dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3
share rss forum feed


SkyBlue9

join:2007-03-31
reply to norwegian

Re: AOL Free Version of Kaspersky AV updating errors!!

said by norwegian:

said by Blue2:

KoRnGtL15,

Not to worry, Version 6.02.621 is the latest version. Kaspersky (or whoever is licensing the product from them) has the pretty stupid habit or labeling files in this incomprehensible fashion.
AOL maybe?

6.02.621 - Kaspersky version
AVS-V25.exe - AOL installer; and anything extra they so desire in the installer.

Just to clarify it
I have this version and there is nothing hidden in it.


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
said by SkyBlue9:

I have this version and there is nothing hidden in it.
Maybe not, and I wasn't really suggesting otherwise, just the fact, once they get the installer licenced they can use it how they desire, as long as it doesn't break the contract, and considering the issues about how long it took to update last vunerability, no one received a conclusive answer then either. Now it is McAfee's turn

I just get peeved when they blame one party all the time, it is contracted to AOL.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke


Blue2
Premium
join:2004-04-14
France
kudos:1
said by norwegian:

Maybe not, and I wasn't really suggesting otherwise, just the fact, once they get the installer licenced they can use it how they desire, as long as it doesn't break the contract, and considering the issues about how long it took to update last vunerability, no one received a conclusive answer then either. Now it is McAfee's turn

I just get peeved when they blame one party all the time, it is contracted to AOL.
And I don't buy this excuse as being some sort of get-out-of-jail-card-free for Kaspersky.

If Sony makes defective batteries (Kaspersky makes vulnerable code), you won't see them washing their hands of responsibility and pointing at Lenovo or others about how they handle the recall since Sony sells the batteries to them and not directly to the end user.

The point is that Sony is still responsible for the defect and Lenovo and others merely for the implementation of the recall. If Lenovo sat back and did nothing, I don't see how this would remove Sony of responsibility (and liability) for their product defect if it were to cause damage and they did not inform their clients and require action be taken.


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
Wasn't suggesting that, nor do either me or you know what happened between Kaspersky and AOL.

As for vunerable code, there isn't any program out there with perfect code.

--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke


Blue2
Premium
join:2004-04-14
France
kudos:1
said by norwegian:

Wasn't suggesting that, nor do either me or you know what happened between Kaspersky and AOL.

As for vunerable code, there isn't any program out there with perfect code.

Agreed, sort of.

You wouldn't want to be caught with exploding batteries while Sony pointed fingers at Lenovo and Lenovo pointed fingers back at Sony. Responsible companies act responsibly. Period.

(I was a consultant to Johnson & Johnson when the famous Tylenol poisoning case occurred. J&J took the costly and painful decision of removing ALL products from stores, even though it was not their fault, and this was an isolated case. Their reasoning was their first interest was to protect the consumer not their investors. After the incident, their stock price soared showing that good behavior often is rewarded by consumer loyalty.)

No, code is never perfect, but only the code writer can fix the code.

I stand by my position based on the facts I see. Kaspersky makes a fine product but is an irresponsible company.