CPF 2.3.4.45: comments on the newly released version

[Guest]

[Bluesman]

which I hope will NOT be made again. 

Yes, we all hope that

And here in Sweden we have a proverb that says - "You learn by your mistakes" , and I am sure Comodo is doing just that, so they don't do the same mistake twice

[mad]

I have used cpf since its initial release (v 1.0.0.0).
This not-updating problem is the first problem I experience ... and what? I will patiently wait till it gets fixed.
 (R)

[comicfan2000]

It appears there are members of this forum who have been longstanding, satisfied users of CPF, and who have developed an almost "cheerleader" mentality when it comes to objectivity about the program.

I am a relatively short term user of CPF, having started with 2.2.0.11.  I moved to CPF because of problems with current Zonealarm Pro versions and because of the complexity of firewall maintenance which that program has developed.  I particularly dislike the current function of the privacy feature in Zonealarm.

Having said this, I was pleased with the performance and feature set of CPF 2.2.0.11.  I am sure I will be happy with 2.3.4.45 when it is debugged.  However, there were mistakes made with the release of 2.3.4.45 which I hope will NOT be made again.  I don't care if CPF is a PAID or FREE package, it is INEXCUSABLE to release an update, on the day before a long holiday weekend, which will NOT work with its own updater module.  This is a most basic and simple thing to test.

I don't expect anyone to fall on their sword over this, nor do I expect the "cheerleaders" to come forward and defend something as egregious as an update that won't update...  Further, while I can not yet say with clarity (because, while I did get 2.3.4.45 to run for a brief time, it failed with registry errors indicated, on two separate attempts), it appears that at least one app that I use regularly, and which worked well with 2.2.0.11, MAY not work well with 2.3.4.45.  I can't be sure until I am sure I have a solid install of 2.3.4.45.  It appears that may occur next week.

I come to the forums for two reasons; to find a solution to a problem, and to provide feedback.  I have done so, as have others, and I have seen obtuse responses from the "cheerleaders" indicating I, and others with similar issues "must be doing something wrong" because "I had no problem whatsoever".  I am as sure you had no problem at all as I am that I, and others, have.  That is the nature of operating systems and apps...  I have about 460 components logged in CPF, and I would venture maybe 30% of those might be common to someone running the identically configured operating system (and the chances of that  are 1 in ?).

I like this app.  I want to use this app.  I hope that I can install 2.3.4.45 and have it play nice with my machine and apps.  However, those hundreds of posters who are indicating 2.3.4.45 is not working for them are not wrong.  The developers of CPF have gone to some lengths to make this program install a "no brainer" and, for the masses, that is a good thing.  It is just wrong, as others have indicated, to expect the masses to forgive the app its transgressions, and implement workarounds many may not grasp...

Don't forget, among the multiple support banners hoisted high by the graemlins on the reply page, there is one angry little fella.  He is entitled to his input and opinion as well.

 Well you have a right to be angry but much like others it seems you take posts the WRONG way from us CHEERLEADERS. My post was simply made to those who don't give Comodo a chance, don't want a fix, just get on the forum to slam Comodo and nothing else. So while I don't have a problem with those who have REAL issues much as you seem to, my statement if read CORRECTLY isn't directed at people like you.

  That said, here is your statement...>>
Having said this, I was pleased with the performance and feature set of CPF 2.2.0.11.  I am sure I will be happy with 2.3.4.45 when it is debugged.  However, there were mistakes made with the release of 2.3.4.45 which I hope will NOT be made again.  I don't care if CPF is a PAID or FREE package, it is INEXCUSABLE to release an update, on the day before a long holiday weekend, which will NOT work with its own updater module.  This is a most basic and simple thing to test.

  Then how do you explain ZoneAlarm's major flaw about 2 years ago? I had to give up ZA (glad I did)  because it wouldn't allow my DSL to go through at all, I contacted support, no answer, contacted again, no answer. I was a customer for 6 years of ZA, could no longer connect to the internet, no help available, got ignored..How about Windows or ummm...winodws sp1 or ummmm...windows sp2...How about the thousand issues Norton has? If you don't believe me, look it up. What about all of Microsofts under products, WMP etc...all have major flaws needs updates...Look up ANY update for a software and you will see a list >>>bugs fixed. I wonder why this is? So while you think this is inexcusable, it's nice to know you may be mad at the technology world all together then considering everything is built on these flaws. I wonder if some think people build software by the click of a button not realizing the coding and many hours of work that goes into a software of any kind.

 Cheers

 Paul

[kail]

I installed CPF 2.3.4.45 on W2k without any issue. Since I was previously running the CPF 2.3.3.33 Beta, I un-installed that first & then installed 2.3.4.45.

I only ran into trouble when I installed CAVS (that's on another thread).. then I saw a crawling-death-startup.

[rgreene501]

Well you have a right to be angry but much like others it seems you take posts the WRONG way from us CHEERLEADERS...
----Snip----

Don't make me furrow my brow at you.

I will... really...  today's a really bad day.  I'm all out of licorice and the candy store is closed, so don't mess with me!

[Ean]

I like you Afan!   Level-headed assessment....

It appears there are members of this forum who have been longstanding, satisfied users of CPF, and who have developed an almost "cheerleader" mentality when it comes to objectivity about the program.

I am a relatively short term user of CPF, having started with 2.2.0.11.  I moved to CPF because of problems with current Zonealarm Pro versions and because of the complexity of firewall maintenance which that program has developed.  I particularly dislike the current function of the privacy feature in Zonealarm.

Having said this, I was pleased with the performance and feature set of CPF 2.2.0.11.  I am sure I will be happy with 2.3.4.45 when it is debugged.  However, there were mistakes made with the release of 2.3.4.45 which I hope will NOT be made again.  I don't care if CPF is a PAID or FREE package, it is INEXCUSABLE to release an update, on the day before a long holiday weekend, which will NOT work with its own updater module.  This is a most basic and simple thing to test.

I don't expect anyone to fall on their sword over this, nor do I expect the "cheerleaders" to come forward and defend something as egregious as an update that won't update...  Further, while I can not yet say with clarity (because, while I did get 2.3.4.45 to run for a brief time, it failed with registry errors indicated, on two separate attempts), it appears that at least one app that I use regularly, and which worked well with 2.2.0.11, MAY not work well with 2.3.4.45.  I can't be sure until I am sure I have a solid install of 2.3.4.45.  It appears that may occur next week.

I come to the forums for two reasons; to find a solution to a problem, and to provide feedback.  I have done so, as have others, and I have seen obtuse responses from the "cheerleaders" indicating I, and others with similar issues "must be doing something wrong" because "I had no problem whatsoever".  I am as sure you had no problem at all as I am that I, and others, have.  That is the nature of operating systems and apps...  I have about 460 components logged in CPF, and I would venture maybe 30% of those might be common to someone running the identically configured operating system (and the chances of that  are 1 in ?).

I like this app.  I want to use this app.  I hope that I can install 2.3.4.45 and have it play nice with my machine and apps.  However, those hundreds of posters who are indicating 2.3.4.45 is not working for them are not wrong.  The developers of CPF have gone to some lengths to make this program install a "no brainer" and, for the masses, that is a good thing.  It is just wrong, as others have indicated, to expect the masses to forgive the app its transgressions, and implement workarounds many may not grasp...

Don't forget, among the multiple support banners hoisted high by the graemlins on the reply page, there is one angry little fella.  He is entitled to his input and opinion as well.

[panic]

Don't forget, among the multiple support banners hoisted high by the graemlins on the reply page, there is one angry little fella.  He is entitled to his input and opinion as well.

The angry little fella is the most valuable member of this community. More often than not, familiarity with an application means a bug becomes an endearing quirk, and the devoted tend to ignore it.

Keep it up, fella.

Ewen :-)

[dg05]

Like others, I get fed up with the cheerleaders here who think Comodo can do no wrong. I would like to make the following points.

1. Comodo have taken on quite a challenge develop a firewall to degree equal or above commercial alternatives.

2. As I understand it, this is not purely altruistic as they hope in the long term it will increase their Digital Certificate business.

3. It does not matter whether this firewall is free or paid for. It is placed in a critical position in a computer and if it fails it deserves criticism.

4. The more complaints received, whatever the motive, the better the developers can progress the program.

As for myself, I am not using it at the moment. I keep trying the new releases but always come across some bug (reported) that makes me uninstall it, and cannot say I feel truly comfortable with it. My current gripe is keeping the rules in the registry. This is being covered in another thread.

[Bluesman]

Like others, I get fed up with the cheerleaders here who think Comodo can do no wrong.

I don't agree with you, I think we "cheerleaders" (Yes, I'm one of them, that thinks the FW is a masterpiece and getting better and better) understand that Comodo can do things wrong, but we also know that Comodo is working hard with the problems that comes up. And Comodo is listening to us customers...and I think all of the other "praise-the-lord-comodo-is-best" guys is thinking like me. I don't think no one imagine that the FW is error-free, and perfect. And as I said...the FW is getting better and better.

[panic]

Like others, I get fed up with the cheerleaders here who think Comodo can do no wrong. I would like to make the following points.

1. Comodo have taken on quite a challenge develop a firewall to degree equal or above commercial alternatives.

2. As I understand it, this is not purely altruistic as they hope in the long term it will increase their Digital Certificate business.

3. It does not matter whether this firewall is free or paid for. It is placed in a critical position in a computer and if it fails it deserves criticism.

4. The more complaints received, whatever the motive, the better the developers can progress the program.

As for myself, I am not using it at the moment. I keep trying the new releases but always come across some bug (reported) that makes me uninstall it, and cannot say I feel truly comfortable with it. My current gripe is keeping the rules in the registry. This is being covered in another thread.

Very well written post. Points 3 and 4 are I believe, the critical ones in your list - proper software development generally follows a "burst of genius - round of applause - eventual rumblings of discontent - back to the slog of bug tracking". At least Comodo are exceptionally open in their user interactions, and willingly seek and take on board user suggestions and refinements.

I've got to agree with you about the cheerleaders. Mike and Justin in the short skirts and their pom-poms just look silly, but I do admire their gymnastic routines. 

Seriously though, good software can, and does, develop a loyal following, and this is what I believe Comodo intend to foster through these forums. Some of the regulars may go a bit overboard in their defense of all things Comodo, but sanity will generally prevail. If it's a bug, then it's a bug. Comodo acknowledge that they aren't perfect (what software company is??), sometimes it just takes the more fanatical of us a bit longer to come to the same conclusion.

I hope that you haven't been put off Comodo's desktop security products by our "cheerleading".

Regards,
Ewen :-)

[AOwL]

It's INEXCUSABLE... and so on...
If you write a bug-report like that, you will probably get some defensive "cheerleading" answers...

I (and 1% of the users) got one (1) bug! I'm gonna uninstall it right away! I will tell everyone that this program is a piece of crap!
Well, If you write a bug-report like that, you will probably get some defensive "cheerleading" answers...

and so on...


I'm not accusing OR defending anyone her, but i think that it's not only the "cheerleaders" that should be less defensive, but also the "accusers" should be less aggressive...

In short, both "teams" should be more objective, and really try to help Comodo to develop better programs... If you're in a bad mood, or just want to complain/whine, don't post/answer...

A firewall is important to your computer and it's safety, but that doesn't mean that people can't have humor. If you, between bug-reports and helping other users, can get some friends and have a laugh, and keep this forum alive (there is always someone here to help you), I think that it really helps Comodo and it's users...

I've got to agree with you about the cheerleaders. Mike and Justin in the short skirts and their pom-poms just look silly, but I do admire their gymnastic routines.

 

LOL!
I thought it was Scomodo who jumped after the UFO in my signature... It may be Justin or Mike...

[comicfan2000]

Very well written post. Points 3 and 4 are I believe, the critical ones in your list - proper software development generally follows a "burst of genius - round of applause - eventual rumblings of discontent - back to the slog of bug tracking". At least Comodo are exceptionally open in their user interactions, and willingly seek and take on board user suggestions and refinements.

I've got to agree with you about the cheerleaders. Mike and Justin in the short skirts and their pom-poms just look silly, but I do admire their gymnastic routines. 

Seriously though, good software can, and does, develop a loyal following, and this is what I believe Comodo intend to foster through these forums. Some of the regulars may go a bit overboard in their defense of all things Comodo, but sanity will generally prevail. If it's a bug, then it's a bug. Comodo acknowledge that they aren't perfect (what software company is??), sometimes it just takes the more fanatical of us a bit longer to come to the same conclusion.

I hope that you haven't been put off Comodo's desktop security products by our "cheerleading".

Regards,
Ewen :-)

 


While I agree and since it seems my hellish, evil , demonic post is spewing forth flames from the depths of hell , I would like to put into perspective and perhaps FIX a guessed ill written post.

 Starting with and hopefully "ending" with ....


  When I wrote it, it was not directed at those who have bugs, well let me rephrase that , bugs with Comodo software.
 
   What I really meant were gestures like, "Comodo crashed my system, peice of crap, i'll never use it again!"  People who post this and many times leave the forum and leave us wondering, "who was that masked man?" But yet, it does reflect on Comodo I would think.  So while I may have went into too much detail, it was in no way directed to those who have problems with CPF and it was simply to try to help from scaring away newbies who may want to try it.
 
   Without a question, some who did get mad about the post, I was trying to help prior to this (whether helped or not) but didn't even conidser them into this catagory, I knew they had issues and in no way called them liars, or that they shouldn't post help or report. I know my place on here, being a user of CPF and a somewhat regualar on here, truly I can be deleted as you would swat a fly. I would never assume to have say,  or any of the likes around here, it's not my place to do so and I would never think so.
***<<Those who thought so, I apologize, it was not directed at yous. >>***
   
  And just to make a point, while no, I admit little issues with CPF, I in no way deem Comodo perfect. I have had anti-virus issues and can't use it on my son's pc and waiting for an update seems the only option.  Perhaps I was a bit blinded thinking that not all issues pointed to CPF, when in fact 90% of them did. This would have taken me by surprise with any software at the amount that was on Comodo's end and I think took other's by surprise as well.

 So in fact I wasn't even really "Cheerleading" just surprised and trying to not sway other newcomers from using Comodo.

 Ean, I do apologize and I did get your PM and all is good, and yes, you get the shoes. Will PM you  later.

 
 Ewen, as you state , <<The angry little fella is the most valuable member of this community. More often than not, familiarity with an application means a bug becomes an endearing quirk, and the devoted tend to ignore it.>>
  Understandable, Comodo needs to know if there are issues and I have never had any personal problem with that and it makes sense.
  But please keep in sight that some devoted may also have issues  as I have with CAV, and I would have to assume that since I threw no colorful words, or moderate rant, and took a freindly approach, have waited patiently for a new version, in fact then would make me a devoted but less valuable user? I think that's a bit harsh...but let me then retry from simply stating a few friendly throw ins....

 Comodo, your stupid  CAV doesn't work, I can't run it on my computer and it sucks! It froze my kids computer, it wouldn't shut down and now I can't do anything!!!!!! I won't ever use it again!!!! I kept gettin BSOD errors, couldn't update! It's junk!!

 Somehow, I don't feel more valuable.

 While I understand somewhat what you are trying to say, You need angry users with bug problems to helps solve comodo issues, it's feed back. However, I  think putting value on members due to long term standings, or how they address issues isn't exactly right either. I would like to think ALL members are valuable as long as we are Comodo users, angry or not, bug, no bug, helpful, non helpful. As you know, I have no ill feelings toward you Ewen and you have always been great , even with my misunderstandings when I was new here, but I am just trying say that I think your comment may be taken a bit harshly.

  Paul

[Ean]

Paul, did you disappear from here?   All your posts seem to say "guest" now and can't PM you....

[egemen]

Paul, did you disappear from here?   All your posts seem to say "guest" now and can't PM you....

I think he got mad about someone and left us. We will miss him:)

[AOwL]

Well, now he's back!

[Tags:]