[QUOTE=chalsall;347634]To put on the table...

My advise is not to respond to any such "offers". They're simply trying to collect data on you.

IMO, such "class action" contact requests provides no upside to anyone except the sender; almost always never upside to the recipient.[/QUOTE]

I'm sure you are correct, though this did have all the trappings of a Federal Court notice and the described faults jibed with some of my experiences. However, in this case there is not really anything that Symantec can discover about me that they don't already know. I've been a customer for too long. I suppose that does presume that any part of this was as it claimed to be. But still, any common info on me is undoubtedly easily searchable.

[QUOTE=kladner;347637]I'm sure you are correct, though this did have all the trappings of a Federal Court notice and the described faults jibed with some of my experiences. However, in this case there is not really anything that Symantec can discover about me that they don't already know. I've been a customer for too long. I suppose that does presume that any part of this was as it claimed to be. But still, any common info on me is undoubtedly easily searchable.[/QUOTE]

Class action lawsuits are filed in public court so any case can be verified. I got a check recently for $214 as payout from suite where my local bank was charging customers more than published schedule of fees. I didn't even know about it till a letter from the suing law firm arrived with a check. The letter outlined the suite, the finding and the judgement, the check was issued by the law firm, not the accused bank.
Symantec has been getting sued for decades for one thing or another.

Gross vs Symantec
 

[URL]http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9223368/Symantec_employs_scareware_sales_tactics_lawsuit_charges[/URL]

The suit alleged that Symantec offered free online tests which ALWAYS FOUND SERIOUS ERRORS!!!!! In other words, they were running the classic Scareware scam.

This seems to be unrelated to my suspicions of bad results from using their Norton Utilities software. Note that I was not lured into buying by the scare tactics. I was lured in by a really cheap offer when I renewed my Internet Security subscription. I have used a number of versions of Norton Utilities over the years so I did not expect problems. I emphasize that these are only suspicions, and that I do not have unequivocal evidence connecting weird behavior by MISFIT to running their registry cleaner and various optimizing functions of the Speed Disk defragmenter.

I do know that it happened twice after a Windows rebuild when I ran the various utilities shortly after. After the second time, I rebuilt yet again after removing NU 16 from the system. Since, MISFIT has worked without problems. I repeat that I had used these functions of the suite for some time previously without these particular malfunctions occurring.

This is circumstantial, at best, but I got really tired of fixing things and did not care to experiment further.

MISFIT source released.
 

The good the bad and the ugly. It is all there on the MISFIT download page.

Please do not interpret the release of the source as a sign I am no longer supporting MISFIT.

[QUOTE=swl551;354460]Please do not interpret the release of the source as a sign I am no longer supporting MISFIT.[/QUOTE]

That's really cool Scott!

Thank you for all your work on this, and the trust involved with releasing the source. :smile:

[QUOTE=chalsall;354473]That's really cool Scott!

Thank you for all your work on this, and the trust involved with releasing the source. :smile:[/QUOTE]

+1 indeed.

Same here! :tu:

+1 from here too! :goodposting: I consider that Scott did a very good move by releasing the sources, in spite of the fact that I was in the "privileged" set of the users from the beginning: Scott gave me the source code to "shut my mouth down", hehe, :razz: when I told him that I won't run exe files from "untrusted" sources, and he continued to send me the sources without my request, for every new version he has done. Yet, this has nothing to do with me "lobbying" the program, the program is very well written, he invested a lot of time into it, and from the user point of view, as I said, since I have MISFIT, I almost forgot to write batch files... no joke! The program is doing everything for you, if is set right. Its utility is better when you have more cards or when you run mfaktX in more computers. Try it and see. What you have to do is set your copies of mfaktX, set MISFIT, go to the beach and relax...

It is true...
 

As Laurv mentioned he was silently providing verification of my builds in-case a concern of my credibility became an issue. I also suspected that getting [B]his[/B] approval was a sure-fire-way to increase MISFIT usage. The more users, the more ideas, the more fun.

Thanks.

MISFIT VERSION 2.5.6
 

VERSION 2.5.6
1. Added option to have Stalled Process Detection suspended on startup. This is useful if you have scheduled start/stop events and MISFIT is starting up but the next scheduled start event's time is greater than the Stalled Process Detection threshold.
2. Added ability to resume Stalled Process Detection regardless of what triggered the suspension. A warning is provided if trying to resume when no MFAKTx instances are running.
3. Added CurrentGHzDaysWorkToDo and StagedGHzDaysWorkToDo to the productivity reports
4. Fixed some minor UI bugs when MISFIT is put into MONITOR MODE

GET FROM [url]http://mersenneforum.org/misfit/[/url]

MISFIT VERSION 2.5.8
 

VERSION 2.5.8
1. Changed the MISFIT support email address to [email]MISFIT.SUPPORT@OUTLOOK.COM[/email]
2. Additional small fixes

GET FROM [URL]http://mersenneforum.org/misfit/[/URL]


Due to the lack of activity in the MISFIT forums I will no longer be checking them.

If something comes up please contact me via email at [email]MISFIT.SUPPORT@OUTLOOK.COM[/email]