And I'll second that!
A 25 year user of Norton/Symantec products
Then all I can say is, "Oh, how you've been deceived." If you ACTUALLY believe that Symantec, or any other company, for that matter, doesn’t tell lies, then you have a lot to learn. There isn’t a single company in existent that hasn’t told lies. It’s a matter of business, and in order to survive, ALL companies have to tell lies. Using the Firefox 3.5 upgrade as an example, once again, Symantec didn’t have the 5-month advance notice that they had this time around, yet they were able to rewrite the APIs, have it fully tested, and released it, in less than a month. This time around, they had five months, which means they had four months longer than the previous API issue. If the majority of those writing plug-ins for Firefox were able to update their APIs in advance of the final release of Firefox 4.0, then there is absolutely NO reason why Symantec wouldn’t have been able to do the same.
Not only that, but considering Symantec is working with greater manpower than the individual programmers that write the great majority of API plug-ins for Firefox, it SHOULD have taken Symantec even less time than it took others. Maybe it might help if you knew my dad, who retired two years ago, worked as a programmer-analyst for an IBM subsidiary for almost 30 years, and even he agrees. He knows more about programming than you will ever know, so, please, do NOT try and tell me that I don’t know what I speak of, because I am very well aware of what it should have taken Symantec, in terms of programming time. Again, there is absolutely NO reason why their rewritten API, for the Toolbar, as well as ID Safe, couldn’t have been completed, tested, and released, in advance of Firefox 4.0 being released.
Not only was Rome built faster, it lasted longer...LOL
What a JOKE, except it IS NOT FUNNY! It's not like Symantec didn't know about the new versions of IE and FF, but OH NO, the autofill STILL WILL NOT WORK! Not a very professional image, I must say. What IS kind of funny is that when I entered the forum, there was a pop up that asked if I wanted to participate in a service survey. I SURE WOULD!!!! But first I have to enter my email and name and, well, that's NO PROBLEM because my faithful autofill will make that so easy and......OH, that's RIGHT, autofill DOESN'T WORK which is why I wanted to leave a response in the first place. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
Thanks for your help. I am back to normal now. I will definetly do more research before upgrading to newer versions in the future.
I went back to Firefox 3.6.16 until I feel more confident all of the compatability issues between FF 4.0 and Norton 360 have been fixed. Will there will be any communication to Norton 360 users when the fixes are in place and everything is working properly?
Panther,
You can call people liars if you wish -- I do not choose to do so.
Since I don't know you from Adam I wouldn't dream of telling you what you do or do not know nor reflect on your Dad's competence .... even if you who don't know Norton staff are happy to do just that ....
As for myself, I started in QC for High Technology in 1950 after wartime service in the US Army Signal Corps doing repair on combat equipment. I started using computers back in the late 1970's and have been doing online support almost as long, including incidentally for IBM Thinkpads, Lotus Software, HP Hardware and computing in general and I've been active here since 2008. So I've a fair background in what's involved in complex technical situations.
I'm not a Symantec employee nor do they pay for what we do here. I have a very high respect for them, for their honesty and willingness to tell us what is going on, within the limits of commercial sensitivity, and this is well known by those who have been here for any length of time.
I'm not saying people are wrong to be upset but there are a few things that seem to me to be being ignored.
Firstly, everyone seems hypnotized by the date "May" in the first announcement giving a report on the problem and is ignoring further detailed messages in the forums indicating that the fix will come out when it is ready and tested and not on some specific date.
Secondly, everyone is focused on the length of time "Norton has had" since the first release of Firefox work in progress files but overlooks that what really matters are not any changes Firefox made 5 or more months ago but any they made in the days before going RTM (let alone any that may have crept in after that announcement .... which does happen as for example Microsoft themselves have indicated in blogs happened after Windows 7 went gold) ... those are the ones that can cause problems just as easily as earlier ones. Because of knock-on effects they can be even more difficult to deal with since working around them can undo work-arounds that have been applied to earlier problems. Security programs dig so deep into the operating system that they are more prone to be affected and cause upsets than most other programs.
And if you add into this that during all of this Microsoft, who control the operating system, are busy changing it so that the environment etc there at the beginning on which the applications depend is no longer the same, it's a wonder to me that anything works when it does ....
If you don't think that changes in Windows matter do a search here on Norton 360 & PowerDesk & context menu and see how an announced to partners change by Microsoft that Microsoft themselves did not immediately implement caused PowerDesk to crash when Microsoft eventually did implement it and how initially it appeared to be due to Norton 360 which had implemented it but turned out to be due to PowerDesk lagging behind ....
If anyone honestly thinks that Norton and their staff around the world, not just in the USA, sat on their .... hands doing nothing for months then they can have no idea of reality. If you think they are deliriously happy at the present situation, why should they be?
Since there is a workaround in staying with Firefox 3.6 a little longer why don't we all get on with life? However loud you shout the problem will still be fixed when it is fixed and released when Norton's QC decide it is ready to go ..... and that does not, in any commercial organization I know, mean when it is 100% perfect because nothing ever is and someone will always break it ...
Firefox has a great password manager. I finally got it working with Firefox 4. Slowly things are going good but a long way to go with FF4.Nothing breaks a browser like a buggy plugin/extension.Norton take your time and get it right.Thanks.paul
Starting with you, I am glad you were able to get back to FF 3.6.16, and with everything intact. You are most welcome. I can’t say whether, or not, Symantec will inform people when the new API is ready for download. Considering the fact that they never bothered to inform people when it was ready for FF 3.5, despite the fact that they said they would do so (yet ANOTHER lie from Symantec tech support personel, which, to huwyngr, is just one example of how Symantec HAS lied to its customers in the past), so, my suggestion would just be to Google the topic on…say…a weekly basis, until they state that it has been released. I can’t guarantee that this will provide the answer, but this is a URL that might, very well give the answer, at least in the end:
http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-360/Norton-compatibility-with-IE9-and-FF4/td-p/420024
it is the N360 & NIS 2011 thread informing people that they are “working on it”, and, I suspect, where the information might be once the plug-in is finished.
My suggestion is, at least for now, as I have suggested to others, uninstall FF 4, and reinstall FF 3.6.16, and, as I suggested to fisherka1, immediately above, check the link I provided on a weekly basis, at least until the update has been released.
While FF 4 might have a password manager, if it’s the same one as was used in FF 3.x, it’s not as secure as the one included in Norton’s Identity Safe. In addition, FF doesn’t securely store your personal information, which can, if you so choose, include your name, address, phone number, birthdate, and even credit/debit card information for multiple cards. All of this can be secured not only with a master password, but you have the option of setting it so that the password is needed every time FF opens for the first time after booting your system up, every time you open FF (even during multiple FF start-ups during the same system operational period, or each time such information needs to be entered on any website (yes, that might sound monotonous, but being able to enter the same password each time, with it knowing the correct information for each of them, is a lot better than having to manually enter all the information each, and every, time it is needed.
@ huwyngr
Finally, leaving you for last, to start with, I wasn’t calling you, or any individual, a liar. What I DID say is that companies…ALL companies…lie. Think, honestly, to yourself. If companies told us the pure truth for everything they offered, do you REALLY think people would buy their products/services? Of course not. As with you, my introduction to computers was also in the late 1970’s (IBM 500-Series mainframes, to be exact). I have also worked in the industry, and as such, I have my own personal experiences, as well as the knowledge from many others.
I'm not a Symantec employee nor do they pay for what we do here. I have a very high respect for them, for their honesty and willingness to tell us what is going on, within the limits of commercial sensitivity, and this is well known by those who have been here for any length of time. As for a release date of the patch, you will not find, anywhere, within my comments, have a mentioned “May”, or any other specific month. The only time-based comment I made mention of was, when I asked the technician when the update could possibly be expected, his comment, and what I did state was his comment, was, “I don’t know.”
In regards to the 5-month lead I mentioned, yes, it’s obvious that Mozilla made changes during that period, although what I’ve stated has nothing to do, specifically, with that. The changes they made had very little, if anything, to do with how APIs would interact with the new browser. If this were the case, others (again, individuals, as well as companies, such as Google & Adobe) wouldn’t have had fully finished AND tested API updates already available for download, BEFORE FF 4 was released, I might add. There is little difference in how the Google & Norton Toolbars function, yet the Google Toolbar was already updated AND tested.
Lastly, as for your comments regarding Microsquish (my favorite name for them, as they are the company everyone loves to hate, yet, at the same time, we know we can never, unfortunately, do without), I will leave those alone…for what should be obvious reasons, due to my “Microsquish” name for them (thank you, VERY much, Berkeley Breathed).
panther68 wrote:Considering the fact that they never bothered to inform people when it was ready for FF 3.5, despite the fact that they said they would do so (yet ANOTHER lie from Symantec tech support personel, which, to huwyngr, is just one example of how Symantec HAS lied to its customers in the past),
Not true. Symantec did announce the FF3.5 fix.:
Norton Toolbar Support for Firefox 3.5 Hot Fix Released!
If you actually read the notice you posted the link for, you will notice that it was ONLY for the toolbar, not the ID Safe, as they are two entirely separate APIs. Between the two the ID Safe is considered, by most, to be the far more important of the two, and they did NOT post notice of it being released. I remember finding out it was finally available ONLY because I called in, spoke with a support technician, and was provided the link to manually download (at that point in time, it wasn’t part of the auto-update, and had to be done manually) and install the update.
Again, your facts are not correct. The toolbar fix for FF3.5 included Identity Safe. What was not fixed, as stated in the announcement was the IPS extension. The announcement goes on to say this about IPS: "We will make another post as soon as the patch is out." And, yes, as promised, the release of the patch containing the IPS fix was prominently posted:
@ SendOfJive
It seems that YOUR facts are, AGAIN, the incorrect ones. That posting has nothing to do with the Firefox 3.5 upgrade incompatibility. What it DID have to do with was the Windows 7 incompatibility, as it VERY clearly states. Maybe you need to learn to read before you start spouting off that other people are wrong, when you are reporting on something entirely unrelated. Get your facts straight. At least one of us is actually spending time correctly researching the information. Unfortunately, that one person is NOT you. The upgrade that I, as well as some others, were pointing out, was the Firefox upgrade from 3.0 to 3.5.
The 16.7 patch was the inline patch where the Toolbar hotfix was incorporated and the IPS issue was fixed. It was called the Windows 7 compatibility patch because much of the update was aimed at fixing compatibility issues with that OS, but the patch also addressed other general issues in OS's besides Windows 7, as stated in the announcement (also see this earlier Symantec employee post about this):
4. What are the changes in this release?
- Several Windows 7 compatibility fixes
- Support for migrating Vista to Windows 7
- Fixed issue where Windows Defender was disabled on every reboot
- Norton Toolbar support for Firefox 3.5 in this release, including fixes for IPS Add-on issues
- Fixed LiveUpdate failures caused by hosts running behind a proxy
- Fixed top install failures seen in the field
- Fixed patching issues seen with 16.5 patch
@ SendOfJive
Obviously, you’re still having trouble learning to read, so I will give it to you in as elementary way as I possibly can. The link you gave is to an update from 8-31-09, which was designed to fix an incompatibility problem with Windows 7, which was released on 10-22-09 (almost two months later, if you need math assistance, as well). In regards to anything having to do with Firefox 3.5, it, specifically, had to do with the interaction between Firefox 3.5 & Windows 7, but did NOT, specifically, have to do with incompatibility problems with Firefox 3.5, itself. To be more specific, it had absolutely nothing to do with Firefox 3.5, in, and of, itself. As for the update that DID have to do specifically with the Firefox upgrade, from 3.0 to 3.5, that can be found here: http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-Internet-Security-Norton/Norton-Toolbar-Support-for-Firefox-3-5-Hot-Fix-Released/m-p/118566/highlight/true#M61120
Take careful notice of the date (7-13-09), for, if you do, then, and ONLY then, will you finally realize that this patch, which was released a month & a half earlier, was the REAL patch having to do SPECIFICALLY with the upgrade from FF 3.0 to FF 3.5. Of course, since you are the very person who posted this information (earlier, not only under this same topic, but also under the very same Norton 360 thread…I only mention that last part because there is a similar thread going on in the NIS section), then it seems that, in addition you tour inability to read, you are also having sever “senior moments” (ie. senility). You appear to be trying to convince people of one thing in one thread, and, in another thread, you are trying to convince people of something entirely different. Do you enjoy contradicting yourself?
The chronology was
June 30, 2009: Firefox 3.5 released.
July 13, 2009: Hotfix for Norton Toolbar Released
August 10, 2009: Hotfix included in 16.7.2.9 Update - for those who did not install the hotfix
August 31, 2009: Fix for IPS Add-on included in 16.7.2.11 Update
All customers received the 16.7.2.11 Update - The included fixes were not all specific to Windows 7.
NO WHERE in that release do the words “The included fixes were not all specific to Windows 7” appear. Those are YOUR words, NOT those of Symantec. Quit lying to yourself, as well as others, and quit trying to prove a false point as truth. You only continue to show your ignorance. Sorry, but THAT is the truth. You don’t even read the information you are attempting to pass of as your false-truth, for, if you had, then you would know that the information contained within that last posting refers to MULTIPLE patches, NOT just one patch. It VERY clearly states that if refers to patches 16.1, 16.2, 16.5 AND 16.7.2.11. That is FOUR separate patches, NOT one. Guess I was really right, and you don’t know simple math.
@ SendOfJive (or, more accurately, maybe you should be called TurkeyOfJive)
I had tired of your childish antics, and will no longer be responding to your pointless & worthless comments. You have not only contradicted yourself, but, it appears (and, probably accurately so) that you either have trouble reading, or understanding that which you read. While, ever once in a while, I might miss one or two specific points, but, for the greatest part, I thoroughly research information BEFORE I add it into any comments I make. In that research also comes understanding of that which I speak. You, on the other hand, seem to just be searching out data (probably using Google, which I use), and either including the URLs, or words from that which you find, but, whereas I fully read what I find before including it in my comments, you chose to just copy & paste. You find little points that might help your argument, but once you find something of the sorts, you don't bother to read any further. This is what is known as doing a "half-**bleep**" job. I'd like to be able to say that, as a researcher,. you would be fired, but, the truth is, you would probably never be hired as a researcher, to begin with. Quite trying to argue points which you have proven you can't even argue, and go back to your job...probably flipping burgers at McDonald's.
@ EVERYONE else who reads these comments
To anyone else reading Mr. JiveTurkey’s comments, I highly recommend taking them with a grain of salt, and, as I have done, do your own research. I have tried to help those in need, and that I have done, as you can see by comments left by others. Then, unfortunately, there are the misinformed & misguided bits of information you will read that have been posted by SendOfJive, some of which, if you read all he (or maybe she….know knows) has posted, you will find contradict other posts s/he has left. I leave things for you to decide on your own. As for me, I am done with all Norton/Firefox 4 related threads, as I chose to no longer involve myself in someone else’s childish delusions.
Geez, sorry to see you go Panther. You've added so much to the comraderie on the forum. I'm sure Norton support will miss you as well. 
To: Panther 68: I received your last post for me and I want to thank you again for all your help. This forum is about helping one another, and that you did for me. As I stated earlier, I am back to normal. I will check the link you provided and google updates related to FF 4.0 and Norton fixes until I feel confident those fixes are in place. I do not want to have to go through this kind of situation again.
To Everyone: I am sorry for opening what appears to be a can of worms. There are obviously problems with the compatibility between FF 4.0 and Norton 360. As a Norton 360 customer, I would have expected Norton to notify their customers of any potential compatibility issues, and their time frame for addressing those issues. We all know Norton has known about the FF 4.0 release in plenty of time to at least warn us. Norton is a provider of an extremely important service for which they have a responsibility to notify their consumers of issues which could affect that service...End of Story – there is no way to sugar coat this. With that being said, lets hope Norton will do a better job of notifying their customers in the future. When they don't, we need to let them know what our expectations are. As for this forum, it should be about people working together to resolve problems and that means respecting one another even when we believe some of the information provided is inaccurate or misleading. Please try to get along, because there are a whole lot of people out here (like me) that are not computer savvy and we really depend on your expertise. We need to keep all knowledgeable people contributing. It is what makes the community work!!! I hope Panther68 rand any others that are considering leaving the Norton community reconsider. In my opinion this would be a big loss!