Kaspersky 7 still has major issues

I thought the "TR" phase was somewhere in between the beta stage and the final stage, but closer to the final. Here some parts of the program could have minor changes to it before it is officially released (changes in help file, GUI enhancements, etc).

 

Hello

Is TR (Technical Release?) something like RC (Release Candidate)? If so, it's still not final, but "technically" it's not a beta anymore either...

 

It's out of the beta-testing phase now .

KAV 7 went through several Release Candidates and then this TR, which should now be ready for prime time ( gold release).

 

Spoke too soon, still a slight lag at times browsing with version 7 but it is better than 6 for sure. For now though, went back to my old setup and not a suite for now.

Gary

 

ye i tryed online armour version 2 on my old pc and the internet was faster.
so the kis7.0 firewall still needs a bit of work.
lodore

 

PC Magazine voted Kaspersky number 1 this last month with Symantec Norton #2. Funny how soon they forget.. I was running a demo of Norton antivirus 2007 full virus scan in the background (less load on the PC if you minimize- how hillarious) CPU showed 25-30% CPU when minimized running a virus scan in the background.. Come on now. I'm running with 2 GB of DDR2. That shouldn't be happening. Yes Norton Antivirus still holds the title of system hog on resources.

 

I am running a Kaspersky AV 6.0 scan on my other pc as we speak (AMD 2000+, 2GB, etc.) and avp.exe is frequently spiking up to 90+% cpu usage. So by your train of thought KAV is worse than Norton.

 

have you try insstalling norton 2007 on the same pc and see how much cpu that uses during the scan?
you have to try both on the same pc to make it a fair test.
lodore

 

Why? It's supposed to use the CPU when doing a scan, not using the available CPU would not make a lot of sense.

 

Hi Don,
what i ment was if you using the pc it should work around you due to the "concede resourses to other applications"
lodore

 

How can you call it a hog when during full scan its ONLY using 25-30 % CPU? No matter what antivirus you try, on demand scan will be a cpu hog(effecting lower CPUs even more).


tD

 

i agree, this is getting stupid, especially saying norton is a hog now and cpu usages.

personally, i would rather have a full system scan use 100% if it finishes quicker, i have noticed this problem with my drweb.

in my drweb, there is a setting for low priority > high priority.

low priority - 10-20% ish
high priority - 30 - 50% MAX

so, its not really high priority... if i set it to this, i expect it to usage my maximum resources which would be 80-100%, and it just does not do this and i wish it did.

norton never uses full/high cpu usage yet it still manages to do a fast scan, so ive no problem with this.

kaspersky does use high CPU when scanning, but as ive mentioned.... ive no problems with this at all.

not many programs are 'true hogs' now, these would be GDATA, trustport and i still think mcafee needs turning down its usage.

if you look at things now, norton is not a hog, neither is panda and these 2, used to be the 2 biggest hoggers out-there.

i think people got too attached to the argument of X is a hog, i would never use that, and now they are just running out of ideas and usually come up with something totally radical, just for arguments sake.

 

We now know that the chkdsk issue in KAV6 and KAV7 is very real and is caused by IStreams placing NTFS Object Identifiers on every file on the user's computer. Plus, thanks to Don, we also know that KAV8 will not have IStreams...I wonder why? You guys who have pooh- poohed the entire issue owe all of us with the problem an apology as does Kaspersky. I fully expect a tool to remove the IStreams Identifiers will be forthcoming soon from Kaspersky. I'm not going to settle for Dantz's difficult, time consuming program to remove them.

What angers me so much is two things: 1. I, like StraightShoot, was a stupid fool to trust Kaspersky again after the ADS fiasco. 2. The arrogance shown by Kaspersky toward its customers is simply astounding. That they would lie as they have about IStreams and the fact that it cannot be turned off in the GUI and thus even when you try to avoid getting the Identifiers on all your files (because you hated having the ADS tags on all your files) there is no way to avoid it (even if you deliberately never run a full scan which is what I did and in the GUI uncheck Istreams and ICheck for the on demand scanner).

Kaspersky also never informed us that if we installed KAV 6 or 7 that no matter what we did, not only would all our files have crap attached to them (just like with KAV5), and that crap could never be removed except by either reformatting or using a clean image, because the KAV uninstaller, just like with KAV5 and the ADS tags, cannot remove the crap from every file placed there by KAV on the user's computer. So, when someone does a trial of KAV6 or 7 or decides for whatever reason to no longer use KAV6 or 7, they are left with damage to Chkdsk and a nasty "remember me always" present from KAV in the form of junk attached to every file that they cannot remove. If they could remove the junk, Chkdsk would be healed.

It simply astounds me that Kaspersky refused to learn anything from the ADS mess and instead just arrogantly turned around and created IStreams which is even worse than ADS tags and then deliberately hid all relevant information regarding IStreams from the users. Then when questioned by users a year ago, Kaspersky said it was a figment of their imagination that KAV was the cause of their damaged/broken chkdsks even though Kaspersky KNEW about ISwift breaking chkdsk from the early days of KAV6 beta at which time Kaspersky stated that the problem was Microsoft's and Microsoft had to fix it and they KNOWINGLY, WILLFULLY WENT ON WITH ISTREAMS.

ANYONE CONSIDERING USING KASPERSKY SHOULD FIRST BECOME FULLY INFORMED BECAUSE THERE IS NO TRUE CONSENT TO THE KAV EULA AS IT IS SILENT AS TO WHAT ISTREAMS DOES TO ONE'S COMPUTER. READ THE DSLR THREAD... ALL 272 POSTS. ALSO READ THE FRONT PAGE DSLR NEWS ARTICLE.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18608452-Kaspersky-You-lost-me-at-ISwift
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Kaspersky-AV-Breaking-CHKDSK-85517

 

Everyone has the non disclosure problem. I would never have installed KAV 6 had I been properly informed that ISwift could NOT be turned off for the file monitor, except perhaps in the registry, but even that is not certain. I was not informed that KAV 6 (and now 7) was a repeat of KAV 5 in that it would place, withOUT my permission, crap on every single file on my computer. Further, I was not informed that if I decided to uninstall KAV that the uninstaller was a piece of junk that cannot uninstall KAV properly..the same as with KAV 5. To me, even more outrageous than the damage done by the NTFS Object Identifiers to Chkdsk is the fact that I was lied to and led to believe that I could turn off ISwift entirely when turning ISwift off for the on demand scanner and never running a full scan yet, according to posts in the KAV forum in the past few days by Lucian among others, that is futile as far as escaping from having Kaspersky put all this junk on your files. I would never dream of using an AV that would do something like that even if that action had no effect on Chkdsk.

If Kaspersky has such poor engineers that they can't figure out a decent, clean method to speed up their scanner that is slow on older computers then that is their problem, but they should not lie about it to their customers. Avira catches more than KAV, and NOD32 does also, and neither of them have had to resort to sneakily placing crap on all our files in order to be fast on old computers. So, had Kaspersky been honest about their problems with the speed of the scanner and the fact that they felt they had to do something in KAV 6 that was similar to KAV 5, I would have simply avoided KAV 6 and now KAV 7. Others don't care about their files being raped by KAV so they would keep it or happily get it for the first time. Fine. All Kaspersky had to do to avoid this entire mess was be transparent with their users. You'd think after the ADS fiasco that they would have learned that crucial lesson but, no, they learned from that incident that they need to be even more secretive and if there are any problems they need to not address them promptly rather they need to call those who are the canaries in the mindshaft stupid, crazy, heavy imaginers,etc.

Do you use System Restore? That may make this problem worse for chkdsk. If you do use System Restore how much disk space do you allocate to it and how many restore points do you have? Whether or not you get the problem with chkdsk also seems to have to do with the number of files on the disk and how many are small ones. We don't know all the common denominators yet for why some have the problem and others don't. But we do know that it is a problem caused by ISwift. I suspect that particularly in the case of AVS users that the problem is widespread but those users tend to not be very computer knowledgeable and probably have never run chkdsk and may not even know what it is. If, by chance, they did run they would have no idea what was normal and what wasn't so they probably would not report a problem with chkdsk.

 

I never had major issues with KIS 7.
No chkdsk errors , no slowdowns operating a P III 800 PC.

KIS have a stong firewall with a "very good" level of anti-leak protection :



Combined with web antivirus it might lead to a little slowdown while browsing.
But can that be compared with all that amazing protection you get .

 

guys this is my experience with KIS.

when i have my new laptop i installed a lot of software and my security during that time is PCcillin IS 2007. I try NOD32, Jetico firewall, GS, SAS Pro.....and lastly i try KIS.

what do i expect with ****'d up system ( a lot of un-installation blah blah blah) KIS did not work properly.

What i did is I do clean vista install and BEFORE I install other software and windows update I installed KIS7 first. No problem since that. No chkdsk error, no freeze problem, no slowdown, no major problem, etc.

Just reminder to KIS7, when you do next upgrade don't mess-up with ver .125

 

I've had just the opposite experience.. chkdsk errors, slowdowns while browsing (very annoying). I just uninstalled KAV6.

The whole leaktest fiasco is just a bunch of snake oil. Once malware is on the machine, there is an infinite number of ways it could phone home if it wanted to. Besides, even for the leaks that are detected, Kaspersky alerts on every one of them. WHAT THE POINT IN ASKING THE USER. Thats why products like NIS have a low score before they dont believe asking the user is the right approach. If you can automatically block malware from communicating, that will be cool (check out NIS 200.

 

...but this topic is about v7.

 

Same difference.

KAV 7 is essentially KAV 6 but with a few extra features such as heuristics, rootkit scanner, etc. Problems with KAV 6 are still applicable to KAV 7.

 

I dont know from where you guys get those errors.
In my opinion it was the best suite for its fastness and for its working and also low on system resources. It is the best all in one protection.

 

'we' dont know and neither do kaspersky

but for some people its flawless, some people it causes wayyy too many problems.

ive tried it on 2 laptops and i really cant use it the way it is for me, and although id say it does NOT cause 'wayyy' too many problems, there are a few things that dont work as they should, or maybe how id like them to.

 

I completely agree, it is the best out there - but they lost me on the whole chkdsk fiasco.