Paying for viruses

Norton Security | Norton Internet Security
21

First, contrary to someone elses reply here, my issue with Norton is posted elsewhere here.

 

And yes, (to another's reply),  it is about having to pay Norton to remove a virus that a Norton program ignored.

 

Version? The techs that log in to my computer keep changing it, but today, it's:

version capture.jpg

 

This version is missing a feature, has a Hedlp file that I think is for an entirely different type of Norton, and doesn't have another feature that would prevent the annoying mistaken 'there is a virus' Norton popup.

 

Let's see, what can I be positive about and thank Norton for - how about the list of suggested fixes:

 

  1. Let Norton delete the file.
  2. Manually remove the file then empty the trash bin.
  3. Open IE and delete the internet cache and cookies. (really! that was a reply from support.)
  4. Re-boot the computer.
  5. Use Norton Uninsall and remove Norton, then reboot without protection, access the Internet, download another copy of NIS2011 trial, re-install Norton, add key. To download the "free" NIS2011 trial, I have to give them my credit card - already did that and free means no cost, no charge, no interest, bo invoice or bill. Now why do you suppose they want my credit card for a 'free trial' when I already have 3 keys!
  6. And, as some brilliant forum helper said get Kaspersky.

I know what a forum is. It is a place where the software giants depend on for support for their customers. Gradually, weening out bhuman support, and then even machines like nathan, leaving it to the unthanked to help fix the problems of the software.

 

I also thought I was clear in proclaimimg my displeasure of discovering that when the product fails, to pay Norton to do what the software was supposed to, but failed to do. If you buy a brand new car, and it won't start, should you have top pay a mechanic to fix it?

 

I'm sorry for those that have mustered like lemmings over the cliff that believe that it's OK for a company to charge for something that doesn't meet up with their promises.

 

By the way, thanks.

I

p.s., With this post, as with others, the Norton forum glitch states there is a invalid HTML code within the post, and to remove the highlighted HTML and resubmit. Nothing is highlighted. There just has to be a smiley somewhere that shakes it's head in frustrated disbelief. I dont blame any forum for not using one though.

floplot wrote:

Hello iNiC

 

I am not a Norton employee. I am just a user of a Norton product. You haven't told us what your issue is with your Norton product, nor have you told us what your Norton product is. Norton employees are the ones whose names are in red. You haven't told us what your issue is other than having a problem navagating around the Symantec website. This is a user to user Forum.

 

If you tell us your issue, perhaps as I mentioned before, we can try and help you. But without any information with specifics of your problem and specifics about your computer, we can not try and help you.  You say issue I described, bug in the program, until it is fixed. However, you haven't mentioned what it is. How can we try and help you if you don't tell us what is the problem? I do not read from any script and I am not from the tech dept. What is it that needs to be fixed please?

 

22

iNiC

 

<<  p.s., With this post, as with others, the Norton forum glitch states there is a invalid HTML code within the post, and to remove the highlighted HTML and resubmit. Nothing is highlighted. There just has to be a smiley somewhere that shakes it's head in frustrated disbelief. I dont blame any forum for not using one though.  >>

All complaints should be addressed to the Forum Host company who provide the service for Norton and many other leading companies -- every one of us hates that feature ... and a number of others ... as much as you do.

<< leaving it to the unthanked to help fix the problems of the software. >>

 

We are largely thanked, thank you, enjoy what we do or we would not be here and fix nothing ....

 

<< ...  it's OK for a company to charge for something that doesn't meet up with their promises. >>

 

You have read the EULA that Norton like all software houses provide ..... ?

 

Are we having fun yet .... ?

23
iNiC wrote

 

I also thought I was clear in proclaimimg my displeasure of discovering that when the product fails, to pay Norton to do what the software was supposed to, but failed to do. If you buy a brand new car, and it won't start, should you have top pay a mechanic to fix it?

 

I'm sorry for those that have mustered like lemmings over the cliff that believe that it's OK for a company to charge for something that doesn't meet up with their promises.

Hi iNiC,

 

There is no place where Symantec guarantees you will not get malware on your computer and NO other company does either. There are so many new malware coming out all the time and companies like Symantec is always having to catch up to the latest trends in malware and be reactive in nature. They have a large team of people who work 24/7 to keep on top of this but NO company out there is going to make a guarantee like that. As someone else mentioned earlier there is also the fact that many users have gotten themselves infected by visiting websites against the advice of Norton software, clicked on URL's from email, etc, etc, etc.

 

Any company who would try to make this guarantee would not be in business long, that is for sure.

 

Norton is constantly rated at or very near the top of the list in the overall protection it offers the end user and that includes things like Zero-day malware.

 

Best wishes.

Allen

24

I also thought I was clear in proclaimimg my displeasure of discovering that when the product fails, to pay Norton to do what the software was supposed to, but failed to do. If you buy a brand new car, and it won't start, should you have top pay a mechanic to fix it?

_________________________________________________________________________

Unfortunately many users insist on clicking, when it would be much wiser not to do so.  Many also enjoy downloading cracks, warez, and a miscellaney of stuff from torrents.  This is not Norton's responsibility to fix for free.

 

If you buy a brand new car and drive it off a cliff, see how far you get with warranty repair.  :smileywink:

25
iNiC wrote:

I also thought I was clear in proclaimimg my displeasure of discovering that when the product fails, to pay Norton to do what the software was supposed to, but failed to do. If you buy a brand new car, and it won't start, should you have top pay a mechanic to fix it?

_________________________________________________________________________

delphinium  said: Unfortunately many users insist on clicking, when it would be much wiser not to do so.  Many also enjoy downloading cracks, warez, and a miscellaney of stuff from torrents.  This is not Norton's responsibility to fix for free.

 

If you buy a brand new car and drive it off a cliff, see how far you get with warranty repair.  :smileywink:

I don't have a malware problem. I explained it all further back about the bug in the NIS2011 Help File, a bug in the program itself, and now the issue that NIS says there are two programs that are infected, and they are not.

 

To your reply - if someone does drive their car off the cliff (probably a Internet lemming), they won't need a mechanic.

 

As you say, some people get malware by inviting it in. But in this instance, the virus is not there and I have no *choice to ignore them. How can I trust NIS after all that?  All said and done, my experience with NIS says the price for NIS should be $19.95

 

Oh, I'll still use it until something better comes along - maybe even a better NIS - who knows, but rely, depend, or believe in it 100% - no. I wouldn't do that with any AV. But no AV should keep one on edge, worried that if the program is gltchy, as is the service, and HF, that maybe it missed that web site that was hacked and dumped a Trojan on my end without the AV detecting it. What has the Trojan downloaded from home, and what is it doing to my system, Identity, and network!  It's become very difficult to maintain faith in such a product.

 

BTW - Contrary to a recent reply, I do not always knock bad software, or without reason, move the slide-bar to aggressive. I do write kudo's when it is deserved.  I've taken a real pen in hand and put it to real paper, and mailed it through the old fashioned post office praising the efforts of an employee that tried to help.  Sometimes, some people think that once negative, always negative. 

 

i

 

* A reply suggested to quarantine it I forget who, (apologies to the author), then use the quarantine GUI to ignore it, and return it to it's place ~ which I will do, but shouldn't have to.

 

SIDEBAR ON::: I remember Norton products for *DOS (not the DoS but DOS). I remember tying in dumb terminals to a host, running an Atari BBS software program on a IBM MoBo with a huge 80Mg HDD under 16k of RAM that even IBM, Comodedoors and Tandy could access. Viruses and kiddie-bat files were the battles back then.  Even in DOS we needed protection from malicious no-minds - Norton  was there to do that. 

Everything has come a long way since then - the Internet blossomed from white text (on dumb terminals, green or yellow) on a black screen to what we have today. The only thing that hasn't changed is the push for a bigger, better, stronger bottom line.

SIDEBAR OFF:::

 

26
Inline in red below...

 

iNiC

 

<<  p.s., With this post, as with others, the Norton forum glitch states there is a invalid HTML code within the post, and to remove the highlighted HTML and resubmit. Nothing is highlighted. There just has to be a smiley somewhere that shakes it's head in frustrated disbelief. I dont blame any forum for not using one though.  >>

huwyngr wrote:
All complaints should be addressed to the Forum Host company who provide the service for Norton and many other leading companies -- every one of us hates that feature ... and a number of others ... as much as you do.

Ok, you see a complaint, but I wrote about a annoying bug in the forum software -- wasn't a complaint. 

<< leaving it to the unthanked to help fix the problems of the software. >>

 

We are largely thanked, thank you, enjoy what we do or we would not be here and fix nothing ....

 

I know the feeling. I help people for about 10 hours a day, 7 days a week (I made the error of giving out my phone number). More often than not, people do not say thank you. I don't care. I prefer not to hear it because I get an 'Awww shucks' feeling and hot flashes :smileywink:

I feel some forum gurus everywhere, not just here, take to heart too much from too little. Everywhere one looks, they can find people volunteering their own time doing what businesses should have done in the first place. Now, more than ever, clicking "Support" takes one to a Forum where one depends on the volunteer for a good answer. Companies know that and unfortunately, abuse it.  Before I forget and get chastized, Thank you Norton for providing this Forum so volunteers can do the job for you. It is appreciated.

Some days (I do a lot of research), I feel as if I'm only person on the Internet that is not an expert. Many are experts in their own camp, some are just trolls, some are idiots wasting bandwidth. Those with the questions just need to work through the flack and chaff and have faith in some replies. 

 

To my friends, I say "I may not know the answer - but the Internet is chock full of people who think they do." (well, many do have the answer - thank you.)

 

<< ...  it's OK for a company to charge for something that doesn't meet up with their promises. >>

 

You have read the EULA that Norton like all software houses provide ..... ?

 

I did read it. I read every one where I am involved. It's how I know whether or not the softare (any) is not responsible for anything their third party buddies drop on one's computer. But try to find a Philadelphia lawyer who will interpret it for under $350.00 an hour! All ToUs, EULAs, ToSs etcetera do one thing, and one thing only - they relieve the author of any responsibilities with or without one's consent. If everyone read those things, and understood them, and had testicular tenacity, they would band together and boycott such shennigans. But as any Philly lawyer would say, all those things do is take up 5 minutes of the court's time - then the case continues.

 

Are we having fun yet .... ?

We? I donm't know about you, but "fun" has been taxed out of my reach - are you having fun?

Have a good one...

i

27

UPDATE:

 

Everyone - thank you for your comments, suggestions, and even insults.

 

This has gone from the topic to off topic -- to a degree - but has been very informative none the less for not only me, but anyone doing a search around the same orbit.

 

There is really only one solution, but I can't click/apply it here. The solution is for companies to get out from behind the annonimity of the Internet and face up to their responsibilities witrhout ducking them via EULAs and such.

 

I'd close this thread as 'solved', but there is no solution - not as long as we buy something, and have to pay again to have it work properly. If a virus does get through, and it is shown that the software missed it, and recipient did not ignore any warnings (but there being none), then the company, whoever they are, should clean it without charge.

 

IMHO and EOD

 

thanks again

 

i

 

28

Senseless, endless...let's be wise and end this...