From: terry@wag.caltech.edu (Terry R. Coley)
Subject: Re: WINSPEED DRIVERS LOCATION (not?)
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 05:23:19 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.230731.1@vax1.umkc.edu> edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.191857.11047@afit.af.mil>, jchrissi@afit.af.mil (James W. Chrissis) writes:
>> [stuff deleted]
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> >Anyone got any idea where the winspeed drivers can be located?
>>>> 
>>>>     Isn't Winspeed (the software windows accelerator) commercial software?
>>>> I've seen it being sold in a local software store, too.
>>>> 
>>>> Timothy
>>>> 
>> 
>> WinSpeed IS commercial software.  It is published by Panacea.
>
>> James W. Chrissis                      |   No time to find
>
>Now that we have established this, can anyone provide any reviews about
>their experience with these? What exactly do  these do? Are they worth paying
>the $60 for?
>
> 

I have some experience with Panacea and WinSpeed.  First, it does not
work with all boards.  Check with Panacea for compatibility.  Second, it
does not speed up (as of about 3 months ago) 16 color mode; only 256 
color modes.  For 256 color mode, I was able to get a 20MHx 386SX with
Paradise video board to operate as fast as the same configuration in
16 color mode.  In that sense, it was of potential benefit.

I had a negative experience dealing with Panacea, however.  I'll relate
the facts and you can decide if it should play a roll in your decision
making:  Soon after WinSpeed appeared I called Panacea and asked if it
was worth attempting to make it work on my older 512Mb ATI video board.
Peter Mitchell there said yes, so I bought the software with the 
understanding that I could return it for a full refund if it did not
work.  To make a long story short, it did not work in the video mode
I needed to use.

I talked to Peter Mitchell again and said I would try to sell it to 
someone else before I returned it.  I demoed the software on the 386SX 
refered to above, but the person did not find the benefit great enough to
warrant the expense.

The software was returned via First Class mail.  After not hearing anything
for a long time, I called Peter Mitchell and he indicated the return
could not be found.  He said (for the first time) that I should have
gotten a return authorization before shipping it.  Then the phone tag
games started.  Peter never returned my calls.  I spoke to another 
person who agreed to resolve the issue of my refund.  This person
left the company before resolving the issue.  Finally, someone called
(Byron Cruces) and offered me a 50% refund.  I argued that it is not
clear that the software was lost in the mail or in their shipping/receiving.
Also, I had made a good faith effort to resell the software before
returning it.  I offered to pay media costs (a paperback, stappled
users guide, and a floppy).  His final offer was to return 65% of the
$80 I originally paid.

The moral, I suppose is to use registered mail on returns.  My personal
judgment was that they handled the whole situation very unprofessionally.
It took 5 months to resolve; I still have not received a credit on my
charge card, but I anticipate it will show up soon.
-- 
	- Terry
terry@wag.caltech.edu 818-397-2724 818-585-0918 (FAX)
Terry Coley, Caltech 139-74, Pasadena, CA  91125
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc