Syncronys eventually filed for bankruptcy in July 1998 after releasing other poorly received tools. A large number of its creditors were customers who had not received their rebates for SoftRAM.
I wonder what the story was from the company perspective? Sounds like it just was a total fraud, but I can imagine a scenario where some programmer was ordered to build something that they didn't know how to implement and some manager told them to ship it anyway? I found this article about the bankruptcy  which has a priceless quote indicating total denial to the end:
Interestingly enough, two days before the company sought bankruptcy protection, Syncronys CEO Rainer Poertner was busy touting a new product called UpgradeAID 98 and claiming that the company's problems were history.
"It's been a really long time since SoftRAM 95. In the meantime the company has released 12 new products," he said on July 13. "We released a product in a rush with the release of Windows 95."
So far, UpgradeAID 98 has met with skepticism. The product is designed to allow consumer who upgrade their PCs to Windows 98 to revert back to Windows 95.
And this is hilarious:
Poertner, who was at lunch, could not be reached for comment.
Also, he exists! 
It was supposedly the other way around. The programmer claimed he had in fact implemented it, and management claims they really thought they were shipping a real, working product.
I worked at a company that was also in the "utilities to improve system performance" niche. In 1997, we were showing our new program at Comdex. It was a finalist for a "Best Utility" Best of Comdex award from Byte, and Jerry Pournelle wrote a very positive review, and said it had his vote for Best Utility.
We were looking for a distributor for it, and a couple companies were interested. One was Syncronys. They could get it into a lot more stores, and promote it more effectively, than the others but we were concerned about trusting them after reading the revelations about SoftRAM.
We asked them to explain how the SoftRAM thing happened and were told about the programmer faking it. We would have been pretty skeptical of that explanation--it is almost always management that fakes things--except it turned out we knew that programmer (or rather, our founder knew him personally, and some of the rest of us knew of him) and it was quite believable that he was behind this.
Our company was our founder's second company. Let's call him F. His first had been a Mac utility company founded in 1984, founded with a partner (P) he had met when he took a couple years off from school to go work in Silicon Valley. When they started the company, F came back to Pasadena and hired a bunch of his Caltech friends and acquaintances on contract to get their first product out over the summer with him as chief engineer, and P stayed in SV to handle the business end of things while F stayed in Pasadena to code and run engineering.
P did not run the business honestly, and both F and those friends and acquaintances F hired ended up getting stiffed out of a significant fraction of what they were owed when the company fell apart and P disappeared with what money they did have.
As you've probably guessed by now, P ended up at Syncronys, where he was in charge of engineering and was the developer of SoftRAM.
By the time Syncronys was wanting to make a deal to distribute our software, they had gotten rid of P, and were just going to be a distributor of software developed by others.
We did end up, after much debate, going with Syncronys. They had more reach than the other distributor we were considering, and offered a better deal (probably because they needed something decent to help fix their reputation). (I don't remember if I agreed with this, or argued for going with the other distributor).
Things ended up working out OK going with Syncronys. There were some people apprehensive about buying something from them, but the reviews were good, and made it clear the product was real, and that it was not developed by Syncronys--they were just distributing a new product from another, established Windows utility company that had a good track record. As far as we could tell, that was enough to overcome most people's apprehension.
Now that improvements in CPU speed have outpaced improvements in storage speed, it's easier to benefit from compressed swap in ram. Linux includes "zswap", which in my experience works well for postponing the severe performance degradation you otherwise get with heavy memory pressure on general desktop use. If you think you want to set "vm.swappiness=0" (which I ran for several years), you probably want to enable zswap instead. If you're running Debian, you can set it up by installing "zram-tools" (which can be configured with /etc/default/zramswap if you're not happy with the default).
zswap (nee compcache), on the other hand, is a region of memory that tries to store pages compressed instead of swapping them out -- basically a last resort before swapping. zswapped pages are not considered swap, so you have to check sysfs to see how much it's getting used. Many default configurations are pretty aggressive, allowing zswap to use up to 20% of physical memory before finally resorting to the system's configured swap space.
Latency for pulling single pages has never really been limited by CPU performance, that's always been faster and will probably never change due to physics.
At work I think I have a 2012-era ssd drive, that while speedy is probably pretty far behind modern drives. When things start thrashing in swap it's a bad time all around.
That's probably shifted as everyone moves to PCIe based storage solutions, particularly on the low-mid range phones that don't have super high performance cores.
And i measured disk usage on my desktops (home, job) and laptop, and my main dev "server" (xen, with bunch of vms).
Surprisingly my desktop had most writes to disk, but even then it would take me 6 years on the cheapest (qlc, kingston 1tb) before wearing it out
So i don't think that is a big issue, especially with how much you can improve your life, with faster swap.
There are currently a ton of Andriod apps that are similar.
- Battery Extenders.
- Memory Cleaners
- Disk Cleaners
- Bandwidth Enhancers
- Virus Checkers
All of them promise the world with flashy graphics and many do absolutely nothing, or nothing the OS doesn't do automatically.
Storage Cleaners: https://play.google.com/store/search?q=cleaner&c=apps&hl=en
Memory Boosters: https://play.google.com/store/search?q=memory%20booster&c=ap...
Bandwidth Enhancers: https://play.google.com/store/search?q=bandwidth%20enhancer&...
RAM Doubler: https://winworldpc.com/product/connectix-ram-double/windows-...
For extra credit, look the ingredients up and see how many of them have above-zero blue hazmat ratings.
I believe that for a significant share of the cosmetics users, just doing some gym and adjusting nutrition would improve looks significantly more than cosmetics.
However, gym and diet change take effort, so it's "natural" to look for silver bullets. And looking for silver bullets is not about effects, it's about deluding oneself.
I agree on the theory that cosmetics do little or nothing. I was reading about somebody who claimed that the the general cosmetics effect can be achieved by home-made hydrating cream, and that over the counter cosmetic can't have significant effect, otherwise they would be dangerous (e.g., large amounts of certain vitamins). However, I can't find any reference.
This is gold
At the time (1996?) RAM was cheap enough to just buy another 8MB instead of some software
RAM Doubler used the “System Memory” that could auto-expand and made applications think they had contiguous memory. I don’t know if the “compression” was a scam but the better memory management definitely wasn’t.
Also for PPC Macs, it was usually bundled with “Speed Doubler” - a much faster 68K emulator than what came with early PPC Macs. The operating system itself was also partially emulated, you did get real world speed improvements.
RAM definitely wasn’t cheap in 1994, I paid $500 for 16MB of extra RAM for my PPC 6100/60 for a total of 24MB (third party reseller). I remember in 1996 though buying a 32MB RAM stick for around $350 for the DX/2-66 DOS Compatibility Card in my 6100/60.
I remember my first PC clone in 1992 it was a white box with a 40MB hard disk and 2MB of RAM, within 6 months or so I spent $200 on two more 1MB 70ns SIMMs.
Our high school had a small lab running Mac IIci's with 8MB of RAM and those things were probably $8K each with display, it was a big deal to get time on them. We had more physical space than money, so we had an IBM PS/1 lab, a couple of ][e labs, and my personal favorite was a networked TRS-80 Model 3 lab where the master machine had a 10MB hard disk. Those things were beasts -- we used to play some sort of a networked crossword puzzle game while wearing an onion tied to our belts (which was the style at the time). Give me 3 B's for a quarter you'd say...
So it was the cloud, essentially.