6 AV LAMER OF THE ISSUE
All statements in this file are my opinion so symantec u cant sue me saying this shite
because i gotta disclaimer you COMMY avers
AVER LAMER OF THE ISSUE IS: PETER NORTON!
peter Norton Info
Name: u know by now right?
Co. Symantec
Cheap AV:Norton Anti Virus
Sucks why:Bad repair jobs, Shitty detection of Win95 viruses,
shity cleaning of unknown virii. (excep[t in dos mode)
why Peter is a lamer:
1. He isnt involved, he writes a shitty AV and thats it he never has the guts to confront us VXers like other AV do, like Pat Nolan (hey dude youll be in the next issue AV lamer section :) )
He also is pretty stupid as one of the features in Nav 5.0 is the "reduce downloaded time because it only gives u the defs u need!"
jeesh as if it takes a genius to know that when you give a user the whole def set, instead of the new ones it takes quite awhile to download.
and on the package of NAV 5.0 PN is wearing a stethoscope whats with that huh? a Normal Doctor can usually cure whats ailing you, but all NAV is good for is telling you its there in the 1st place but hell NAV best repairs COM files, but hell most viruses that are COM r worthless unless they multi partite NAV can repair some files but it does rather shitty, i tested NAV 4.0 i infected a number of .COM and .EXE files with various viruses NAV detected them all but only repaired 25% hows that for a shitty AV proggie writen by a lmaer i know this is a file about peter but i gotta say this in NAV 4.0 in the file Sarc.avi, the interview with a AV researcher sounds so pathetic.
you can tell hes reading off something.
and in aboutvir.avi
i quote from that video "Viruses are written by ill intentioned hackers to infect your computer and destroy your data" hmm i feel a Libel suit coming on (Libel: saying something false to intetionally damage a reptutation "
PN, were not all ill-intentioned and out to destroy Data, so quit with that BS you MOFO.
well that raps this up, next section on Pat Nolan will be bigger :)
