[J_Mod45]

I have been using the trial versions of memory up and network acc for about a week now. I just read through this entire thread and am thankful that I have not spent any money on these apps. It seemed as though my phone worked a little better with them but I can definitely believe it is all psychological.


One question I have remaining after reading this, for someone who is more blackberry educated than myself: I run slacker radio pretty often on my phone, unfortunately it has caused my phone to crash several times as well, especially when I am low on signal. After downloading memory up, the crashes seem to be much less often. Is there any way that memory up can alter other 3rd party apps?


I used the quickboost option once as I closed down slacker and it said it recovered an outrageous amount, something like 260,000 b. Way more than the usual 20-90 range.


I will not be buying these apps, I am only curious as to what the program did do.

[vinmontRD]

Most likely, about all the program CAN do is make a call to call to the system's "garbage collect" method, which "suggests" to the java runtime environment that it may be worthwhile to run the normally automated garbage collect routine a bit sooner. That's it. A call such as:

System.gc();

[funkym]

BTW, have you guys ever used 'Batterybooster' and 'MemoryBooster' from S4BB Limited? Any comments on these two apps? Thanks.

I use MemoryBooster and it is just great. You can give it a try as there is a 30 day money guarantee ...

[thereisnospoon]

I have also noticed customers' request for the trial version of NetworkAcc. I will propose it to my CEO. My company always listen to the voice of our customers. So I believe soon you will be able to download the free trial version of NetworkAcc.

Thanks!

Can you please explain why the following emails from your company seem so confused:


Dear Alex,

Thanks for your letter, We sincerely hope it can boost up your mobile
experience.

We believe that you will observe the difference in network performance
after running NetworkAcc in the background after serveral days using.
Please help try again.

Regards
Tina


On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Alex Jorgensen <alex@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> But please process a refund for me for this software, it is not helping my phone in my situation.
>
> Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Jessie from eMobiStudio.Com" <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 11:15:47
> To: Alex Jorgensen<alex@xxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Fw: Order from CrackBerry (Software 2133102)
>
> Dear Alex,
>
> Thanks for contacting us. This is Tina from eMobiStudio. I am mainly
> responsible for the customer service of NetworkAcc.
>
> The performance of NetworkAcc may be affected by many factors,
> including your smartphone�s network traffic load, system computing
> speed and free memory, etc. According to our testing results, normally
> NetworkAcc will improve smartphone�s network throughput by 5%-25%.
> There are a few key tips for our valued customers just like you:
> 1. If you want NetworkAcc to work at its best effort, we recommend you
> to shift the accelerator gear to level 5, but that will take more
> system resources including system computing time and free memory.
> 2. Please make sure you have selected the proper network parameters
> for your network and clicked the �Accelerate� option in the main menu
> of NetworkAcc.
> 3. Please make sure you have enabled NetworkAcc to run in the
> background by selecting the �Hide� option in the main menu of
> NetworkAcc.
> For more detailed instructions, you can also refer to the user guide
> for NetworkAcc. And we believe you will observe the difference in
> network performance after running NetworkAcc in the background.
>
> Hope that helps. lease feel free to contact us if you have any further
> questions. We are always ready to help.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Tina
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:19 AM, Alex Jorgensen <alex@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> I need to have a refund for this software as it isn't making a noticeable difference on my phone.
>>
>> Please let me know what the steps are.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>>
>>

[BubiSparks]

What I really can't understand is that Emobistudio's apps (16 as of today) are still offerred on BB Appworld.

Surely RIM has a vetting system to ensure that only legit apps that actually do something useful get on there???

Obviously not, and that's quite shocking!

[vinmontRD]

What I really can't understand is that Emobistudio's apps (16 as of today) are still offerred on BB Appworld.

Surely RIM has a vetting system to ensure that only legit apps that actually do something useful get on there???

Obviously not, and that's quite shocking!

I've been complaining about these BS apps that - at most - call a java garbage collect routine (which only *suggests* to the runtime that a gc should be performed whenever the runtime also deems it appropriate) for a couple of years. I remember digging into one of these companies 2 or 3 years ago (not sure, but I think it was the guys who published memoryup) and being amused to find that the corporate hq address came down to a house in a small suburban mid-west neighorhood on the same block as some others that sold such notable items as "reception boosting decals" that you were supposed to stick to the inside of your phone (another scam).

Take a look at my rather large post on pinstack back in August 2007 here.

If you do a couple of web searches, you'll find that knowledgeable Java developers agree that it's simply BS. Some have taken the extra step of going beyond their own knowledge of Java and have checked the BB event monitor to see what memoryup actually does...

Also check this post for more about the misrepresentation apparent in their advertising as of April 2008.

Something for potential customers to remember: user experience with a multi-tasking OS like this is largely subjective. There are numerous studies - major ones - performed over the last 50 or so years relating to customer perception, and it's known that people will generally:
- WANT the product they buy to work, especially if it claims to produce an outcome they seek
- Will tend to believe that the product actually DOES work if the results are subtle and only subjectively evaluated

For anyone pondering the idea above, think about the multi-billion dollar weight-loss product industry and "sex enhancement" industry -- and don't forget cures for baldness too. Although study after study illustrate that these products do little or nothing except extract money from your wallet, people spend a fortune in the hope that the products will make a difference in their lives, and often convince themselves for years at a time that they're working -- and blame the failures on themselves for deviating ever so slightly from the prescribed regimen.

Fraudsters have been selling snake-oil to a naively hopeful consumer market since the dawn of human commerce.

What's also notable about products like memoryup is that NO LEGITIMATE and RESPECTED independent laboratory has evaluated these products and published results - EVER. Doesn't that make you curious? Additionally, these products are released in versions for numerous difference cell phones, meaning that they're available for literally hundreds of millions of hand-held devices in the marketplace. If they were real - and really made a difference in the performance of any of these devices, would it not make sense for a company like RIM, NOKIA, Qualcom, SONY, etc to either buy the product or produce their own version?

RIM is working on their own OS constantly, putting out new releases for all models several times a year. They've been doing this since day one and will likely be doing it for many years to come. But we're supposed to believe that the guys who write the OS (Sun and RIM), design all the internal logic of the OS, and write the API calls that products such as "memoryup" MUST call in order to do ANYTHING within the device can't come up with a product like this -- or a simple update to their own OS -- despite CONSTANTLY trying to improve the user experience in their unending quest for customer acquisition and loyalty in a multi-billion dollar competitive arena?

I'm just sorely disappointed that:
1) the managers of respected sites don't do their own investigation and publish meaningful results for their members

2) respected 3rd party labs (such as TomsHardware, ZDNet and CNET) don't pursue these and put this endless debate to bed

3) sites that sell such apps (like BB AppWorld) don't do some kind of due diligence when app vendors make suspicious claims (I'd love to see internal RIM OS developers weigh in on this and let the other department at RIM - the one that runs AppWorld - know how this really stacks up).

I'm incredibly disillusioned to see that products that appear to be scams are among the top selling apps on AppWorld, suggesting to me that it's still profitable to sell snake oil.

If I'm wrong -- and any legitimate, repeatable, scientific testing can uncontestably prove that -- and be repeated by others performing the same tests -- then I will publicly apologize for my skepticism. I'm happy to learn more, even if it means that I was wrong. But after being in software for many years, having been a developer, consultant, CIO and CTO for a long time, I can generally tell when a software product is legitimate -- and when claims about a product are bogus.

[anon3396357]

I got redirected from the "What app did you download today" (or something like that) thread. I'm surprised this is not getting anymore publicity.. I'm glad I've not spent money on these apps. The most was on BerryJoose which I got a full refund for.