SoftRAM 95: Does it do Anything?
Or, The Producers Revisited in "Springtime for Windows"

Last updated: December 1, 1995
by Andrew Schulman
Senior Editor, O'Reilly & Associates
andrew@ora.com
Latest news: click here if you've already read
the following introductory material
"One day there appeared two rogues who spread the story that they
were weavers who had mastered the art of weaving the most beautiful cloth
you can imagine. Not only were the colors and patterns outstandingly
lovely, but the clothes made from the cloth had the wonderful property
of remaining invisible to anyone who was not fit for his job or who
was particularly stupid....
"'Yes, it's a lovely piece of stuff, isn't it?' said the two rogues.
And they showed the king the cloth, and explained the charming pattern
that was not there.... They pretended to take the cloth off the loom,
they cut out large pieces of air with their big tailor's scissors, they
sewed away with needles that had no thread in them, and at last they
said, 'Look, the clothes are ready!'...
"No one would let anyone else see that he couldn't see anything, for
if he did, they would have thought that he was not fit for his job,
or else that he was very stupid. None of the Emperor's clothes had ever
had such a success before.
"'But, Daddy, he's got nothing on!' piped up a small child."
-- Hans C. Andersen (1805-1875), "The Emperor's New Clothes"
![[Image: SOFTRAM.EXE shows tons of extra
memory supposedly supplied by SoftRAM, even if SoftRAM isn't
installed!]](softram.gif)
Strange, softram.exe produces the same output whether or not SoftRAM
itself (softram1.386 + softram2.386, or dynapage.vxd) is loaded.
SoftRAM 95, from Syncronys Softcorp, has been described in the trade press
as the hottest-selling utility for Windows 95. For example, the
November 7, 1995 PC Magazine reports that this "RAM compression"
product was the top-selling piece of retail software. The
marketing of
SoftRAM 95 has been aggressive (one might even say innovative).
The president of
the company, Rainer Poertner, was named "entrepreneur of the year" by the
Software Council of Southern California. Syncronys stock jumped in value
from 3 cents a share in March to a high of $32 a share in August. One
stock recommendation asked the almost-musical question, "Will it double
your money too?" (New York Times, October 19, 1995).
Yet, several independent examinations of SoftRAM 95 have shown that
this product does not in fact perform RAM compression in Windows 95.
The vendor, Syncronys Softcorp, has even acknowledged this in an October
20 press release ("RAM compression is not being delivered to the operating
system"). Microsoft has told Syncronys to remove the "Designed for
Windows 95" logo from SoftRAM 95, and Egghead reportedly is no longer
selling the product. Yet the company continues to
aggressively push SoftRAM 95, and says that those who claim the product
is a hoax are "insulting the intelligence" of the 650,000 people who
bought the product.
It's bad enough that a product called "SoftRAM 95" does not do
anything in Windows 95. But while Syncronys insists this is a bug,
and that the product does work as advertised under Windows 3.1, and
will soon be updated to work as advertised under Windows 95, and
that Syncronys has "revolutionary new technology" which is patent
pending, disassembly of the code does not turn up even an attempt,
however flawed, to do RAM compression in Windows 95.
Furthermore, numerous independent tests have found no evidence that SoftRAM
performs any RAM compression under Windows 3.1 either! While
Syncronys has widely circulated a report done by XXCal labs, which
claims that such compression is occurring, PC Magazine
recently completed a test which finds the opposite: no RAM
compression occurs under Windows 3.1 either.
That one can successfully market a product to 650,000 users, with a small
number of returns, and receive generally favorable press coverage, is
an interesting commentary on the state of the software market today.
I'll continue to update this page as the bizarre SoftRAM story
unfolds. In the meantime, here are some useful links to discussions
of SoftRAM 95:
- The Windows 95 logo department at Microsoft has issued a Q&A
document,
"Information Regarding Syncronys SoftRAM95" (November 30,
1995). One interesting section reads:
There have been allegations that Syncronys copied Microsoft
beta code. Is this true?
This is true. Syncronys used, without permission, beta code
from a Microsoft virtual device driver- DYNAPAGE.VXD - in their
product. This virtual device driver was delivered by Microsoft
in the beta of the Windows 95 Software Developers Kit.
What actions has Microsoft taken for these issues?
Microsoft issued Syncronys a cease and desist letter
demanding that Syncronys stop shipping the copied code
and stop using the Windows 95 logo. Syncronys agreed to
take the corrective actions demanded in the letter.
- XXCAL Testing Laboratories has issued a Business Wire press
release (November 29, 1995) to "clarify various issues concering its
role in the testing of SoftRAM95." I'm trying to locate an online
version of the press release to link to. The clarification states:
"In the case of SoftRAM95, XXCAL's conclusion of utility is
valid only within the context of the observed test results upon
specific test configurations."
"The conclusion reached was based
upon specific test configurations as proffered by Syncronys for use
in testing."
"Syncronys specified the desired 8MB physical
RAM and 4MB temporary swap file configurations under which observed
results led to a conclusion of substantial utility."
In other words, the XXCAL testing, the results of which Syncronys has been
so fond of referring to in its press releases, was
based entirely on test configurations offered by Syncronys.
- PC
Magazine article (December 1, 1995): "SoftRAM 95 Fails PC
Labs Tests, Again". "On another test, PC Labs used Nu-Mega
Technologies Inc.'s Soft-Ice for Windows to analyze SoftRAM 95 as it
was executing. The test found no evidence that SoftRAM 95 did
anything to affect system resources."
-
Brian Livingston's "Window Manager" column from InfoWorld
(November 27, 1995): "SoftRAM claims are refuted by software industry
exports". "In my opinion, SoftRAM does less per dollar than any Windows
utility I've ever seen."
-
Windows Sources retraction/correction to its initial favorable
review of SoftRAM 95. In its November 1995 issue, Windows
Sources reviewed SoftRAM 95: "This one-trick pony works as
advertised." Now the magazine has issued this correction:
"After further discussion with PC Magazine Labs, we have
concluded that the results of our SoftRAM testing cited in the
November 1995 issue were aberrant and we cannot directly attribute
them to any specific activity taken by the product." (Also see the
November 7 online discussion from the Microsoft Network (MSN) between
Syncronys CEO Rainer Poertner, Windows Sources reviewer
Lori Grunin, and PC Magazine Technical Director Larry Seltzer.)
- Time magazine (November 27, 1995)
article, "A Trick of Memory?" by Julian Dibbell; reporting by William
Dowell: "One of the most dazzlingly successful new software companies
faces charges that it is peddling thin air.... if the harshest of these
attacks are true, SoftRAM 95 isn't just one more computer product that
fails to live up to its hype; it's a hollow piece of Potemkin programming,
devoid of the advanced, patent-pending compression technology touted in
its packaging. In short, says Mark Russinovich, a University of Oregon
computer scientist, 'the thing is a fraud.'"
- San Jose
Mercury News (November 18, 1995) article, "Where's the extra RAM?
Despite claims by manufacturer, popular SoftRAM95 failing tests"
by Dan Gillmor: "SoftRAM95 is still being sold in stores, but has
been re-labeled in some cases as a 'Windows 3.0 & 3.1 version only'
-- as appeared on boxes in a display at Computer City in Milpitas.
However, there was a binful of SoftRAM boxes nearby that did not bear
the new label; a reporter bought a copy from that bin, and a sales
clerk did not warn of any possible problem with the software. Egghead
Software has pulled SoftRAM95 from its shelves...."
- Two Computer Reseller News articles
on SoftRAM 95, reprinted with permission of the author, Jodi
Mardesich: "Double or Nothing? Questions Arise Over Syncronys
Utility," Computer Reseller News, November 6, 1995, and
"Egghead Pulls SoftRAM 95," Computer Reseller News,
November 13, 1995.
- Analysis of disassembled code in
SOFTRAM1.386: "Softram1.386 is virtually identical to
pagefile.386 from the Windows 3.1 DDK."
- Analysis of disassembled code in
SOFTRAM2.386: "Softram2.386 is virtually identical to
pageswap.386 from the Windows 3.1 DDK."
- Detailed comparison of code in SR-START.EXE
with copyrighted code from PC Magazine.
-
PC Magazine special report, "SoftRAM95 Does Not Compress RAM In PC
Magazine Lab Tests" (November 7, 1995):
"Just-completed PC Magazine Lab tests indicate Syncronys Softcorp's
top-selling SoftRAM95 product, which the company calls a 'RAM
doubling and resource expansion' product, does not compress memory or
increase systems resources under Microsoft Windows 3.x.
"The company, which has received numerous criticisms of the product,
already has stated that SoftRAM95 does not deliver RAM compression
under Windows 95." By Larry Seltzer.
- Article on
SoftRAM 95 from the great German computer magazine, Magazine fur
computer technik (c't) (October 12, 1995). By Ingo T. Storm. This
was the first in-depth technical expose of SoftRAM.
- .
By Ingo T. Storm.
- c't lab tests
indicate that it is useless. We therefore found it appropriate to
call it 'Placebo Software'. The distributor sued us. In a summary
proceeding the court decides that the short review lacked sufficient
facts to enable the reader to assess our judgement. Thus we will
now provide more data. We have disassembled the program: it does not
even contain code that would be able to provide the advertised
functionality."
- Letters from Dr. Mark Russinovich
to Rainer Poertner of Syncronys Softcorp: October 23, 1995 letter
("blatant misreprentation"); October 31, 1995 retraction ("the necessary
steps are being taken to correct the current situation ... I thereby
formally retract the letter"); November 9, 1995 retraction of the
October 31 retraction ("Syncronys is not acting in good faith by not
revealing the identical problems with the Windows 3.1 version, which
they continue to promote and sell").
- The financial side of the Syncronys SoftRAM story was picked up
weeks ago by the New York Times: Floyd Norris, "A Great Wall St.
Success Story Unravels," New York Times, October 10, 1995.
- Check
SYCR stock from Quote.Com (you'll need to register for free
limited use).
- Some interesting tidbits about
SoftRAM 95: Well-disguised compression code?; SoftRAM version
1.03; the XXCAL report; Growing the swap file
- Summary of results from "Double
Scan", a "RAM Doubler" performance/compression analyzer, by Mark
Russinovich and Bryce Cogswell.
- "Double Scan": This zip file
includes sample output from the analyzer with SoftRAM: "From the
results, it is clear that no compression at all is detected for
SoftRAM, while MagnaRAM, and RAM Doubler compress so well that no
paging to disk is necessary. This of course, leads to dramatic time
savings versus the native and identical to native SoftRAM case."
- "Double Scan" including all source
code.
- National
Software Testing Labs (NSTL) report on SoftRAM 95, September 1995.
- Syncronys Softcorp press release,
October 20, 1995: "Syncronys has, however, indicated that a
problem exists with the Windows 95 version, the net result of which
is that RAM compression is not being delivered to the operating
system."
- Syncronys Softcorp quarterly report,
November 1, 1995: "Since announcing on October 20, 1995, that a
problem exists with the Windows95(TM) version of SoftRAM95, Syncronys
has not experienced any significant increase in the rate of product
returns."
- Syncronys press release, November 13:
Syncronys files for NASDAQ listing. Hmm, and the box already claims
"NASDAQ: SYCR". Well, it also claimed "Designed for Windows 95,"
apparently without proper Microsoft authorization, so what else is
new?
- Syncronys press release,
November 13: XXCAL says that "SoftRAM95 effectively doubles
system RAM." Dataquest says most SoftRAM users are happy with the product.
- Yes, most SnakeOil users prefer SnakeOil 2-to-1 over the other
leading placebo.
- "SoftRAM 95:
the RAM doubler that doesn't" from c|net (November 4, 1995) by Tinoo
Singh.
- Associated Press wire story, November 2, 1995: "Microsoft has
quietly removed SoftRAM 95 from its list of companies licensed to
carry the Windows 95 logo on their products, a company spokeswoman
said Wednesday in answer to a query.... The president of the Software
Council of Southern California, Bill Manassero, was surprised to hear
the criticism. He said he had tried SoftRAM's product for Windows
3.1 and it freed up memory. 'What do you say to all of the reviewers
out there who say this is the greatest thing since sliced bread?' he
asked."
- Mike Langberg article on SoftRAM, San Jose Mercury News,
November 3, 1995.
NOTE: I have done some paid consulting for Connectix, whose
RAM Doubler product competes directly with SoftRAM.
The O'Reilly Windows Center
Unauthorized Windows 95 Update