005 upgrade version has been a total nightmare. My computer requirements exceed the minimum requirements suggested by the software developer, yet my new Pentium 4 (3.2GHz; 1GB RAM) based laptop computer behaves like a “286” did a decade ago when using ACT! 2005 – it’s the slowest and most frustrating experience I've ever had with a supposed "new and improved" application.

I upgraded because of the new features it advertised prior to its release this past summer and have passionately regretted doing so! You ask, “why didn’t I return to the previous version?” Because once you convert your database to the 2005 version, you can’t go back!!!!!!!!!!

After receiving and installing software, I’m informed that it can’t synchronize back from my Palm PDA to my desktop; I can only sync from my desktop to my PDA. This renders my making changes in my PDA obsolete – NOTE: they said this problem will be fixed with a later update release! Next I spent over 2 hours over three weeks in tech support trying to get computer to even synchronize the one-way it said it would do. I will say that their tech support personnel were helpful; but it was on a “we will call between 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon” insanity basis versus resolving it on the phone with one call.

I can't describe in words how frustrated I am with the slow and dysfunctional performance of ACT! 2005; it's actually causing work inefficiency instead of increasing productivity like it’s promoted as! I can't believe a company – Best Software SB, Inc. – could be so inconsiderate in changing a product to a state of regression from a very satisfactory end-user product experience.

I will be very happy to answer any questions and share my personal experience regarding this upgrade disaster:

Todd Tobin
Business Development Director
RapidNet, Inc.
605-719-3530 – direct
     
Read 3 RepliesAdd reply
User Replies:
N on 2005-02-24:
Sounds like I could have written this review. The same thing happened to me in upgrading Business Works 12 (I liked that program) to Business Works Gold. Took them 18 MONTHS after I pre-paid to get me the program, and not once did they let me know where I stood - I had to contact the local vendor. Not only did that, but the customer service support fee went from $275 per year (just for tax table updates) to $500 per year. I just switched to PeachTree and like it very much. Ironically Best owns it too, but I don't think they actually designed it!
Cookie boy on 2005-06-28:
Seven years here. Couldn't be more true. Badly need a conversion program to leave Best (now Sage) forever. What a low blow. A class action lawsuit is in order. Anyone else?
willrow on 2005-11-10:
I have to fully agree, Act 2005 is a disgrace to CRM products and its Users. I will only cover the highlights due to space limitations (I could write an entire book on ACT 2005 by Sage Software and now change in attempt to give ACT 2005 a separation from Best Software).
I purchased 7 copies of ACT 2005 in Volume Licensing only after speaking to Best Software Presales Support for over 2 months. I was assured that we could transfer ACT 2.8 for MAC data to the new and improved ACT 2005. I received trial software and everything appeared to convert, OPS well after speaking to ACT Support and discovering that you must migrate database from 2.8 to 6.0 and then to 7.0 (2005 version). Next, it took me almost 3 hours to find out why the layout on ACT 2005 was the default ACT layout and not the one that I imported from ACT 6.0. When contacting ACT, the Technician told me I had a corrupted database and for a substantial fee, they would help me fix it. I finally figured out on my own that the program did not recognize the older layout as valid but I could copy and paste the layout file from ACT 6 to the ACT 7 and it worked fine. The next issue was the remote database option. This means you have a database on the local laptop so that while out of the office you can access client data. Well this has to be synchronized with the main database. Synchronization causes the main database to be locked and all users must be logged out of the database before you can sync it. This is a real waste of time and should have been disclosed during my conversations with Presales.
Now it was time to deploy the solution in a production environment. Now the fun really starts. Following all steps provided by Best Software and my testing check list I now find out that out 9600 contacts we now have 7800. I spent 15 hours testing the database first in 2.8 format then migrated to 6.0. Tested database with all Best Software tools provided by support and database tested fine. Then I migrate to 2005 and again lost a large number of contacts. Now these were not just some contacts they were all the current paying customers that have the most entries and thus the most important data to migrate. After working with ACT Support again they tell me that it must be a corrupted database. Best Software, or now known as Sage Software, technician once again offered to fix the database for a pretty large fee. I refused to pay for this solution considering problem is not indicative to a corrupted database. Finally I spoke to someone in their Problem Resolution Group and they told me I can DOWNGRADE our licenses to 6.0 first for a charge and then at no extra charge. Well that is a slap in the face, we just paid for the most current product with all the new features. Presales stated their product was Number 1 and we needed to buy the 2005 version because it is the BEST (no pun intended). At this point I am glad that my education and experience told me to maintain the database in it’s original state “JUST IN CASE”. After spending the hours to downgrade the product I now find that ACT 6 does not work well on a network. ACT software generates massive packets back and forth. You would think that a server that has dual 933 MHz processors and 1.25 Gigs of RAM could support a network of 7 users. I really thought that it was an over kill but we had this server sitting on the shelf with no apparent need. If this was not enough we have IBM laptops with P4 1.7 GHz processors and 512 MB of RAM. So far this network would be a screaming infrastructure but ACT brings it to its knees. The next thing I attempted was to set up RRAS access to the ACT database. We this failed as well. Since then we have decided that this database will be migrated to SQL database.

Bill MCSA MCSE 2000

Close commentsAdd reply
Top of Page | Next Page >