Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:18300 comp.sys.mac.programmer:1627 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!endor!singer From: singer@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: WARNING: Symantec Utilities ('SUM') trashes partitions!!! Keywords: BOMB SUM sloppy_programming Message-ID: <4972@husc6.harvard.edu> Date: 17 Jul 88 18:43:26 GMT References: <5579@dasys1.UUCP> Sender: news@husc6.harvard.edu Reply-To: singer@endor.UUCP (Rich Siegel) Organization: Symantec/THINK Technologies, Bedford, MA Lines: 86 In article <5579@dasys1.UUCP> alexis@dasys1.UUCP (Alexis Rosen) writes: [Warns of problems with Partitioning software] > >To add insult to injury, there is a feature of the new MacZAP HFS Recover >program which makes it easy to restore damaged partitions... but... when >run it only recovers a few of the lost files! Do you realize that there can be cases in which a volume is so badly munged that no recovery utility can resurrect it? In your particular, the fact that only a few filess were recovered is due to the fact that the partitioning software trashed the partition, NOT THAT THE RECOVERY UTILITY IS DEFECTIVE. If you're going to bitch, at least bitch at the right software. >>>>>>>>>>> FLAME ON!!!!! <<<<<<<<< And I'll turn my own flamethrower on as well. >This is the most inexcusable, irresponsible, idiotic, egregious blunder I >have ever seen from a "reputable" software company. Even worse, I can't Have you every hear dof Microsoft Word version 3.0? >I can only conclude that this bug is a fluke, and that the programmer >responsible for this is utterly irresponsible, incompetent, or both. I You're half right (and therefore, half wrong. I don't know the exact circumstances, but I understand that the defective partition DA *was* a fluke, and that it's already fixed. (I'll see if I can post it to comp.binaries.mac, because in spite of your idiotic comments, there iis something to be said for good software support. >hope that the programmer gets another job in another industry soon, because >if he (or she) ever works again, it will endanger more people! If Les Herbst quits programming, there will never be another version of SUM, EVER. How would you like that? >While I'm at it I'd also like to roast Symantec's testing and QA people. >They really fell down on the job this time! Not as I understand it. Like I said, this particular problem was a fluke that made it in between final QA and production. You can't place blame anywhere. >(flame off) > >I wonder who wrote the guardian program- the author of MacZAP or the author >of the partition software? If the latter, I wouldn't put too much faith in >that guardian, at least until a LOT of testing is done. What about the file >de-fragmenter? That could also do a lot of damage. ANY disk utility can do damage. The QA testing ensures that IF CORRECTLY USED, the product will not damage your disk. If it's any comfort, I've used HD TuneUp (the defragmenter), and have not had any problems. (I still use it now...) >(Now if I find out that the author of MacZAP IS the author of the partition >software, I will really be worried. MacZAP has always worked wonders before. >I hope they are different people...) Why are you so worried?? Because you've found a bug, you'll instantly assume that the whole package is bugridden and unusable? If this is the way you think, then I urge you NOT to buy any more software. >Symantec- Consider this a bug report. I urge you to immediately recall this >product until a fix is provided. It will cost me hours to recreate what I >lost. The cost to others may be far worse. I don't yet know what the fix will be; I suspect a mailing to registered owners and a posting to the info services, but since I don't make the policies, don't hold me to that. (FLAME OFF) I apologize for the tone of my posting, but sometimes.... --Rich Rich Siegel Symantec (THINK Division, if anyone cares)