RazorSync

Razor Sync is user friendly for the most part and I like that all customer info is in one place with unlimited space. I like that it is a cloud based program and can be accessed anywhere.

The software does NOT work with Quick Books as well as we were lead to believe which was the biggest factor for us when we decided to purchase. We have tried to get our Razor Sync to link to our Quick Books with tech support on multiple occasions which were unsuccessful so it has caused a lot of issues with out billing. We also have had over 6 instances where the Razor Sync invoicing and payments have caused customers to get double charged and I have had to call and have the second charge reversed. It does not show up in our Razor Sync only on the customers card statement. Also our mobile ap goes down often and our field techs can not use it.

Easy to use for the most part, but the training is definitely beneficial.
Technical support is second to none.

There is no field for a purchase order, in our days 99% of our customers use a purchase order.
Integration with quickbooks desktop is at best quirky, customers created in razorsync sync to quickbooks but not the other way around. That being said, quickbooks is definitely not the easiest product to integrate with, and their tech support is often sub-par. When a tech marks a job as completed an invoice is automatically generated, which is ok for a project only requiring one visit, but not for one where multiple techs or visits are required. There are some work arounds for that, but not easy to find.
When we used the sms to notify the customers that a work order was created and scheduled, most of the customers had no idea who it was coming from. The email send out looks more like an infomercial for razorsync with only a small portion of it displaying our company name and the pertinent information.
Attachments can be added to work orders, but not service requests. While this might not be a big deal, at times, it would make a lot more sense to add reference documents, copies of the customer's request or notes to the service request that are visible from every work order, instead of having to attach them to each work order thereafter.
The address field can not handle unit numbers at this time, and there were some issues with google verifying the address in some newer neighborhoods, and in order to fix them we have had to re-install the app.
At times we have some customers providing us with an address for the work to be done, their phone number and description of the work. The system forces you to enter a name in order to create a customer. More often than not, we just use an underscore. Perhaps there could be some default values in order to speed up the process. I do not need to know more than the customers first name and phone number.
The mobile apps are battery hogs on phones, so please make sure to have chargers on hand.

Customized statuses... Hands down our most important feature. We have several different types of inspections that have stages and steps that require both field users and office users to complete. Since we were able to customize the statuses to fit the stages of the project, I can see where everything is at a glance. I can color code the statuses by the responsible employee so that when glancing at the calendar, I know that I shouldn't see any bright yellow statuses that are over a week old... That tells me to go check on Kevin and see if he has a pulse. That type of tracking is INVALUABLE!!! I'm not waiting on reports or taking an employee's word that their tasks are completed.

All the other features are great but you can find the same features elsewhere (and pay a lot more).

Most of my cons are specific to the odd nature of our work. We routinely have different inspectors team up for a day and separate the next day and there is no way of assigning more than one employee to a task/work order. This leads to creating place holder events to indicate that the employee should look to another employee's schedule. It works... it's just a bit clunky.

UI- RazorSync does not appear nearly as polished as it's competitors. Because of the functionality, I feel that it's an acceptable trade off. The web browser view is the largest problem design wise. Again, we have as many users in the field as we do in the office so half of our company uses the web browser view. If you just run through the mobile app, you probably won't notice the awkwardness.