Author Topic: This is low even for Symantec  (Read 13997 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DukeNukem

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #15 on: January 10, 2006, 10:57:49 AM »
Norton's Ghost 10 User Guide

General error messages

Following is a list of the most common, general error messages:

EA39070A

The internal structure of the recovery point file is invalid or unsupported when saving the file to a network location. This error can also occur for one of the following reasons:

The recovery point file is damaged or corrupted. Damage can occur when you create a recovery point over a network and there is significant packet loss during the creation of the recovery point file. You should verify recovery point after they are created to ensure their integrity. Create a new recovery point file to a different location, or create a new recovery point with a different file name to the same location.

The recovery point file is fine, but there may be a conflict with spyware detection software (such as Pest Control or Spybot) causing the recovery point file to become corrupt or appear to be corrupted. While using the product or Recovery Point Browser, disable all spyware detection software.


If you copy a recovery point file from one FireWire drive to another FireWire drive while connected to a FireWire expansion card that uses a Via chipset (such as the Kouwell card). To work around this issue, replace your Via-based FireWire expansion card with a card that uses a non- Via chipset (such as the Adaptec 4300 Fireconnect, which uses a TI chipset).
----------------------------------------------------

Seems like tech support are going by the manual.

"Disable all spyware detection software " , Im speculating, they think best way to accomplish this is to uninstall.

justin1278

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #16 on: January 11, 2006, 02:49:44 AM »
I wasn't mean I just said I was suprised such a good company like Symantec that makes good priducts not including NAV would do that and I will no longer purchase any of there solutions.

justin1278

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #17 on: January 18, 2006, 10:45:42 PM »
Hello,

I have recieved a reply from Symantec on the 1/16/06
below is what the e-mail said. I am sure others as well that have e-mailed Symantec have recieved the same replies. (e-mail in blue)


Hello,

you expressed your opinion to an article that has been published in a forum at safer-networking.org. Some of you expressed opinions in a very abusive way which is noted but believed just being your limited ability to communicate to others.

The individuals who are really interested in the matter please take the following into consideration:
There are allegations but what evidence do you see? Certainly not much because the article is simply not true.

Background
A technical article recommended to deactivate TEMPORARILY your spyware tool WHILE saving an image with Symantec's v2i Protector or Norton Ghost 10 when you have problems.
v2i/Ghost 10 can backup a computer while you continue working with Windows and save the backup to an image file.
Is deactivating certain services such an uncommon recommendation? Think what spybot does (e.g. checking loading points or tea timer controlling and preventing registry changes).....
Take into consideration
-- It is absolutely not true that Symantec asked customers to uninstall Spybot. This is a plain lie! Where is the proof?

-- When Spybot changes wording from 'disable' to 'remove' you should ask what their motives are. Are they trying to get some money with this makeup story?

-- It is not true that Spybot is under some sort of conspiracy attack. Why? There is no product from the Symantec or Norton line that competes with Spybot. This functionality is a very small part of Norton Internet Security suite but you would use this software primarily for anti-virus/firewall. Here, we talk about backup software for disaster recovery!

-- It is not true that the Symantec individuals mentioned by name did not get back to Patrick Kolla of Spybot. Frequent mails were sent to legal@spybot.info  and patrick@spybot.info (I can name this mail address because it is published on the Web)

-- What would say or how would you react when the author of this article becomes immediately extremely abusive in his language to you. Everybody being in contact with Patrick has been insulted. Patrick Kolla is German living in Bochum (Germany). Patrick is well-known in his neighborhood for such scurrilous behavior. This story is another unfortunately proof.

-- The author writes about 'honor'. How do you rate the fact that he writes such article, provides no platform to response and exposes legitimate e-mail addresses of people who wanted to help, certainly without their consent?

-- Think about a situation having a computer disaster. You are lucky because you think you have an image.... but suddenly you learn the image is bad because.... well, I am pretty sure you blame Norton not Spybot.

-- Will you have problems? No, not consequently. But if you run into trouble, do not say you have not been warned of possible problems. Strange enough that Spybot has apparently no interest in looking into the issue from a technical perspective.

As you probably know, the creator of Spybot is German and due to legislation, an imprint for websites has to be published. Go and have a word with Patrick as well. You find patrick@kolla.de at  http://www.kolla.de/

As a consequence, you can bet that the story has been brought to the legal departments now. European data and privacy law is banning these practices of false allegations and posting names on the Internet (without consent, as I assume) As a result Spybot will now be liable for damage... and Norton wins.

I am sure you can make up your mind yourself.

Stephan
« Last Edit: January 20, 2006, 01:22:42 AM by justin1278 »

Staind

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2006, 11:05:57 PM »
Er, is that a joke or was it serious? I thought at first it was a joke, but then it was really long so I didn't know.

CharleyO

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2006, 11:41:37 PM »
***

Probably Symantec being serious ... they are shooting themselves in the foot!    :o


***

Zagor

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2006, 02:38:01 AM »
Shame that there is no respect beetween the competitors on the market. It is a sad story really...

Staind

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2006, 05:23:55 AM »
The email just really lacked professionalism, which is what I would expect from someone working at Norton.  Did this "Stephan" have an email address?

justin1278

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2006, 01:06:45 AM »
Hello,

The persons name was Stephan Berger this persons e-mail was <rrgz635@yahoo.com> I am sending a reply to him.


~justin1278

justin1278

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #23 on: January 20, 2006, 01:21:27 AM »
Hello Forum Members,
I have sent my reply to Stephan Berger and here is what it said. (in red)

Hello,

Here are a few points,
1. I was not abusive in my e-mail I got to the point that Symantec Corp. has lost a costumer. Although 1 person most likely not matter because Symantec is such a popular company, well it was.
2. The proof is all over many websites. Try doing a Google search using the keywords uninstall spybot to use norton ghost.
3. Symantec has done many things such as Rootkits coming with there services to supposedly help improve there service to the costumer.
4. I did not use any bad language in my e-mail to Symantec Corp. I was expressing myself in a very good way for how frustrated I was with what Symantec has done.
5. I will not believe anything Symantec says about Patrick M. Kolla because he is competition to Symantec so of course they will try to make costumers think that Patrick's product is no good.

Overall I believe your e-mail to me Stephan was very unprofessional.

Regards,

Justin Leffert

MFB

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #24 on: January 20, 2006, 02:50:07 AM »
Hello Forum Members,
I have sent my reply to Stephan Berger and here is what it said. (in red)

Hello,

Here are a few points,
1. I was not abusive in my e-mail I got to the point that Symantec Corp. has lost a costumer. Although 1 person most likely not matter because Symantec is such a popular company, well it was.
2. The proof is all over many websites. Try doing a Google search using the keywords uninstall spybot to use norton ghost.
3. Symantec has done many things such as Rootkits coming with there services to supposedly help improve there service to the costumer.
4. I did not use any bad language in my e-mail to Symantec Corp. I was expressing myself in a very good way for how frustrated I was with what Symantec has done.
5. I will not believe anything Symantec says about Patrick M. Kolla because he is competition to Symantec so of course they will try to make costumers think that Patrick's product is no good.

Overall I believe your e-mail to me Stephan was very unprofessional.

Regards,

Justin Leffert


 I really suggest that you leave this matter to Mr. Kolla and Symantec.  Both of them are professional people and they should settle this in a mature matter. 
  After hearing this problem from both directions, I don't know who to believe anymore.   :-\
« Last Edit: January 20, 2006, 03:22:08 AM by Turkey »

timcan

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #25 on: January 20, 2006, 03:01:02 AM »
It seems odd that Stephans' email address is not @symantec.com.

MFB

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2006, 03:21:18 AM »
It seems odd that Stephans' email address is not @symantec.com.

I was a bit curious on that too, I don't know if he's part of Symantec since I never heard of him.   ???

justin1278

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #27 on: January 20, 2006, 03:25:43 AM »
Hello,

I to noticed that, maybe he e-mailed me with his private one, but why? He must be in the company to know that I e-mailed Symantec.

Offline bob3160

  • Avast √úberevangelist
  • Probably Bot
  • *****
  • Posts: 47175
  • 62 Years of Happiness
    • bob3160 Protecting Yourself, Your Computer and, Your Identity
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2006, 03:29:45 AM »
Hello,

I to noticed that, maybe he e-mailed me with his private one, but why? He must be in the company to know that I e-mailed Symantec.
All he had to do was scan this forum. I highly doubt that anything official from Symantec would be sent from a yahoo throw-away email account. IMHO.
Free avast! Security Seminar: http://bit.ly/2N1eaR2  -  Important: http://www.organdonor.gov/ -- My Web Site: http://bob3160.strikingly.com/ - Win 11 Pro v21H2 64bit, 16 Gig Ram, 1TB SSD, Avast Free 22.5, How to Successfully Install Avast http://goo.gl/VLXdeRepair & Clean Install https://goo.gl/t7aJGq -- My Online Activity https://

justin1278

  • Guest
Re: This is low even for Symantec
« Reply #29 on: January 20, 2006, 03:39:10 AM »
Ya thats possible to. But in the e-mail he said that many things were said and to get the e-mail he would need to have worked with Symantec unless he just came up with that by looking at the forums. Also how would he know this info about Mr. Kolla also? this makes no sense to me.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2006, 03:42:13 AM by justin1278 »