 Woody79_00I run Linux am I still a PC?Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state | How can you possibly blame Micrsoft for this! that is absurd
Kaspersky failed to implement the API correctly. just because an API/Program works doesn't mean there isn't a "Logic" error in the way the program was made, thus the code runs without error but really messes something up.
Trend Micro, Norton, and other companies have been using this same technique for awhile now(What Kaspersky calls ISwift) and none of those users have had any issues with CHKDSK or any other app
Kaspersky ISwift is has some serious Logic flaws in its code, and it is messing up the NTFS Idetifiers which in turn is not Mtaching up with the MFT(Master File Table) this is what is really causing the issue
if the Identifiers(Which ISwift changes) do not match what the Identifies should be in the MFT it causes a serious problem with CHDSK they must match....Kaspersky failed to update the MFT with the proper Values when it modifies the identifentifiers on the said files, so the original data in the MFT doesn't match the files ISwift changed.
this is "ALL KASPERSKY'S FAULT" Not Microsoft's.
Like i said Trend Micro's "Turbo Scan" has been using this for a bit now, so has Norton, and other products, and there have been no issues because these products update the MFT properly to reflect the changes to the identifiers that they made, Kaspersky failed to do this and has fragged peoples systems because of it
Persnoanlly if i was a businesses owner dealing with this, I would have every reason to file suit against them...there is definitly reasonable grounds to sue, loss of data, ect, you could most definitly sue them on this for sure, but it wouldn't be worth it unless you were a businesses....a EULA does not protect a software maker from damage "due to negligence" which is exactly what this is. There have been countless cases where a EULA said "We can not be held liable for any damages" yet a lawsuit was brought and the plantiff won, so don't buy to much into EULA'S its up to a judge if the cases deserves merit,
I sued a cellphone compnay once, even though the contract said "i cna't sue and must agree to arbitration
" a Judge threw out that clause stating i had "sufficent grounds to sue" due to harrassment, failure on the wireless company to provide adequate service" among other things
but this is definitly Kaspersky's fault
there right up there with norton, i would never install a piece of garbage software like this on my Machine, i thought Norton was bad, even McAfee (which i used for years) never fragged my computer...i don't even think Norton has ever fragged a PC this bad before...
how pathetic
Kaspersky gets a thumbs down from me for not manning up and admitting their mess up and doing the best they can to fix the problem. |
·