Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003
From: Craig (wpyr@REMOVEworldnet.att.net)
Date: 11/22/02
- Next message: RLW: "Question: excessive pinging by the same IP"
- Previous message: Ray Williams: "Appliance advice needed (question)"
- In reply to: Robert Dubenezic: "Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003"
- Next in thread: Robert Dubenezic: "Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003"
- Reply: Robert Dubenezic: "Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "Craig" <wpyr@REMOVEworldnet.att.net> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 17:06:22 GMT
"Robert Dubenezic" <rad@sprintpcs.com> wrote in message
news:03tD9.16318$op6.4952@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> I do want your opinion. I was just explaining why I switched to ZA. If I
> ask symantec it would cost me $29.95. I sent them an e-mail 2 weeks ago
and
> I did not get a response.
>
> thanks
>
> bob
>
> "NeoSadist" <neos@dist> wrote in message
> news:uts4b1fsok3t83@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > "Robert Dubenezic" <rad@sprintpcs.com> wrote in message
> > news:_zlD9.7050$op6.6602@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > > Why is it that when NPF (Norton Personal Firewall) is installed I
never
> > get
> > > a attack history or log or attempted attacks?
> > >
> > > When I have Zone Alarm installed, all I get is attacked.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Bob
Bob,
I understand your frustration, having been one of the very early users of
the 2003 versions of NAV and NPF. This was when there was a bug in the NPF
software (which existed for several weeks before being fixed) that would
crash you PC and prevent outgoing email to be sent if your emails "To:"
field contained more than 255 characters, something quite likely for those
of us with group email distribution lists).
What I found was that the free Symantec support through their web site
message board's support staff didn't have a clue as to the problem or the
cure, even though several messages were posted by users that presented a
work-around fix and even worse, the program development staff at Symantec
were aware of the problem but it appears that they weren't communicating
with their own support staff who continued to claim that Symantec was unable
to duplicate the problem being reported. And yes, even those paying $29.95
for live phone support were given incorrect answers to this problem. By the
way, even when supporting users questions with correct answers for different
topics, Symantec's staff usually took several days to respond.
Luckily (or so I've been told), this bug in NPF2003 has been cured through
a LiveUpdate, but the weeks that I suffered with the problem and continued
to see support staff giving out wrong information [their favorite--please
uninstall your Norton products, then reinstall them] left me with a very
sour taste.
I continue to use NAV2003 but obtained a full refund from Symantec for my
NPF2003 and switched to ZAP. I fear that Symantec has lost me as a purcha$er
or $annual-updater$ of their firewall product. It wasn't an issue with the
buggy software, even though the problem certainly never should have
occurred. The problem I had was with their current support staff.
Sorry for being unable to help you with your original question, but I
thought I should pipe in here to support your right to ask questions here on
usenet rather than having folks suggest you go to the manufacturer's support
staff for help, free or paid.
-- Craig Williams http://wpyr.netfirms.com
- Next message: RLW: "Question: excessive pinging by the same IP"
- Previous message: Ray Williams: "Appliance advice needed (question)"
- In reply to: Robert Dubenezic: "Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003"
- Next in thread: Robert Dubenezic: "Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003"
- Reply: Robert Dubenezic: "Re: ZA Pro and NPF 2003"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
