Downgraded to 2.4 [resolved]

[Guest]

[Klatuu]

I had no problems with the older version of Comodo (2.4), and upgraded to 3.0 recently.  (I use it on 2 XP machines.)

It worked fine, but the constant nagging when ever I installed something was a bit much.  Yes, you can switch to Installation Mode, but that becomes rather tedious (like the annoying nagging of Vista).  2.4 protected me just fine - if something malicious was about to install, I could just tell it no.  No need to monitor every single aspect of the installation that you know to be legit.

I also find that ver 2.4 loads much faster at start-up, which allows my Anti-Virus updates and other start-up functions to also complete sooner, and therefore the overall start time for Windows is a lot quicker.  I even find that both PC's run faster in general with 2.4 as compared to 3.0

I even think I prefer the user interface on 2.4 as well - not as neat and clean, but more info on the General Screen.  But that's just a personal preference.

I still recommend Comodo - I like it better than all the other Firewalls I've tried (I was a former Zone Alarm user), but I think 3.0 is too slow, and a bit too over the top in trying to protect things that a careful user such as myself doesn't need protecting from.

Yes - I know there are several internal settings you can try and tweak to change some protection levels, but that just shouldn't be necessary.  The program should be fast and efficient right out of the box.

Maybe the next incarnation can determine (via an installation questionnaire) what level of user you are, and what level of protection you desire.  This would allow for a choice between faster but more basic firewall (such as 2.4), or a more complete but slower one (such as 3.0), without the need to try and manually tweak various internal settings that may be too complicated for many users.

[Vettetech]

3.0 is completely different then 2.4. 3.0 also has HIPS and once every program is learned and Comodo has a base line then you will not get any more alerts. With patience Comodo 3.0 is extremely secure.

[madame ganda]

  hi Klatuu, welcome to the forum 
i don't remember exactly, it's been a while since i install CFP3, but upon installation there are 3 different choices given.
1) basic firewall (no HIPS at all)
2) Firewall w/ leak protection (similar to V2)
3) Firewall w/ defense+ (with full HIPS)

so if you rather use V2 like firewall, you can try option no.2 
as for the GUI, you can change the skin of V3.
now, where do i find the CFP3 skin thread  .
i'll look for it & give you the link once i find it 
 
ganda

here you go: 
http://forums.comodo.com/empty-t16900.0.html

oh and this is the screenshot for installing firewall w/ leak protection

[Vettetech]

hi Klatuu, welcome to the forum 
i don't remember exactly, it's been a while since i install CFP3, but upon installation there are 3 different choices given.
1) basic firewall (no HIPS at all)
2) Firewall w/ leak protection (similar to V2)
3) Firewall w/ defense+ (with full HIPS)

so if you rather use V2 like firewall, you can try option no.2 
as for the GUI, you can change the skin of V3.
now, where do i find the CFP3 skin thread  .
i'll look for it & give you the link once i find it 
 
ganda

here you go: 
http://forums.comodo.com/empty-t16900.0.html

Excuse me Ganda but the skins only change the color and not the layout. The skins are not supported by Comodo and are user made.

[madame ganda]

Excuse me Ganda but the skins only change the color and not the layout. The skins are not supported by Comodo and are user made.

oh you're right  silly me. but how i love my CFP3 skin 

[Klatuu]

Thanks for the input guys.

Vettetech - Ver 3 learned all my programs - that wasn't the problem.  It was installing updates or new software that required me to keep switching to "Installation Mode" that drove me crazy.

The other important issues were speed.  It took far longer for Windows to boot with Ver 3, and also appeared that Windows was slower overall as well.

That said, I've now noticed that shutting down windows with 2.4 takes forever.  So, I may try 3 one more time.  If there's a choice to run it with far less options turned on as Ganda points out, maybe one of those will allow the faster boot time, and less nagging upon installations or updates.

I can deal with the interface - that was minor.  But I hate a slow PC

[Soyabeaner]

Hmm...looks like "every PC is different" is not just an expression.  3 is faster for me.  The thing that bugged me was 2.4's CPU issue.

[Vettetech]

2.4 never remembered anything for me. The only thing slow about 3.0 is the tray icon loading. So I wait 10-15 seconds longer. No biggie. I would rather have the protection level of 3.0 over 2.4.    (B)

[madame ganda]

problem solved?  oh OK. wanna hug?   
i'm gonna lock this topic. if you want to reopen this topic pls PM me or other online moderator.
 

[Tags:]