Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Symantec Competing Unfairly Against Spybot?

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the moving-to-secure-income dept.

frankbaird writes "Symantec has been claiming for months that the anti-spyware program Spybot-Search & Destroy corrupts Norton Ghost images. Spybot has tried to convince them this is a false positive. After having been ignored, and this is the second time Symantec has claimed a false positive against Spybot, the makers of Spybot have gone public. They claim that rather than compete fairly with quality products, Symantec is resorting to libel."

8 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. but...but... by BushCheney08 · · Score: 4, Funny

    But...But...But Symantec is part of the Anti-Spyware Coalition. They would never lie about something like this...

    --
    Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
    1. Re:but...but... by orkysoft · · Score: 5, Funny

      Indeed, it is the other way around.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
  2. Oh, this is funny by Nejaa · · Score: 3, Funny

    Symantic's Norton and Spybot being considerd competitors is quite a streach in my opinion. Spybot was "country before country was cool" in the anti-spyware arena. The Symantic folk have an uphill battle convincing many folk (like me) that current versions of Norton bloatware are not a plague upon RAM, CPU cycles, network communication, and Winblows in general.

    --
    A wise man once said: "Never pick a fight with a man who buys his ink by the barrel."
  3. Is the message 'Dont use Spybot'? by kestasjk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Are Symantec trying to tell us 'Dont use Spybot' or 'Use dd instead of Ghost'?.. Out of Ghost and Spybot I know which I consider more disposeable.

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  4. Re:Well then, is it or isn't it? by ettlz · · Score: 4, Funny
    So maybe it is like determining the existence of God: it could be the case that SpyBot is corrupting Norton Ghost images, but until someone posts some evidence, you'll have to take that on faith from Symantec.

    Well, in that case:

    "I refuse to proof that Spybot Search & Destroy corrupts Ghost images," says Symantec. "For proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

    Now, something should happen in between, but the desired outcome is nevertheless:

    "Oh, dear," says Symantec, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
  5. Re:Well then, is it or isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Maybe something like this:

    But the fact that ghost images on a system with Spybot Search and Destroy aren't corrupted is a dead give away isn't it? The images would be corrupted if Spybot really did corrupt Ghost Images, so you're wrong. QED.

    Then, I go on to prove that 0 = 1 and get run over at the next bit crossing.

  6. I am *Shocked* by drew · · Score: 3, Funny

    I must say, I am shocked, shocked to hear that Symantec might have said something untrue in order to promote their product or malign a competing product. Clearly they have always shown in the past that they hold themselves to the highest of ideals.

    --
    If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  7. Not completely true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Unfortunately, Symantec keep buying nice software (Paragorn Partition Magic was the last one I remember) and making it suck.

    They recently bought Veritas Backup Exec, which already sucked before the buyout.