Sorry, but it is true. The fix for the explorer.exe bug is in private testing now. The fact that your friend doesn’t have it simply means he isn’t in the testing group. For all I know, it’s only being tested in-house, but it is in testing.
Cheers,
Ewen 
There is no 100% security period!
what Matousec says is the limited amount of tests they had has been passed. It in no way says the product is 100%. There are more tests you can see on www.testmypcsecurity.com and even that is not enough. So you are right no 100% security hence everything can be improved.
thanks
Melih
this is your opionion.
I prefer OA, and that’s my opinion (i’ve had many troubles with comodo, and I had to format the pc)
Scott prefers OA for other reasons… and that’s another opinion…
But I’ve NEVER said that Comodo is a bad firewall: on the biggest italians forum, when somebody asks an advice to choose a firewall, I always tell him to try comodo or online armor.
ps: only a few users have explorer’s issue (and they’re really trying to solve it, i’m in the beta tester team)
and the matousecs test that OA couldn’t pass before, are going to improve his stability too (less BSOD)… anyyway, if you think that OA’s aim is to pass matousec and nothing else, read this post: http://support.tallemu.com/vbforum/showpost.php?p=32912&postcount=7
oups, i forgot the most important thing :o
there’s no explorer’s issue anymore… well, 2 user still have problems, but the other don’t have this issue anymore
Yes and one of the users is my buddy and he now is a Comodo fan.
fan fan fan (R) (S) (V) (CLY) (CNY) (CWY) (B) (J) (L) (M)
that’s this forums problem, imho… and that’s why Mike deleted your posts
So essentially Comodo didn’t keep their eyes on the ball and got carried away with adding dubious new features such as AV-Smart and ThreatCast, while Tall Emu kept their focus on fixing bugs and improving usability of existing features in Online Armor.
Now Tall Emu’s focus has been rewarded with a product-of-the-year award, and a record-setting number one position on a firewall test list.
Hopefully Comodo can regain momentum before the next test… :THNK
Hi guys,
I don’t know how you are with it, but I think this thread went a bit far…
I personally don’t like product “a” vs product “b” discussions. Especially if both products are great at their job.
A lot of people have issues with comodo too…I never had those, only minor ones during beta testing. But this doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. I think the same applies to OA. Anyway if only 2 people have an issue out of the thousands, is in my opinion a great achievement, and it is possible that its not OA which has the error. As I have already mentioned I have no issues with Comodo (except the incompatibility with perfectdisk offline defrag). How come others have such serious issues? We downloaded the same copy…Its quite a hard task to develop security software…You not only need to hunt your own bugs, but also need to circumvent the programming errors of other programs too without compromising the security of your own product. See Vista as an example…
Anyway a leaktest result should not be the only factor when judging a product. Especially if the difference is only 2%.
If somebody wants to decide between the 2 products they should try both, and use the one which fits more they preferences.
I also like the idea of prohibiting these “a versus b” discussions. These are anything but constructive.
I totally agree, although Im a comodo user, but not a fan!
This is not football…Neither a race between two products.
The sad, and quite ridiculous thing is that politics work the same way in my country at least. There are “fans” of the different parties, but not reasonably thinking members of an open minded democracy. (I hope I didn’t violated forum rules with this 88) )
@ Axl:
Comodo is also fixing bugs fast. The introduction of the new features have no connection with the bugs in my opinion.
This is your opinion.
IMO the resources being used to develop and deploy these new features could be combined with those used for eliminating bugs to deliver a more stable, usable firewall in a shorter time. 88)
No its the truth with the lastest version. When 318 came out all of a sudden tons of people were complaining about slower speeds and I myself was getting higher latency and pings. I sent Melih an email and 48 hours later out popoed version 320. Thats one hell of a turn around.
I understand your opinion, moreover I do agree with it generally. But, IMO all the major “show-stopper” bugs are ironed out. Correct me if Im wrong, my statement is based on the fact that I personally do not experience bugs. Currently as I see it, the main source of user complain is ease of use. So as the main bugs are fixed, comodo is now concentrating on usability, for example with Threatcast. For me it is redundant, but I see potential in it.
There are also some complaints about the gui. Most of them are about the advanced features that the “average joe” wont use. There are some very intuitive suggestions/redesigns regarding the gui too. I don’t think that comodo is ignoring them. Simply they are not top preference issues. Remember we don’t now what is going on inside the development/company. We can only make assumptions based on the outcome. If a bug is not fixed fast enough doesn’t necessarily mean that the dev team is not working hard enough or they lack resources.
True Blas. All bugs are fixed and most posts in the forums are due to users trying to learn all about D+.
Boys
This whole discussion about “who is the best” makes no sence at all You can read tests and articles with opinions as much as you like, but you should be aware that they are being used as marketing instruments as well 
That a Vendor decides to pay for a test makes that even more clear. I can understand that a Vendor does that, but is it smart :-\ For me it tells me something about the tester, and not much about the tested product Remember, the best test is always on your own pc
Greetz, Red.
I agree rednose. This is what I wanted to say originally, but maybe due to my lack of English I failed it (:SHY)
that’s what i said
I agree with Blas, we’re not football fans…
And I’ve already said that I always tell people to use comodo or online armor (even if I had to format the pc because of comodo) because they’re both good firewalls.
It has no sense to say “i’ve had an issue, and so this software sucks”, because OA’s got thousand of users, and only 2-3 have the explorer issue… And it’s the same for comodo… I suppose that only a few people had to format the pc because of it!
You can’t say that a software is bad just because you (or the freind of the friend of the friend of the grandma of the daughter of the uncle) had problems with it! Informatic is really complicated, and always happen strange things, when you do a program
And we all musn’t forget that what we say is just our opinion! When we talk about something, the main aim isn’t to convince the oppositor that his way of thinking is completely wrong!
ps: hope you can understand my english… i’m only 16 and here in italy english teachers are all mummies ;D
Hi Guys
As you know I was surprised to see that Scot hadn’t put our Firewall Mode with Leak protection enabled in his review. Again, as you all know this was the main reason why Scot had put this article called Do not rely on comodo’s basic firewall . The main reason for this article was because Scot had recommended v3 in the simple firewall mode to his userbase but he did that under the impression that this mode had Leak protection. He realised it had no leak protection hence he wrote the above article (which as you all know caused me to respond in a “mild” manner ). Anyway, to cut a long story short, soon after, us being us listening to our users and hey Scot is a user we launched the Firewall with Leak protection and sent a screenshot to Scot.
Then Scot launched the firewall of his choice for 2008 but we were surprised to find out that the very thing he recommended to his users (now with leak protection) was not included.
I asked Scot as to why it wasn’t included and he told me that he hadn’t realised it was launched. Which is fair enough as there might have been a mis-communication between him and us.
So I thought I should let you all know as to why Scot has not included this Firewall with Leak test mode, which he initially recommended to his user base! Afterall, now its more leak proof (it had the best leak proof in the market when Scot had made his decision) and it offers literally no popup so its very usable and CPF is very stable as a code base.
I thought I should share this with you as there has been a miscommunication between Scot and us about availability of this feature and Scot was unaware of its launch.
So I asked him if he is going to review that mode, as he originially did or not. I am waiting for his answer. Will let you know…
cheers
Melih
And my opinion is that Scot was decided which is best firewall long before he started testing…
Of course
He tested them ONLY one year and a half :THNK
It’s not enough, you’re right 88)
Nobody in this thread red the aricle, before talking!! 88)
The decision is in. After a year and a half of testing, and with the help of more than a thousand Scot’s Newsletter readers who’ve written detailed descriptions of their software firewall experiences, I’m happy to announce that Tall Emu’s Online Armor 2.1 is The Scot’s Newsletter Blog Best Firewall Software of 2008.
In addition, this is one big lie, I think he is paid by Tallemu