«

No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I have
countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be extremely
difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these machines
never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating JUST to
Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.) for
their own products. What does that tell you?!
"R.A.D." <> wrote in message
newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
>
> "techshare" <> wrote in message
> news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain the
need
> > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec shite
> (8
> > times out of 10).
> I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps you
> could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the software
itself
> or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used both,and
have
> had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just like
> the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product I
> service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I inquired if
> they carried supplies for it.
> I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your using
> dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I would
> see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can afford or
> have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I tried
the
> Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
firewall,but
> the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
remove
> it
>
>

Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not say
more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living selling
a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way I've been
at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
"techshare" <> wrote in message
news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
> development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I have
> countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be extremely
> difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
machines
> never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating JUST
to
> Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.) for
> their own products. What does that tell you?!
> "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> >
> > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain the
> need
> > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec
shite
> > (8
> > > times out of 10).
> > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps you
> > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the software
> itself
> > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used both,and
> have
> > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just
like
> > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product I
> > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I inquired
if
> > they carried supplies for it.
> > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your using
> > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I
would
> > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can afford or
> > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I tried
> the
> > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> firewall,but
> > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
> remove
> > it
> >
> >
>
>

"R.A.D." <> wrote in message
news:9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04...
> Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> complaints about McAfee,
Did not take me long to find this,just goes to show it is all personal
choice:
Subject: mcafee installation and performance
View: Complete Thread (3 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain
Date: 2003-09-14 16:12:32 PST

I had the same problem. Eventually I had to reinstall
the software and OS. But that was harsh. You might
try these techniques described at:
http://ts.mcafeehelp.com/default.asp?
siteID=1&cnrcheck=done&resolution=1024x768



Manual Uninstall of McAfee VirusScan 7 (Windows XP)

Summary: This document explains how to manually remove
VirusScan 7.0 off of Windows XP.

Log in as the Administrator

Attempt an Automatic Uninstall

Click on the Start button.
Click on Control Panel. The Control Panel will then
appear.
Double click on the Add/Remove Programs icon. The
Add/Remove Programs Properties dialog box will then
appear.
Locate McAfee VirusScan on the list of installed programs
and single click on it so it is highlighted.
Click the Add/Remove button.
NOTE: If at any time you are prompted to remove shared
files, answer Yes To All.
Windows will then attempt to remove McAfee VirusScan from
your computer. If McAfee VirusScan is successfully
uninstalled you do not need to complete the remaining
steps in this document. If you receive error messages or
find that McAfee VirusScan was not completely removed
then follow the steps below to manually remove the
program.
Run MSIEXEC to Attempt a Forced Uninstall

Click on the Start button.
Highlight Programs then click on RUN.
Type in COMMAND
Type the following commands into the keyboard:
CD\
CD C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32
MsiExec.exe /X{E4DC62CE-5F95-11D6-B254-00C04FF4B435}
exit
If McAfee VirusScan is successfully uninstalled you do
not need to complete the remaining steps in this
document. If you receive error messages or find that
McAfee VirusScan was not completely removed then follow
the steps below to manually remove the program.
Manually Removing McAfee VirusScan

Backup the Registry

Click here for instructions

NOTE: The instructions in this document will guide you
through deleting specific items from your computer. If
you are instructed to delete an item that you cannot
find, skip that step and continue with the next step.
Some steps may not be applicable to your installation of
VirusScan.

Delete the Registry Keys

NOTE: The following steps may be more easily followed if
you close and reopen the Registry Editor between each
step. To close the Registry Editor click the X in the top
right corner of the Registry Editor window. To reopen the
Registry Editor follow steps 1 - 3 in the 'Backup the
Registry' section above.

1. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-System-ControlSet001-Services
and remove the McAfee related entries:

Double click on HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE.
Double click on System.
Double click on ControlSet001.
Double click on Services.
Single click on AvSynMgr to highlight it then press the
Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
Single click on McShield to highlight it then press the
Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
Single click on NaiFiltr to highlight it then press the
Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
2. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-System-CurrentControlSet-
Services and remove the McAfee related entries:

Click the minus (-) next to ControlSet001.
Double click on CurrentControlSet.
Double click on Services.
Single click on AvSynMgr to highlight it then press the
Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
Single click on McShield to highlight it then press the
Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
Single click on NaiFiltr to highlight it then press the
Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
3. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-Software-McAfee and remove the
VirusScan entry:

Scroll back up on the left side of the screen and click
the minus next to SYSTEM.
Double click on Software.
Double click on McAfee.
Single click on VirusScan so it is highlighted then press
the Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
4. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-Software-Network Associates
and remove ePolicy Orchestrator

Double click on Network Associates. (If VirusScan is the
only McAfee product on your machine, delete this folder
and skip to step #6)
Single click on ePolicy Orchestrator so it is highlighted
then press the Delete key on the keyboard to remove this
entry.
5. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-Software-Network AssociatesTVD
and remove VirusScan

Double click on TVD.
Single click on VirusScan so it is highlighted then press
the Delete key on the keyboard to remove this entry.
6. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-Software-Microsoft-Windows-
CurrentVersion-Run and remove the related entries:

Single click on the Run folder so it is highlighted.

On the right side of the screen single click on
AlogServEXE (or AlogServ if either exist) so it is
highlighted then press the Delete key on the keyboard to
remove this entry.
On the right side of the screen single click on
AvconsoleEXE (if it exists) so it is highlighted then
press the Delete key on the keyboard to remove this
entry.
On the right side of the screen single click on
Vshwin32EXE (if it exists) so it is highlighted then
press the Delete key on the keyboard to remove this
entry.
On the right side of the screen single click on
McAfee.InstantUpdater.Monitor (if it exists) so it is
highlighted then press the Delete key on the keyboard to
remove this entry.
7. Open HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-Software-Microsoft-Windows-
CurrentVersion-Uninstall and remove {E4DC62CE-5F95-11D6-
B254-00C04FF4B435}:

Double click on Uninstall.
Single click on {E4DC62CE-5F95-11D6-B254-00C04FF4B435} so
it is highlighted then press the Delete key on the
keyboard to remove this entry.
8. Delete Hawk related entries:

Scroll back to top on the left side of the screen.
Double click on HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE.
Double click on Software.
Double click on Microsoft.
Double click on Exchange.
Double click on Client.
Single click on Extensions so it is highlighted.
On the right side of the screen single-click on Exchange
Scan so it is highlighted then press the Delete key on
the keyboard to remove this entry.
9. Search the registry and remove all occurrences of
EC26CD4E59F56D112B45000CF44F4B53:

On the left side of the screen, single click on My
Computer (located at the very top) so it is highlighted.
Click on the Edit pull-down menu then click on Find. The
Find dialog box will then appear.
IMPORTANT: This set of characters is case sensitive. Be
sure to type capital letters.
Type the following into the Find What field:
EC26CD4E59F56D112B45000CF44F4B53 (NOTE: The 0's are the
number zero)
Click the Find Next button.
The computer will then search the registry. When an
occurrence of EC26CD4E59F56D112B45000CF44F4B53 is found
delete it, then press the F3 key on the keyboard to
search again. Do this until you get a 'Finished Searching
through the Registry' message.
NOTE: You may find as many as 120 occurrences of
EC26CD4E59F56D112B45000CF44F4B53 in the registry. They
all need to be removed.

10. Close the Registry Editor by clicking the X in the
top right corner.

Remove the McAfee VirusScan Shortcuts

Click on the Start button.
Click on All Programs.
Locate the McAfee folder and double click on it so it is
highlighted. (If VirusScan is the only McAfee program
installed, delete this folder)
Right click on McAfee VirusScan and choose delete.
Close the Start Menu
Delete the McAfee VirusScan Files

Double click on the My Computer icon on the desktop.
Double click on the C: drive.
Double click on the Program Files folder.
Double click on the McAfee folder.
NOTE: If you do not have any other McAfee products
installed, you may delete the entire McAfee folder.
Single click on the McAfee VirusScan folder.
Press the Delete key on the keyboard to delete this
folder. Answer Yes to any prompts about deleting files or
programs.
Close all open windows until you are back on the desktop.
Double click on the My Computer icon on the desktop.
Double click on the C: drive.
Double click on the Program Files folder.
Double click on the Common Files folder.
Single click on the Network Associates folder.
Press the Delete key on the keyboard to delete this
folder. Answer Yes to any prompts about deleting files or
programs.
Delete the Misc. McAfee Files

Click on the Start button.
Highlight Search then click on For Files or Folders. The
Search dialog box will then appear.
In the Named field type in Avsmcpa.cpl then click the
Find Now button.
The computer will then search for the file. When the file
is found it will be displayed at the bottom of the dialog
box.
Once the file is found right-click on the small icon to
the left of the file's name. A pop-up menu will appear.
Left-click on Delete to delete the file. Answer Yes to
any prompts about deleting the file.
Repeat steps 3 - 6 for the following files: Avsmcpa.cpl,
Avsmcpa.cpl.manifest, Avsmcpa.dll, naifsrec.sys.
Once all of these files have been deleted close the Find
Files dialog box by clicking the X in the top right
corner.
Reboot your computer. McAfee VirusScan 7 is now removed
from your computer.




>-----Original Message-----
>I recently installed anti-virus software that I
>downloaded from the internet. Ever since then, my
>computer has been running very slow and freezing up on a
>regular basis. Many times I can't even get past my log-
>in screen and I have to unplug the computer to shut it
>off and re-start it. I thought that maybe I had too many
>files, so I weeded through my files and deleted all of
>the files I didn't need. How can I get my computer to
>start acting "normal" again without uninstalling the anti-
>virus software?
>.
>

1 more for the record,and there are many more,at this point I rest my case.
From: me ()
Subject: Re: WARNING - McAfee Virus Scan can Delete your E-mails

View: Complete Thread (57 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,
alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia, alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim,
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim, demon.adverts, rec.video.desktop
Date: 2001-12-07 11:16:35 PST

I used to work for McAfee as an Antivirus Consultant and Expert, flying
around the world
installing, training and upkeeping McAfee products.
Back then, McAfee had great products and had bought some great companies who
also had great
products! Some time, between after McAfee was purchased by NAI and before
NAI dumped McAfee
on their own again, something bad happened.
They laid off tons of their top experts, NAI swallowed up allot of great
McAfee network products,
and McAfee's quality and company care and esteem went downhill.
Now, McAfee pumps out some of the worst programmed crap I've ever seen.
I used McAfee products until about six months ago when I noticed that their
antivirus code had
become fat, slow and for the first time, horribly buggy and disfunctional to
the point of causing
serious system problems. This was common of all antivirus programs back in
the DOS days because their
program was loaded in memory by DOS and their program would intercept all
disk reads and writes and some
programs wouldn't tolerate this and freak out and lose data if not simply
freeze or more common back then,
suddenly reboot.
The same thing is happening now with McAfee in Windows. Their code really
sucks now and has caused not only
me but my wife's business and many other businesses allot of time and
resources to find out that their software
is to blame, and all of their recently coded products are just horrible
running and functioning now.
I now suggest that everyone buy Norton Antivirus 2002 or better, Norton
Systemworks 2002 with comes free with
Norton Internet Firewall. These programs and suites don't act up and never
cause problems and best of all, work
right and find all virus's of the past and the recent ones which have become
rampant in the last month.
I used to have 100% faith in McAfee, but now they do nothing but release
junk.
This is not from a disgruntled McAfee employee, but simply a person who is
now ashamed of the company he worked
for.

Point being, if I may interject, is regardless of what works and what sux-
if the boss says to use a specific title, that is the software used.
PERIOD!

The boss is the boss. Some bosses are good, some are not (just like
employees). But when all is said and done, it is *MY* money on the line.
*I* am the one that pays the bills and *I* am the one who pays the
salaries. Therefore *I* make the final decisions, not an employee. When
techshare is a boss, he can make the decisions.

techshare has consistantly shown in here he knows everything there is to
know about a whole lot of things and will not sway his opinion about
anything. He will argue to the last dying breath. This does NOT make a
good employee- nor does it make a good tech- but as he says, he has been
at this for 10 years, so apparently he has nothing more to learn.

I really do not mean to start bashing techshare here, as I have not really
bashed him before for his posts. I usually just ignore him. But today he
hit a still-raw nerve considering his apparent support for a man who
sabotaged my equipment, cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars, and
nearly put me out of business.

techshare knows little about the industry, except perhaps his own small
part of it and yet he consistantly tries to interject his ill-informed
opinions on matters he knows little about.

For anyone to make a statement about the employer getting what he deserved
when an act of sabotaged occurred shows his true colors regarding
employee-employer relationships. This is the kind of employee everyone
should watch out for. This is the kind of employee that screws things up
for everyone. This is the kind of employee that overly restrictive
policies are put in place to guard against. This is the kind of employee
that micro-managing bosses were born for- to watch over those employees
that will not follow policies and then try to sabotage things.

As far as I am concerned, techshare and those like him need to be removed
from any kind of professional work since they are lack any real
professionalism. Perhaps "You want fries with that?" is more appropriate
for him and his kind.

I did my part by removing at least one sabotuer who is now facing many
years being someone's bitch in a cell. I find great solice in that fact
alone considering the damage this guy did.



In article <9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04>, "R.A.D."
<> wrote:

> Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not say
> more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living selling
> a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way I've been
> at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
> "techshare" <> wrote in message
> news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> > No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
> > development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I have
> > countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> > installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be extremely
> > difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
> machines
> > never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating JUST
> to
> > Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.) for
> > their own products. What does that tell you?!
> > "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> > newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> > >
> > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain the
> > need
> > > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec
> shite
> > > (8
> > > > times out of 10).
> > > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps you
> > > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the software
> > itself
> > > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used both,and
> > have
> > > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just
> like
> > > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product I
> > > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I inquired
> if
> > > they carried supplies for it.
> > > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your using
> > > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I
> would
> > > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can afford or
> > > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I tried
> > the
> > > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> > firewall,but
> > > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
> > remove
> > > it
> > >
> > >
> >
> >

My Point exactly ,but you found the words for me
"Ghost" <> wrote in message
news:user-0201041254050001@1.0.0.101...
>
> Point being, if I may interject, is regardless of what works and what sux-
> if the boss says to use a specific title, that is the software used.
> PERIOD!
>
> The boss is the boss. Some bosses are good, some are not (just like
> employees). But when all is said and done, it is *MY* money on the line.
> *I* am the one that pays the bills and *I* am the one who pays the
> salaries. Therefore *I* make the final decisions, not an employee. When
> techshare is a boss, he can make the decisions.
>
> techshare has consistantly shown in here he knows everything there is to
> know about a whole lot of things and will not sway his opinion about
> anything. He will argue to the last dying breath. This does NOT make a
> good employee- nor does it make a good tech- but as he says, he has been
> at this for 10 years, so apparently he has nothing more to learn.
>
> I really do not mean to start bashing techshare here, as I have not really
> bashed him before for his posts. I usually just ignore him. But today he
> hit a still-raw nerve considering his apparent support for a man who
> sabotaged my equipment, cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars, and
> nearly put me out of business.
>
> techshare knows little about the industry, except perhaps his own small
> part of it and yet he consistantly tries to interject his ill-informed
> opinions on matters he knows little about.
>
> For anyone to make a statement about the employer getting what he deserved
> when an act of sabotaged occurred shows his true colors regarding
> employee-employer relationships. This is the kind of employee everyone
> should watch out for. This is the kind of employee that screws things up
> for everyone. This is the kind of employee that overly restrictive
> policies are put in place to guard against. This is the kind of employee
> that micro-managing bosses were born for- to watch over those employees
> that will not follow policies and then try to sabotage things.
>
> As far as I am concerned, techshare and those like him need to be removed
> from any kind of professional work since they are lack any real
> professionalism. Perhaps "You want fries with that?" is more appropriate
> for him and his kind.
>
> I did my part by removing at least one sabotuer who is now facing many
> years being someone's bitch in a cell. I find great solice in that fact
> alone considering the damage this guy did.
>
>
>
> In article <9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04>, "R.A.D."
> <> wrote:
>
> > Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> > complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not
say
> > more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living
selling
> > a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way I've
been
> > at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
> > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> > > No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
> > > development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I
have
> > > countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> > > installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be
extremely
> > > difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
> > machines
> > > never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating
JUST
> > to
> > > Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.)
for
> > > their own products. What does that tell you?!
> > > "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> > > newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> > > >
> > > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain
the
> > > need
> > > > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec
> > shite
> > > > (8
> > > > > times out of 10).
> > > > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps
you
> > > > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the
software
> > > itself
> > > > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used
both,and
> > > have
> > > > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just
> > like
> > > > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product
I
> > > > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > > > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I
inquired
> > if
> > > > they carried supplies for it.
> > > > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your
using
> > > > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I
> > would
> > > > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can
afford or
> > > > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I
tried
> > > the
> > > > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> > > firewall,but
> > > > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
> > > remove
> > > > it
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >

You put a lot of effort into trying to discredit my (MUCH shorter) posts.
What makes you think I believe your story anyway?! I realize this group is
filled with a bunch of numbskulls as "regular" posters (Kathy, Imhotech) ...
but we aren't all a bunch of lemmings. Your story about this guy sounds
pretty far out.

AND

You STILL haven't told us (despite all your whining) what you are paying.
What are you paying for the talent you seek?! You can find a lot of
crooks/jackoffs/whatever for $8-$10/hour. Just go to any shopping mall. They
are there everyday stealing from the stores they work for (not all of them,
but many of them do).

Of course, your silly baseless insults have no effect on me. There are other
qualified experienced people out there. The key difference between us and
your "problem employees" is that we don't work for less than $12/hour unless
that's the last job on earth that is available.

PS. How do your personal problems relate in any way shape or form to A+,
computers, consulting, or the business of fixing computers? Why not start
alt.computers.ghost.b*tch?
"Ghost" <> wrote in message
news:user-0201041254050001@1.0.0.101...
>
> Point being, if I may interject, is regardless of what works and what sux-
> if the boss says to use a specific title, that is the software used.
> PERIOD!
>
> The boss is the boss. Some bosses are good, some are not (just like
> employees). But when all is said and done, it is *MY* money on the line.
> *I* am the one that pays the bills and *I* am the one who pays the
> salaries. Therefore *I* make the final decisions, not an employee. When
> techshare is a boss, he can make the decisions.
>
> techshare has consistantly shown in here he knows everything there is to
> know about a whole lot of things and will not sway his opinion about
> anything. He will argue to the last dying breath. This does NOT make a
> good employee- nor does it make a good tech- but as he says, he has been
> at this for 10 years, so apparently he has nothing more to learn.
>
> I really do not mean to start bashing techshare here, as I have not really
> bashed him before for his posts. I usually just ignore him. But today he
> hit a still-raw nerve considering his apparent support for a man who
> sabotaged my equipment, cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars, and
> nearly put me out of business.
>
> techshare knows little about the industry, except perhaps his own small
> part of it and yet he consistantly tries to interject his ill-informed
> opinions on matters he knows little about.
>
> For anyone to make a statement about the employer getting what he deserved
> when an act of sabotaged occurred shows his true colors regarding
> employee-employer relationships. This is the kind of employee everyone
> should watch out for. This is the kind of employee that screws things up
> for everyone. This is the kind of employee that overly restrictive
> policies are put in place to guard against. This is the kind of employee
> that micro-managing bosses were born for- to watch over those employees
> that will not follow policies and then try to sabotage things.
>
> As far as I am concerned, techshare and those like him need to be removed
> from any kind of professional work since they are lack any real
> professionalism. Perhaps "You want fries with that?" is more appropriate
> for him and his kind.
>
> I did my part by removing at least one sabotuer who is now facing many
> years being someone's bitch in a cell. I find great solice in that fact
> alone considering the damage this guy did.
>
>
>
> In article <9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04>, "R.A.D."
> <> wrote:
>
> > Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> > complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not
say
> > more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living
selling
> > a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way I've
been
> > at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
> > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> > > No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
> > > development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I
have
> > > countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> > > installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be
extremely
> > > difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
> > machines
> > > never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating
JUST
> > to
> > > Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.)
for
> > > their own products. What does that tell you?!
> > > "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> > > newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> > > >
> > > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain
the
> > > need
> > > > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec
> > shite
> > > > (8
> > > > > times out of 10).
> > > > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps
you
> > > > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the
software
> > > itself
> > > > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used
both,and
> > > have
> > > > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just
> > like
> > > > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product
I
> > > > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > > > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I
inquired
> > if
> > > > they carried supplies for it.
> > > > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your
using
> > > > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I
> > would
> > > > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can
afford or
> > > > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I
tried
> > > the
> > > > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> > > firewall,but
> > > > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
> > > remove
> > > > it
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >

OK, "Boss".

Can you please explain this. How exactly would he be using a product you
don't stock or sell? He used his own personal copy, and then uninstalled it
or left it on the customer's machine?! As I've already stated before, it's
pretty darn messy trying to scan computers with (at least McAfee) the "old
fashion" way of using a disk or CD standalone. The McAfee "emergency" boot
is useless as you have no updated definitions.

"Ghost" <> wrote in message
news:user-0201041254050001@1.0.0.101...
>
> Point being, if I may interject, is regardless of what works and what sux-
> if the boss says to use a specific title, that is the software used.
> PERIOD!
>
> The boss is the boss. Some bosses are good, some are not (just like
> employees). But when all is said and done, it is *MY* money on the line.
> *I* am the one that pays the bills and *I* am the one who pays the
> salaries. Therefore *I* make the final decisions, not an employee. When
> techshare is a boss, he can make the decisions.
>
> techshare has consistantly shown in here he knows everything there is to
> know about a whole lot of things and will not sway his opinion about
> anything. He will argue to the last dying breath. This does NOT make a
> good employee- nor does it make a good tech- but as he says, he has been
> at this for 10 years, so apparently he has nothing more to learn.
>
> I really do not mean to start bashing techshare here, as I have not really
> bashed him before for his posts. I usually just ignore him. But today he
> hit a still-raw nerve considering his apparent support for a man who
> sabotaged my equipment, cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars, and
> nearly put me out of business.
>
> techshare knows little about the industry, except perhaps his own small
> part of it and yet he consistantly tries to interject his ill-informed
> opinions on matters he knows little about.
>
> For anyone to make a statement about the employer getting what he deserved
> when an act of sabotaged occurred shows his true colors regarding
> employee-employer relationships. This is the kind of employee everyone
> should watch out for. This is the kind of employee that screws things up
> for everyone. This is the kind of employee that overly restrictive
> policies are put in place to guard against. This is the kind of employee
> that micro-managing bosses were born for- to watch over those employees
> that will not follow policies and then try to sabotage things.
>
> As far as I am concerned, techshare and those like him need to be removed
> from any kind of professional work since they are lack any real
> professionalism. Perhaps "You want fries with that?" is more appropriate
> for him and his kind.
>
> I did my part by removing at least one sabotuer who is now facing many
> years being someone's bitch in a cell. I find great solice in that fact
> alone considering the damage this guy did.
>
>
>
> In article <9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04>, "R.A.D."
> <> wrote:
>
> > Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> > complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not
say
> > more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living
selling
> > a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way I've
been
> > at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
> > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> > > No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
> > > development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I
have
> > > countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> > > installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be
extremely
> > > difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
> > machines
> > > never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating
JUST
> > to
> > > Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.)
for
> > > their own products. What does that tell you?!
> > > "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> > > newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> > > >
> > > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain
the
> > > need
> > > > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec
> > shite
> > > > (8
> > > > > times out of 10).
> > > > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps
you
> > > > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the
software
> > > itself
> > > > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used
both,and
> > > have
> > > > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just
> > like
> > > > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product
I
> > > > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > > > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I
inquired
> > if
> > > > they carried supplies for it.
> > > > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your
using
> > > > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I
> > would
> > > > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can
afford or
> > > > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I
tried
> > > the
> > > > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> > > firewall,but
> > > > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
> > > remove
> > > > it
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >

How dare you make such slanderous remarks about me as a professional?! You
know nothing about my happy clients, my work as an employee, or me as a
business owner. This post is nothing but tripe ... total tripe ... I should
sue you.
"Ghost" <> wrote in message
news:user-0201041254050001@1.0.0.101...
>
> Point being, if I may interject, is regardless of what works and what sux-
> if the boss says to use a specific title, that is the software used.
> PERIOD!
>
> The boss is the boss. Some bosses are good, some are not (just like
> employees). But when all is said and done, it is *MY* money on the line.
> *I* am the one that pays the bills and *I* am the one who pays the
> salaries. Therefore *I* make the final decisions, not an employee. When
> techshare is a boss, he can make the decisions.
>
> techshare has consistantly shown in here he knows everything there is to
> know about a whole lot of things and will not sway his opinion about
> anything. He will argue to the last dying breath. This does NOT make a
> good employee- nor does it make a good tech- but as he says, he has been
> at this for 10 years, so apparently he has nothing more to learn.
>
> I really do not mean to start bashing techshare here, as I have not really
> bashed him before for his posts. I usually just ignore him. But today he
> hit a still-raw nerve considering his apparent support for a man who
> sabotaged my equipment, cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars, and
> nearly put me out of business.
>
> techshare knows little about the industry, except perhaps his own small
> part of it and yet he consistantly tries to interject his ill-informed
> opinions on matters he knows little about.
>
> For anyone to make a statement about the employer getting what he deserved
> when an act of sabotaged occurred shows his true colors regarding
> employee-employer relationships. This is the kind of employee everyone
> should watch out for. This is the kind of employee that screws things up

> for everyone. This is the kind of employee that overly restrictive
> policies are put in place to guard against. This is the kind of employee
> that micro-managing bosses were born for- to watch over those employees
> that will not follow policies and then try to sabotage things.
>
> As far as I am concerned, techshare and those like him need to be removed
> from any kind of professional work since they are lack any real
> professionalism. Perhaps "You want fries with that?" is more appropriate
> for him and his kind.
>
> I did my part by removing at least one sabotuer who is now facing many
> years being someone's bitch in a cell. I find great solice in that fact
> alone considering the damage this guy did.
>
>
>
> In article <9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04>, "R.A.D."
> <> wrote:
>
> > Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> > complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not
say
> > more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living
selling
> > a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way I've
been
> > at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
> > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> > > No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and software
> > > development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I
have
> > > countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> > > installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be
extremely
> > > difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
> > machines
> > > never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating
JUST
> > to
> > > Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.)
for
> > > their own products. What does that tell you?!
> > > "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> > > newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> > > >
> > > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please explain
the
> > > need
> > > > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove Symantec
> > shite
> > > > (8
> > > > > times out of 10).
> > > > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there. Perhaps
you
> > > > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the
software
> > > itself
> > > > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used
both,and
> > > have
> > > > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds just
> > like
> > > > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the Product
I
> > > > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > > > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I
inquired
> > if
> > > > they carried supplies for it.
> > > > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your
using
> > > > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me wondering,I
> > would
> > > > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can
afford or
> > > > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I
tried
> > > the
> > > > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> > > firewall,but
> > > > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains to
> > > remove
> > > > it
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >

Jezuz,3 posts to respond to 1 ? Who knows? But then again no-one can even
figure who you are responding too.
"techshare" <> wrote in message
news:AZCdncaU4LypSGiiRVn-...
> How dare you make such slanderous remarks about me as a professional?! You
> know nothing about my happy clients, my work as an employee, or me as a
> business owner. This post is nothing but tripe ... total tripe ... I
should
> sue you.
> "Ghost" <> wrote in message
> news:user-0201041254050001@1.0.0.101...
> >
> > Point being, if I may interject, is regardless of what works and what
sux-
> > if the boss says to use a specific title, that is the software used.
> > PERIOD!
> >
> > The boss is the boss. Some bosses are good, some are not (just like
> > employees). But when all is said and done, it is *MY* money on the line.
> > *I* am the one that pays the bills and *I* am the one who pays the
> > salaries. Therefore *I* make the final decisions, not an employee.
When
> > techshare is a boss, he can make the decisions.
> >
> > techshare has consistantly shown in here he knows everything there is to
> > know about a whole lot of things and will not sway his opinion about
> > anything. He will argue to the last dying breath. This does NOT make a
> > good employee- nor does it make a good tech- but as he says, he has been
> > at this for 10 years, so apparently he has nothing more to learn.
> >
> > I really do not mean to start bashing techshare here, as I have not
really
> > bashed him before for his posts. I usually just ignore him. But today
he
> > hit a still-raw nerve considering his apparent support for a man who
> > sabotaged my equipment, cost me thousands upon thousands of dollars, and
> > nearly put me out of business.
> >
> > techshare knows little about the industry, except perhaps his own small
> > part of it and yet he consistantly tries to interject his ill-informed
> > opinions on matters he knows little about.
> >
> > For anyone to make a statement about the employer getting what he
deserved
> > when an act of sabotaged occurred shows his true colors regarding
> > employee-employer relationships. This is the kind of employee everyone
> > should watch out for. This is the kind of employee that screws things
up
>
> > for everyone. This is the kind of employee that overly restrictive
> > policies are put in place to guard against. This is the kind of
employee
> > that micro-managing bosses were born for- to watch over those employees
> > that will not follow policies and then try to sabotage things.
> >
> > As far as I am concerned, techshare and those like him need to be
removed
> > from any kind of professional work since they are lack any real
> > professionalism. Perhaps "You want fries with that?" is more
appropriate
> > for him and his kind.
> >
> > I did my part by removing at least one sabotuer who is now facing many
> > years being someone's bitch in a cell. I find great solice in that fact
> > alone considering the damage this guy did.
> >
> >
> >
> > In article <9OhJb.731116$Fm2.632630@attbi_s04>, "R.A.D."
> > <> wrote:
> >
> > > Once more,I will say that if sought hard enough one could find,similar
> > > complaints about McAfee,but that is your software of choiceI need not
> say
> > > more.Credentials are Great but mean nothing when one makes a living
> selling
> > > a particular product,the other products always suck.And by the way
I've
> been
> > > at my job for 18 years,but I still have an open mind.
> > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > news:Ou6dnRe-a4wvO2iiRVn-...
> > > > No ... I have about 10 years of experience in this field and
software
> > > > development. Several certifications, and a BSCS ('97). Once more, I
> have
> > > > countless documented cases of machines with various versions of NAV
> > > > installed and not working. These same machines also proved to be
> extremely
> > > > difficult to be cleaned of the NAV/Symantec product. Most of these
> > > machines
> > > > never had virus infection(s). There are thousands of posts relating
> JUST
> > > to
> > > > Symantec's myriad of removal utilities (rnis, rnav, symclean, etc.)
> for
> > > > their own products. What does that tell you?!
> > > > "R.A.D." <> wrote in message
> > > > newslhJb.730993$Fm2.632066@attbi_s04...
> > > > >
> > > > > "techshare" <> wrote in message
> > > > > news:7ZydnXFiPPoZB2iiRVn-...
> > > > > > You are right about the personal choice ...however please
explain
> the
> > > > need
> > > > > > for all of the "rn" utilities which you do need to remove
Symantec
> > > shite
> > > > > (8
> > > > > > times out of 10).
> > > > > I can't explain that, because the need has never been there.
Perhaps
> you
> > > > > could explain better as to what you are trying to remove,the
> software
> > > > itself
> > > > > or viruses that went undetected do to bad choices.I have used
> both,and
> > > > have
> > > > > had much better luck with NAV. To me your whole attitude sounds
just
> > > like
> > > > > the Staples employee,fresh out of Highschool telling me the
Product
> I
> > > > > service is a piece of crap,not (knowing that I am not just another
> > > > > consumer)Just because Staples does not sell this brand ,when I
> inquired
> > > if
> > > > > they carried supplies for it.
> > > > > I use a hardware firewall wall,but your statement that unless your
> using
> > > > > dialup there is no need for a software firewall has me
wondering,I
> > > would
> > > > > see a Greater need with always on Broadband,not all people can
> afford or
> > > > > have the knowledge of using a hardware firewall such as a router.I
> tried
> > > > the
> > > > > Internet Security for the Privacy features and had disabled the
> > > > firewall,but
> > > > > the whole software suite was such shite,and went thru great pains
to
> > > > remove
> > > > > it
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
>