Unfortunately, the graph legend apparently was not shown on to the reviewer due to the initial window size. They must have been using a small laptop, netbook, or virtual machine. Sure, they could have resized the graph or main window to have the legend shown, but they didn't know that. This caused them to be confused about what the graph metrics meant.
They also neglected to ever mention ProBalance, arguably the primary function of Process Lasso. They did, however, highly praise the many of the other features, such as Default Priorities, Default CPU Affinities, High Performance Power Scheme processes, and Gaming processes.
The reviewer correctly asserted the software was too technical, and he or she had to refer to the documentation multiple times. This is something I'm working on improving.
They concluded that the product really did make a difference in their PC's performance, and ended up recommending the software.
Overall, good news. Their rating was 3.5 stars. Average user rating is currently 4 stars. I honestly think it deserved at least 4 stars, especially since they rated a much older version with 4 stars (see article update below). It all depends on which reviewer checks your software I guess. For this reviewer, I think it being so technical threw them off. Still, I can't complain that they concluded it did make a difference - unlike so much other optimization software.
They concluded that the product really did make a difference in their PC's performance, and ended up recommending the software.
UPDATE: I noticed that Download.com still lists the old Process Supervisor (the original name of Process Lasso). Ironically, they reviewed it and gave it 4 stars years ago, lol. The original reviewer focused on its out-of-control process restraint (now ProBalance). Its only gotten better since then. I think I will request a re-review by v4, as its not good that the primary feature wasn't even mentioned in CNet's newer review.
[ Link to Process Lasso x32 on CNET ]
0 comments:
Post a Comment