@Velho do Saco
If you're simply dissatisfied with v22.x then that would NOT warrant Symantec to investigate. You'll need to provide proof of actual system error instances, plus full descriptions and any datalogging, for their reference.
Whether Symantec will be able to finally fix those XP system issues remains to be seen. But for affected XP users, they'll heed to actively stand up and tell Symantec that their v22.xx has been (and still is) breaking their systems ALL THESE YEARS.
@macri
You're out of the XP camp/workflow so any XP system issues we've reported are of minimal concern to you. But do please show some more sympathy/concern to these affected users, many of whom are not as tech-savvy as you.
Anyway here's what I understand from this forced new version hijack scenario:
1. The notice Gayathri_R has put out regarding such forced hijack is just informational. When the situation escalates then Symantec/NLL will have to face up to the problem, review such new version forced upgrade policy, and revoke it whenever necessary;
However, whether this is a result of the Broadcom assets transfer and any possible restructuring, nobody knows -- except that this Broadcom thing has already caused various license chaos;
2. The notice states that previous client software versions' engines are at least 5+ years old and that updates are necessary for better protection. That's probably just some kind of liability claim. Trouble is, v22.x is also 5+ years old, and that no real new software version (eg. 23.x) has been announced. And needless to say, v22.x is still buggy to this day;
3. v22.x was first deployed at around 2014 when XP(SP3) was reaching EOL (except for PoS builds, which was until around 2019). Did Symantec lose heart to this outdated OS and thus simply put all the resources to Vista, 7, 8.x etc. etc., while forgetting that many are, to this day, still have to run on XP for everyday workflow? If they indicate that support is still provided down to XP then it's their obligation to work out all the bugs, and fix them accordingly;
4. The Reference Memory error issues were first reported in 2015. Per admin request, datalogging has been carried out on those system error instances back then. But since then there's been no solid follow-up, and to this day, the XP-specific bugs remain;
5. What's the reason for (4)? Is it because XP users were not aware of such problem, or simply think such problem is not 22.x-related, thus they didn't report them to the Symantec admin, and as a result, letting the problem slip through? Is it because Symantec did NOT collect enough data on such issues (Reference Memory error etc.) from affected XP users, leading to the company's dismissal of such problem and moving on to other issues?
6. Customers are not stupid when it comes to software upgrade. And many would take the IT tech's approach: do NOT upgrade/update anything until all issues have been accounted for. Which is why, when v22.x didn't work on XP as expected, affected customers simply remained in the trusted v21.x. Has Symantec even been aware of that?
7. As for why Symantec carried out this forced hijack, it could be the usual streamlining practice to migrate all customers into the same customer support. So without careful consideration, they simply forced all customers (current and legacy) into one solution, WITHOUT even asking. Such mean and selfish behavior from a company like this!! If they think they can live with past fame and glory, then sorry -- this 22.x software simply breaks that.
May I now use the opportunity to call out all current XP users who are suffering from the issues from forced v22.x software upgrade hijack to voice their concerns, complete with proof? Your feedback is needed to push Symantec/NLL into facing up to their mess......