100% Correct! Mods, I think it would be a good idea to move the argument part to some other place or delete it, because people that come here will have to wade through all the other junk to see what they came to see: where the reviews are.
I have read everything in this thread and i agree, that this thread isen’t really what COMODO is about.
And not good for first time readers either.
So MODS get to work and clean up comments that is not about those reviews (:WIN)
And to everyone that is interested in the reviews wait until Melih have got the answer form the marketing division,
and then he reports what they said to him right HERE in this thread.
Thanks, J_G
I share the same feeling.
Seriously, there was a moment I thought someone is impersonating Melih in this topic… He’s answering things not like himself! You know, the cool, joyous and professional good fellow. Hey Melih, what/who ever that got you so tighten up, pls let it go. It’s not worth it!
Cheers man! :■■■■ (:HUG)
LOL…
thanks Foxman…
Just people with ill intentions gets under my skin man… I just can’t help myself… I guess thats why I am good at security… I attack ill intention and protect our users from it 
I mean this guy has the cheek to come here and does what he does abusing our good will of running an open and frank forum where we do not ban or delete people’s posts. We have a Tallemu Moderator who is not declaring himself as one (our mods are very careful of declaring their affiliation in other forums btw) having a go at us for marketing word that some marketing people have used. Give me a break! Anyone can find something wrong with almost any companies website as it is so easily done! Here is an example: “Scot Finnie the Editor in chief of Computerworld has voted Online Armor as the Best Firewall Software of 2008, through his personal blog site titles Scot’s Newsletter Blog” This is an exact quote from Tallemu site. I am only showing this as an example of how marketing words can easily be questioned and I don’t really care if Tallemu modify this or not. What is wrong with that statement is: Scott did NOT vote for it in his capacity as Editor in Chief of Computerworld, he did it in his personal blog as scot finnie. So they should not have put his title as Editor in Chief when they say he voted for it, thats misleading. Now, I don’t really care tbh, but this is just one point and one can go on about other vendors too.
So I am totally p** off with this guy, coming here not being totally frank with us, abusing our opennness, abusing my culture for something that you can easily point the finger on many other vendors, including the vendor he is affiliated with. Now that ticks me off to no end! I am pretty straight forward guy, I call it as I see it.
Melih
But we DID answer your question…
[list]ehm guys 88)
stick to the topic please? 88)
Hey Guys
This is to all the critics of Comodo out there. I have read this forum and it has become unprofessional with some of the things that have been written. The fact is that Melih and the Comodo team have spent alot of money developing a product that is extremely good and that both the firewall and av are FREE. I have yet to find a firewall that is as good. Maybe the AV still have work to be done on it but lets face it, for a product that hasn’t been on the market for vey long it is a damb side better that other i have tried. Also dont forget that the team is still making it better. There are a couple of things i would like to see done and i have posted them and I have NO doubt that this will be the best suite on the market. I have tried other free firewalls and have also paid for firewalls and Comodo is still the best. I have used free and paid for av’s and I still went back to Comodo. Yes I have spent money and wasted it but I had to be sure of what i was using as all my work is on my laptop and the last thing i need is to have it infected. And as far as other cultures are concerned, in my eyes all men and women are equal.
We talk about how women are treated in other countries, just look around you own neighbourhood and you will find that there are many abused women around, its just that it is not as public. I think we should be old enough and mature enough and ugly enough not to be slanderous but keep this forum for the purpose it was meant for and that is to help Comodo develop their products further. There may or may not be the reviews as sugested but I dont really care because I know that the reviews will come thick and fast and that other av companies will be sitting up wondering why there sales are deminishing. All i can say to Melih and the gang, you have my 110% support and I wont be going back to anyother free or paid av or firewall. Keep up the sensational work, if you guys dont then nobody else will.
shadha (B)
That’s would be a really generous way to describe it but at least tis time you didn’t mention Computer America
In fact your first post in this topic didn’t mention Computer america at all.
I can guess you noticed my reply when I asked if anyone considered that they what they asked for likely meant a picture of the review (or an audio capture).
but then you chose to focus on another aspect
soon followed by a contribution that neglect the existence of paper reviews at all.
I sill wondered about that when I poited out the obvious
Despite you later focused only on the request for clarification aspects I retain my viewpoint.
If I had read only one or two latest post of your I could have believed that you simply asked for a clarification but I wonder really if every other reader could agree with your description considering how you addressed some specific aspects starting to read from the first quotes even tough that doubt you aired.
Feel free to invite everiybody to think that moderators could be biased and could have reacted differently if they were regular members.
I wonder if they are willing to ignore that a request for clarification for an eventual an maybe unavailable online review was transformed to imply that all rewiews should be online in order to be referenced in an announcement and, if not online, a beforehand copy of said review should be stored as ‘proof’ in case some users start posting that a review never existed.
I guess still could feel that openness about a marketing announement would be a desired outcome but yet I wonder about what approaches could be legitimately advocate trust.
[ at ] Gibran
Where, in my first post, did I not mention Computer America at all?
This was my first post!!!
Did anyone point me out where those reviews where? No. Then, some time after Melih says he was going to ask his Marketing staff what was going on.
All I have to do is wait. I never said anywhere that Melih had to answer 1 year ago!!! If he has no idea of what happened, then, as he well mentioned, he was going to get in touch with them. End of story. Lets wait and see what Melih has to say.
And now, lets be honest, did I, in any way, bash Comodo? Did I, in any way, try to bring Comodo down the drain?
Is a user who gives suggestions to improve Comodo’s Firewall and Defense+ and help to increase AV’s detection trying, in any way, to bring Comodo down? If that is the case, well, then I will stop suggesting improvements.
If you wish, just ask Melih if I haven’t been in contact with him, sometimes, to point him out sites where his team could put an eye on to help increase their detections. I PMed him, as I believe there was no need to start a thread for that. Do I look like a guy trying to hurt Comodo, in any way? Please, if I am, tell me so…
By the look of it, if anyone was being rude here, it seems that person was me… OK… Fine… It is fair… If wanting to see such situation clarified makes of me the rude one… OK…
But, if you want to go that way, then, allow me to quote something you said:
As you, and everyone else, well can see here http://computershopper.com/software/reviews those reviews go way back to 2006. Comodo Internet Security came out a few months back. If they have reviews of 2006 on their database, don’t you think they would have CIS’s reviews from 2008? Maybe not…
Yep I corrected that mistake and striked out that text. I still however didn’t see any attempt from your side to strike out that part you claimed that the review don’t exist (so far).
I noticed some of your contribution and tests. Like the one when you were willing to test CIS on virtuallbox despite there were bugraports and a confirmation that Virtualbox was not able to support CIS at the time. I forgot to ask you if you were willing to install CIS in the virtuabox only for the sake of testing and you were willing to continue if those leaktests did work in the VM. I still wonder if you had CIS installed at the time though.
For sure I noticed you clarified they yours were constructive comments even though sometimes in other topics I felt to had to clarify some aspects (and sometimes I did not, even though it would be needed)
I guess this is another of those occurrences.
Can you confirm that everybody should read this and implicitly assume that each and every review computershopper featured should be online?
If not did you considered that said request likely meant a picture of the review (or an audio capture in Computer America’s case)?
Was your focus on reading said reviews or only to confirm that they do exist?
As I previously stated I wonder if anyone is are willing to ignore that a request for clarification for an eventual and maybe unavailable online review was transformed to imply that all reviews should be online in order to be referenced in an announcement and, if not online, a beforehand copy of said review should be stored as ‘proof’ in case some users start posting that a review never existed.
I surely hope they will read this entire topic and not only the latest posts and feel free to blame me if I was overly defensive as someone doubted moderators to act in another way (I wonder in that case if a moderator is allowed to have a viewpoint. Even though the scenario of a moderator failing to comply with another forum policy it is something I never expected to see).
To sum this up.
It seems like Leolas only wants to know where he can find the reviews and read them. Not troll the forum.
I acctually wanted to read them myself but i might have been looking on the wrong place.
Washington post(closest i found was this one which only mentions Comodo firewall pro. Don’t see any review of either CFP nor CIS)
Lifehacker
Computershopper
(:s*) Computer America ← (:s*) here i’m not sure where to start looking at all, since they also have like a radio show too, and i’m unsure what date it was published and so on.
Found reviews on:
PC mag
Other places i’ve red reviews:
Downloadsquad
Remove-malware.com
Video review:
From user: mrizos on youtube:part 1,part 2,part 3,part 4 (acctually learned some stuff i didn’t know here, like the task manager AKA view active process list. seems to be reviewing the first CIS 3.5 final)
(This post is not ment as trolling or anything like that, just so this tread don’t end up off-topic with accusations and so on, and to find out where to find the reviews, listing sources doesn’t hurt. like websites, magazin year #### numer/weeknumber ##, dates and so on)
To sum this up it seems like Leolas stated so if due care is taken to neglect some aspects of his posts.
Comoo CEO will query the maketing departement about these reviews and confirmed he will provide a reply to those interested to read the reviews.
What, this here:
Again, I apologize, if somehow, my english didn’t come out right, but I’m not a english speaker. But, what I meant, was not that CIS (Defense+) failed those tests, but that I was not able to perform such tests (Matousec tests) in VirtualBox. They wouldn’t even start. I was not relating any bugs with Defense+. At least, it was not what I meant to do, but as I already stated, I’m not a english speaker. So, again, I apologize for not writing 100% perfect english.
Well, if they have reviews from 2006 and a lot of them, why wouldn’t they have CIS review? Accidentally deleted? Maybe so… Accidents do happen. No more space to store reviews? Maybe so… It happens.
And when did I say such thing? Again, I apologize for not being a english speaker and not writing 100% perfect english.
All I ever said in this thread was/am related to is:
1st - Leolas did have a point by mentioning he couldn’t find such reviews, as I didn’t find them either myself.
2nd - I find odd Comodo press release mentions them and no one is able to find them, or better, never even seen them, perhaps. Did anyone ever came across with such reviews? I’m sure that new people, and I bet a lot, first would want to search for some reviews. Did they ever come across such? I sure didn’t.
(Personally, a few time after CIS came out (final version), I googled for CIS related reviews and I found the typical ones from Softpedia, Download.com, for example. I never came accross Computer Shopper or Computer America. Did anyone ever come across such reviews when googling for CIS related reviews?)
3rd - Then, when I saw 3 replies from 3 mods in a row… I was like… Defensive position? And I expressed what I thought.
4th - You started, perhaps, a personall agenda against me, by implying that I was trying to damage Comodo’s image and that you’re surprised that a user, like me, who gives suggestions to improve Comodo’s products, to want to be clarified about the situation in matter. Fine… It is your right… Nothing of what I will “say” will change that.
5th - Melih asked me if I was a supporter of people who hate other cultures. I told him I got disappointed by such question and later told him what I think of such. He got clarified on that. Not that I had to say anything at all, but I do like to clarify things when I am asked for something that people wish to know and that I can answer. (Being so, I also like to be clarified about something that I don’t understand, such as those reviews. Is it a matter that is off limits to be clarified?)
6th - More of the same mentioned in 4th, but also poiting other posts in other threads, saying I implied things that I clearly did not imply. And if it seemed I did, again, I apologize for not being a english speaker and for not writing a 100% perfect english.
Question:
Do you think that is by you doing what you are doing that most, if not all, people won’t be, at all, interest to know where such reviews are, if they do exist, if they did ever exist, considering that we’re talking about reviews that couldn’t have been done a long time ago, as we’re talking about a very recent product?
I want to believe that all users wish to be clarified on that and to know if the Marketing people could have confused those Magazines’s reviews with other Magazines’s reviews.
Best regards
P.S: I find it amazing, that from all my posts in all other threads suggesting things to improve Comodo’s products and even develop other security apps, that you went to pick something that was in no way related to CIS/CFP/any other product from Comodo/other vendor and totally trying to give to understand that I said something that I did not say. Amazing!!! If this is not a personall agenda against me… I don’t know what it is, then…
Melih, I should be ■■■■■■ of. In your first post here, you attacked me, instead of saying that you’ll ask your marketing people.
Then, Scott Finnie awarded OA the best firewall of 2008 in his blog, and that’s true.
But the difference is that when that happened, you and Alief started saying everywhere that tallemu paid Scott, and you two flamed a lot.
I was not flaming here, before you came flaming.
You don’t read my posts, and say that I’m accusing people, I’m attacking your culture (but that’s not true! If you really read my posts, you would know it!) paid by tallemu and so on. People here trust you, and believe in you.
So it turned out that I’m the bad boy.
Anyway, can we stay in topic, instead of accusing each other? 
-
so, is what Tallemu have on their website misleading claming that “scott finiie, the editor in chief of computerworld has voted”?
-
why did you not declare your affiliation to tallemu?
thanks
Melih
In this you’re quite right :-\
It’s written and there’s also an image of the blog, but it’s written with smaller characters
http://img19.picoodle.com/img/img19/3/11/24/t_scotm_18e2b3b.png
Anyway, when I started this thread, I didn’t want to accuse Comodo, but my english is not perfect and it could be misunderstood :-X
I’m sorry that this caused a flame…
I’m not affiliated to tallemu, they don’t pay me
Leolas
Thank you for admitting that questionable marketing wording on tallemu site (again I have only done this to show Leolas how easy it is to pick on marketing people for their choice of words and I really do not care what tallemu does/says etc. ).
here is the definition of the word affliated. You don’t have to be paid to be affiliated.
You being a moderator in the tallemu forums puts you in the “affiliated” area.
Melih
A-ha thanks. I didn’t know that meaning of affiliated. BTW, I have no real interest in how things go for tallemu. I mean, I like OA, but that doesn’t mean that I’m a superfanatic of their company.
Then, I’m fine now… I think I won’t post in this thread anymore
I know that the answer to my question would be “yes, we wrote something false, but that’s what everybody does”
I’ve realized that everybody’s marketing people isn’t fair… This isn’t a reason to say false things or to hide things, imho (that refers to comodo, but also to tallemu, MS, apple and so on), but that’s how world goes… That’s a critic to Tall Emu too Don’t take it for an accuse to Comodo, 'cause I know that also Tallemu, Symantec, Kaspersky, MS, Apple, Mozilla, Google, Linuxers and so on behave in the same way :-\
Leo
So you did know that that virtualbox was reported to be unable to support CIS but you wanted to test those leaktests in Virtualbox. ???
Did you have CIS installed outside the virtualbox at the time? ???
Why you were willing to test those leaktest on the VM but not on a normal setup? ???
I’m sorry If I had assumed you didn’t have CIS Installed and I’m sorry if I have to ask about that VM topic but I would really appreciate a clarification about this as I have no direct way to confirm it and I will take your words for this.
Very evocative, you don’t deny and you don’t confirm but I asked
Can you confirm that everybody should read this and implicitly assume that each and every review computershopper featured should be online?
If not did you considered that said request likely meant a picture of the review (or an audio capture in Computer America’s case)?
Was your focus on reading said reviews or only to confirm that they do exist?
I notice you evaded a related aspect again. Those interested in the whole topic won’t miss that.
I’m not a native english speaker either and I know for sure that I’m not versed in writing english posts.
I wonder if my initial post were not clear enough and this long exchange of reply in only caused by a misunderstanding.
But then again I invite everybody to read from this post onward.
I stated what I though as soon I joined this topic. I pointed out the email of comodo Media relation department (as only personnel of that department could likely know about that announcement).
As I did not restrict the focus only to online reviews I also asked if anybody expected Melih to post a picture (or maybe an audio capture) of the reviews of Computer America and Computer shopper.
Soon after I pointed out it would be far more easy to assume that these reviews are not available online since even when a magazine has an online site it cannot be assumed that every written article is mirrored on the online version.
It is not unikely that the online version has a subset and/or different articles from the printed version. It is oblious that there are also online sites hosting a full mirror of the printed version and sites that have no printed version at all.
I still don’t think either that any media relations departement out there is likely to save a digital copy of each review cited in the public announcements.
I’m so sorry if I wasn’t able to focus only on the legitimate aspect of your replies.You were obviously motivated to know a simple fact and possibly read an online review.
But from what you posted it’s clear you confirmed there is no online review.
Said review could have been printed on paper(computershopper) only or could have been broadcasted on radio (Computer America).
I thought it was reasonable to invite everybody consider this but yet
Here is the response from marketing people:
Comodo Internet Security was an important product launch for Comodo—virus prevention and protection are a big job. Here in the marketing department, we see CIS as being one big AntiVirus product, and we all wanted to express that vision in different ways. With document versions floating around, ideas got compressed together that shouldn’t have been.
Sean Portnoy at Computer Shopper did recommend the firewall, if you look at the list in the middle of the page
http://computershopper.com/feature/5-free-downloads-to-improve-your-computing-life-june-2008
(My records also say that in April, 2007, ComputerShopper included Comodo AntiVirus 1.1 in its “List of Favourites” for computer trials (DVD only). I can’t find that online right now, but perhaps that’s because ComputerShopper’s forums are down.)
Computer America did not recommend the firewall or antivirus, though they did interview you.
The reviews and the interview were conflated. Forum members are right to call us on them. I hope they will overlook and forgive the oversight. I appreciate their all paying so much attention to our new products, as well as what we say about them.