Is HM2 too complicated

I have been trying to get used to HM2 since the Beta download was made available and i just cannot get used to it, I keep going back to HM1.
I know HM2 looks great but I find it all to confusing and complicated, I know what I want from HM1 and I know how to get it but in HM2 I am lost.
I have read everything I can on it and I just dont like it, foolishly I paid for HM2 this week cos I got 50% off but feel like I have wasted $75.
It is just me or do other people feel the same, I know people on here that love HM2 but I am not one of them, maybe in a year I will feel different but I doubt it.

Amen to this HM2 is too damn complicated I have it, and I sure as hell still have yet to use it...I've had it since November 1st and I swear I can't figure it out for nothing at all

Thank god, I thought it was only me who couldnt work it out, I am going to stick with HM1 probably for good cos it does everything I need.

I must admit I haven't looked at HEM 2 yet because, as others have said, HEM 1 does everything I need (and I suspect there's more that I could get out of it if I had the time to invest). As someone who works in software I can sympathise with HEM - on the one hand they need to make more money and the one way to do this is to add more functionality. On the other most users have most of what they need from the core product and so have no reason to purchase the enhancement. The problems will come when they decide they won't support HEM 1 anymore.

How come you paid more for it? Is it because you had HM1 already and to up-grade you need to buy HM2 again? I myself never had HM1 so I paid $55-60 I forget for the Small stakes verision, Maybe you also had the Omaha+Holdem verision?

This^^^^^^

I would hope they dont do something as foolish as stop HEM1 support. If they do, the price for a HEM1 user better be low for the upgrade, as many would perhaps just change to PT out of anger if they had to pay a lot anyway. Especially if HEM1 users prefer HEM1, as it seems to be in this case.

76$ is HALF PRICE for a HEM1 user????

WTF??? AND you dont like it???? Sounds like a bad start. Did you have the suite, of just holdem?? Even for the suite 150$ for an existing customer seem outrageous (You said you paid 50%, is that cause you had it already or was it 50 % for YOU as an existing customer??). Especially if it is getting the reactions I have read so far, which are not positive.

Sounds like Omaha and Hold'em to me.

http://hm2faq.holdemmanager.com/ques...Upgrade+Policy
Once you have the poker sites saving hand histories to your hard drive and HM is importing them, then you tell HM which seat you use at the poker tables - and happy days

Loads of help available at the HM forum, including plenty of "how to" tutorials. I like HM2.

I've been using HM2 since April when I was invited to alpha test it. It was much less polished than it is now, and yet by May or June I had stopped running HM1 in parallel and had gone completely HM2 without looking back. It has had some bumps in the road for sure, but so has HM1, PT3, and anything else. It's an extremely complex piece of software and with the myriad of system variables out there, it will inevitably stumble once in awhile. I'm in the software development business, so I'm experienced and comfortable with that.

HM2 adds a *ton* of new features over HM1 -- reports, custom stats, the HUD improvements, built-in basic version of Notes Caddy (admittedly buggy right now), it looks way better... far too many new features to post here or that I can even remember.

That said, HM1 is still perfectly functional. If you're happy with it, there's no need to upgrade. I OTOH geek out about new products. Not everyone does, nor is everyone comfortable with change. Me, I embrace change, and always look for change for the better.

HM1 will continue to be supported for some time, but only with poker client changes and major bugs. It will get no new features -- all new development effort will go into HM2. For those that are willing to accept that and prefer HM1, don't upgrade now.

All that said, no I'm not 100% happy with every decision that Roy & Co. make with HM, and I'm pretty vocal about letting them know that. Which is probably why they invited me as an early tester -- I've had quite a few private conversations during the alpha and beta tests, including with Roy himself, and I've not always been complimentary. But overall I like what they've done and where they're going.

I'll also be taking a look at PT4, because while I prefer HM1/HM2 over PT3 any day, I've seen some previews of PT4 functionality that intrigue me. I'm not going to be blindly brand-loyal.

I like the synch facility in HM2. Even if you're not using HM2 on two different PCs, which I'm not, it's still useful insurance against my hard drive becoming corrupted/unusable. If my hard drive dies my HM database is not lost.

Not using hem 2 at the moment seems like I ran into the same problem as some others, not sure if it only affect tournys.
"To Sarvam, I have some hands that have imported from 02/11/11 (the last day I played) which was five days ago. The thing is looking at the date format in HM2 it clearly uses the American format. So it maybe it thinks these hands are from the 11th of Feb, whereas in fact they are from the 2nd of Nov. I wonder if the reason so many of my hands are missing is related to the date formatting, maybe it isn't importing any that don't make sense to it. The thing is I was able to use HM1 using the British date formatting, so I guess my HM1 database is all saved using that format. Morny - is this the problem? and if so is there a solution? Thanks."

The post is still open at hem bug forum.

ive heard of so many bugs in hem2 its embarrassing - clearly a rushed release and i wont even think about touching it until its completely stable

I find it quite exciting to be involved with a beta roll out. When you bear in mind what a big difference a tracker can make to your mutitabling profits I don't think that the prices are too outrageous, either.

there's a difference between a beta rollout and it being sold as "the all new hm2":

http://www.holdemmanager.com/

seeing as you hm1 was perfectly adequate, the only reason to rush the release is because they were getting short of cash - in no way is it of benefit to users

when does HM2 come out with the actual release version? also when does PT4 come out?

I thought it's out already, Cuz that's what I have..Unless I had the Beta version which I don't believe I do personally but could be wrong

hm2 is already out

As with virtually all new software releases, there are bugs that affect a minority of users, but those users are always the most vocal. Count up all the major complainers on their support forum -- maybe you come up with 100? With most of those complaining about the same one or two things, not 100 separate things. Now figure that HM2 is in the hands of several thousand users by this point. Many of us have been using HM2 for the better part of a year now and have no major issues with it. It's not bug-free by any means, yet I still much prefer it over HM1, which itself was never entirely bug-free either -- I've been bitching at them for years now to fix some issues that were never fixed, or only just now fixed in HM2. I hear the exact same thing from the PT3 camp, and really virtually every software product that I buy. I was in the HM2 alpha/beta for months prior to release and I know for a fact that they listened and addressed a ton of bugs reported to them during that period. I wrote literally pages of documented bugs and suggestions for improvement and watched virtually all them get prompt attention.

And I expect a significant portion of the complaints stem from new users who were never involved with the alpha/beta and just jumped head-first into HM2 upon release. It's quite a different interface than HM1 had and takes some getting used to, so the "shock" of it combined with the fact that many people are resistant to change will explain much of the initial outrage as well.

HM2's perceived benefits over HM1 and the severity of its outstanding bugs will depend a lot on each user -- their system, what/how they play, what sites they play, how they use it, etc. etc. I can only say with certainty that not everyone is miserably unhappy with HM2 at this point.

My perspective on it as someone in the software development industry is that, at the end of the day they have a business to run, and there just comes a point where you have things stable enough that you have to draw a line in the sand and release in order to get a revenue stream flowing again. Knowing that you'll still be knocking away at things through the release period and the entire lifetime of your product.

HM2 was released around the first of November. PT4 release date hasn't been announced, they're not even in beta yet as far as I know. I've been told that I'll have an opportunity to test it as well, but so far have not heard specifics.

My thoughts on trying HM2 was that it just had TOO many things going on and it was just too complicated and not as intuitive as HM1 which I found a lot easier to get the hang of.
I and I suspect 99% of HM users just want the basic stats, I use it mainly to keep track of my sessions and I never use it for NL as I very rarely play NL cos I am rubbish at it but I do find the HUD a good aid when I multi table PLO but I really do not want to spend hours analysing every hand I have played cos to be honest I am not intelligent enough to do that , maybe that is why I will never be more than an average player.
It may look better and may even be better but I am sticking with HM1 for as long as I can

Missed this comment when I posted above. I'll address its 3 points separately:

"seeing as hm1 was perfectly adequate"

I'll agree it was adequate. "Perfectly" adequate is perhaps a stretch, depending on who you ask. Many found it lacking in areas, and there were a number of features and fixes that people have been clamoring for for years, that have (or will) only see the light of day in HM2. Regardless, "adequate" should never be an attribute that either customers or businesses accept as a reason to not demand improvements.

"the only reason to rush the release is because they were getting short of cash"

I'm not privy to their business operations, but as someone familiar with the software industry, I agree this likely has some merit. But it's not the only reason.

First, some beta testers and impatient non-testers have been whining for some time that it should be released already. It's been in development for over a year, in alpha testing since early this year, and beta for months now. People were getting antsy. I wasn't one of the ones whining for a release, but in the back of my mind I was wondering what was taking them so long, since the latest betas had been very solid and GM-quality as far as I was concerned. Plus they have a major competitor who is also working on a next-gen version of their product, and history shows that the first to market stands to gain a huge advantage.

Second, to your point, as a software vendor -- particularly of a vertical market product like poker software -- you cannot sustain a business model, beyond the point where the core mass of users have bought your product, without introducing a new revenue stream. Especially in the post-Black Friday US market, where a huge percentage (majority?) of your market has seriously diminished. To continue to incur a revenue stream that sustains innovation, development, and support of your product (software developers are not minimum wage employees) means you've got to eventually put something out that regenerates revenue. This is particularly true of corporations who have a responsibility to their shareholders (not sure if HM has any public shareholders).

So yes, I'm sure it was in part a business decision to get this out there now and start getting some money rolling back into the coffers. But I can reasonably assure you that there were strategic, competitive, and customer-focused reasons as well.

"in no way is it of benefit to users"

Now this I have to . While your first two points had some subjective merit, this one is simply ridiculous. Thousands of us are benefiting from it. Some more than others. I would hate to have to go back to HM1. This sort of comment tells me you've either never tried it, or that you fall into that small minority of users that have show-stopping issues with it. It may not be to to your liking (or where I want it to be, for that matter), but to suggest it's of no benefit to anyone is just plain silly.

Fair enough, and I would agree for many of those in your situation. There are lots of folks who barely scratch the surface of what a tracker can do for them. I wouldn't say it's anywhere near 99% as you suggest, but a significant portion to be sure. In fact I don't think I leverage it nearly as much as I could. If all you want is a HUD that works and that's as far as you take it, then any tracker should work for you as long as it supports the sites you play at. In that case, I agree that you should stick with HM1. If all you care about is a HUD with VPIP/PFR/CBET/3BET/F3BET to better make multi-tabling decisions, and you never run a report, check a graph, look for leaks, or anything else, then you wouldn't notice a difference between any of the trackers on the market, new or old. Stick with what you've got.

As far as being intuitive, I find HM2 more intuitive than HM1, but that's because I've had a lot of time to get used to it. That, and I'm a software geek who appreciates complex software, as long as its complex from being feature-rich and not just complex from poor design. I do have some design issues with HM2 (as I did with HM1) but these are more philosophical, software-engineering disagreements than what I'd call outright stupid design.

Genetically modified?

As being intuitive means that you can use it without needing a long time to get used to it, that comment doesn't really make sense to me.

Overall I find HM2 more intuitive, and they have taken away things that seemed illogical to me, such as when I try to close HM1 it tells me that import is still running and do I want to stop importing - of course I do, otherwise I would press the Stop Auto Import button. Table Manager opening up as a separate window that I have to immediately minimise, and forcing me to have another unwanted icon in the bottom right corner of my screen. The big challenge is that I don't think that setting up hand import and table seating when you first have the program can ever be intuitive, and that inevitably puts off a lot of new users.

Gold Master. It's a software term for the initial release version after a beta testing cycle. You'll also see it referred to as GA (General Availability).

Touché. What I meant was, it can be a shock to some when coming from HM1 because the interface is drastically different. But I find that once you get beyond that shock, it's a more elegant and functional design than HM1 was, ergo my "more intuitive" assertion.

I'm thinking a new user to HM2 that never saw HM1 should find it more intuitive than HM1. But then again, that could be negated by the fact that it -- like any modern full-blown poker tracker -- can still be a very complex and intimidating piece of software for a brand new user with no tracker experience and no intuitive sense of software in general. So the point is probably moot.

The HM1 shutdown prompt always tilted me, and I've been nagging them for years about it. It was just one of many amateurish development tactics they took in HM1. I did all but write the code for them to fix it -- I gave them some pseudo-code with the Windows events they needed to trap and how to respond to them. Heck, I even semi-seriously offered my development services for free if they'd let me clean up some of the crappy code. They did seem to learn from a lot of those and improved on them in HM2, but have shown no interest in backporting them in HM1. Apparently all new development effort other than bug fixes and supporting new rooms has been directed at HM2 for the last couple of years. I had a whole laundry list of such simple fixes for amateurish coding that would have taken a seasoned developer less than a week to knockout for HM1, but apparently there wasn't enough demand for it (or value in it) for them to address them then.

The good news though is when I discovered such goofy coding practices during early testing of HM2, they listened and addressed them quickly. I had a number of detailed technical and development-related conversations with them during the alpha testing cycle. But since around the time it went beta, I've not had much reason to do so and have been relatively quiet. Which means they satisfied a lot of my issues in HM2 that are still outstanding in HM1.

They did charge me 4x!! I'm assuming by some kind of mistake. They did give it back,after wife went ape shit on me,and them.