Is KAV working on chkdsk ?

Some days....the minority, well....ain't so small!!! Opinions, thoughts and feelings are important.....when shared in moderation!

 

I guess that you don't know anything about the chkdsk problem or you would not have brought up the Image issue. Yes, I have an image but it is infected with Kaspersky Object Identifers. So, it is worthless. I had an image from before I installed KAV but I had to remove it to make a new image as my external drive is only 80GB and one full image is about 40GB so the drive will only hold one image. All images except the very first one made are tainted and cannot be used to rid myself of the damage from Kaspersky.

You really shouldn't blather on and criticize when you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

 

As I always says in this type of thread:

"....I really see no reason for the user to defame the vendor so stridently. Fact is, when one screams like this they are merely considered some sort of fanatic, and their views should be suspect...."

We all understand the issues some posters are having but their tone and sometimes rudeness will not help to channel their concern. On the contrary, they are just seriously underscoring their credibility.

Fax

 

You are 100% correct. Your critics are attempting to obfuscate the real issue, and that issue is that Kaspersky does have a chkdsk problem, and I had it on my computers. It is common knowledge verifiable by empirical data and testing. The attempt to discredit you because you are adamant about this issue is meaningless. We are both adamant about this issue, and I have been in the computer industry since 1967.

Btw, I use Windows XP SP2 firewall and NOD32 2.7, and have never had a virus or malware infection on any of our 89 computers.

 

No one here is denying the chkdsk issue... but this does not mean that all Kaspersky software should be flushed into the toilet...

Its very simple... (sorry for the non elegant example)

Kaspersky is aware of the problem that will fixed in the new version 8. You are free to use Kaspersky or any other software you feel confortable with.

I have used KAV and had no problems... other have/had issues with it. But its not a good justification to defame the vendor like it has been done here and on other forum by some of the posters... it is simply suspicious and not very professional.

My 2 cents.

Cheers,
Fax

 

I did not state that the software should be flushed-I like their suite but they need to fix the chkdsk as we know they will (or must). My agreement with Mele is that there is a problem and it needs to be fixed. We took Kaspersky off the machines we tested it on for the chkdsk issue.

Cheers

BB

 

Yes, no problem with that but....

This is something more than a call to fix chkdsk issues (IMO)

Fax

 

I am a bit confused. What exactly is KAV 7 adding to the disk or files. Is it a NT alternative stream or some tag attached to the file or what?

 

Your guessing is wrong again.

Your computer was not damaged. There is a big difference between damage and corruption. Does the computer start? Process data? CD/DVD drive(s) work? If so then it is not damaged.

Like I said before had you really been testing software over the years a bug which is all this is should not be such a big deal.

Report it - Reinstall Windows if needed - Find a different AV to use.

End of story.

Wow like they are the only one with a CS issue?

Edit* Added more

 

you know I find it funny. If this was an issue that Norton came up with everyone would be screaming for somebodies head at Norton but because it's Kaspersky we have the supporterss saying this is not an issue. If software does anything other than what it was designed to do in a fashion that one interprets as harm to a backup (takes time) or puts his sytem in a compromising postion than I think he has a right to protest. You don't have to get testy with Mele. He is entitled to his opinion, he paid for that right...

 

There's nothing wrong with giving opinions... there's only a problem (and its reallllyyyyy annoying) the way certain users keep hammering the same things over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over

 

can't agrue with your opinion as your intitled to it. But from a user perspective (you do use security software?) it's very annoying to have a AV product take your machine apart & have to reformat than put everything back when you find you have a corupt backup. I know from experience as I've been there done that. These forums are for informative conversations & unfortunately some of us (me included) carry on too much. But since we all care, pay money & put our time into it are intitled to it. If it's something I'd rather not reread I pass but I understand where people are coming from, I'd like to think we can come in to share but also vent at those times somebodies software didn't work as expected...

 

The delay on stage 2 is only an indication that a user might have chkdsk problems with Kaspersky. For me the delay wasn't a major problem, I could easily live with the delay for a few minutes. No, the problem for me *and others* is that chkdsk keeps starting and indicates that problems exist that need to be fixed. This happened frequently to me and if you read the many forum threads scattered over the web you'll notice that others had/have the same problem.

I agree that keeping only two images is short-sighted but even keeping 4 or 5 images as you suggest might not be enough. For many users the problem with Kaspersky isn't apparent until months after installing and using the software. In my case I was lucky that I had a pre Kaspersky image that was months old that I could recover from.

 

Are you saying that if Norton was doing something fishy within the hard drive, then nobody would be defending them? My company uses Norton and if it "messed up" the drives, a ton of PCs would get "contaminated". This problem sort of reminds me about trying to "optimize" a program and generating a "side effect" from doing so.

 

I just think there are more Kaspersky defenders during bad times than those that defend Norton during bad times. I like both & have had problem with both , I just think there are more people that will stand by Kaspersky in bad times than Norton. BTW I am not saying one is right or one is wrong. I have Kaspersky & chkdsk runs fine. However that does not mean that the problem does not exist. I respect most of the posters here as they are vets at the game of keeping the nasties off machines. I'm just making a statement at what I preceive. Also If I had Norton do as you described I would be up in arms too...

 

I strongly disagree here. I do not believe in ghosts.
.

 

Hello,

It all comes down to these points...

1. KAV is the winner (with Avira and NOD32) in detection...

2. KAV's NTFS identifiers issue is real, and the general public HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW..

3. Due to #2, I, along with a vast majority of NON FANBOYS, have decided to NOT to use KAV ever again. To me, it's a matter of trust...

Thanks
Jim

To the moron who said I am ranting, when My computer is altered and it cannot be corrected except by a complete disk wipe, then I reserve the right to rant...LOL

 

well said. It's funny how well everyone talks about Kaspersky positives but rare will admit the short comings & this is a pretty serious issue IMO...

 

I couldn't have said it better. And customer of Kaspersky have every right to scream and complain, unless they are getting a full refund, which they are not.

 

Have you considered that some of the KAV apologists in this forum may be shills and/or work for Kaspersky? That is a logical conclusion given the evasion of the clear problem with chkdsk.

Having owned three major computer firms, I can tell you that one of the primary things computer companies do (as do other industries) is to sweep major problems under the rug if a quick and inexpensive solution is not at hand.

 

Kaspersky is the right place , granted. But sometimes telling your friends here in a so called rant makes you feel better & you can get past it. I had problems with kaspersky said something & while I still have a copy of the program I don't use it but it did make me feel better. Also people not as knowledgeable about AV's come here to see what's what. If a rant stops one person from paying 80 bucks to buy problems is a service not provided?

 

That surely would apply to a great many posting to Wilders Forum. In fact if one were to remove all posting containing complaints on the Wilders Forum there would be very few messages left to read.

In my own case I have been in touch with Kaspersky Support Staff numerous times but I still feel I have the right to express my opinion in the Wilders Forum also.