kaspersky really seems to be getting into the right act
For me, ■■■■■ kaspersky and their price. I have read that kaspersky is getting bloated, I haven't tried it personaly. Only until Now kaspersky deciced to plug the those leaks in the test. Comodo had those fixed a long time ago Comodo has always been in the top 5 ranking(firewall leaktests) for the www.matousec.com test (version 3, not 2.4). Only until now kaspersky has finally caught up
Comodo’s firewall is top notch and so is it’s hips. and the anti-virus detection has already beaten (some of the name brands) AVG and MCAGEE(something like that). (It’s already beat AVG and they been around for many years. And comodo is just getting started, they haven’t even introduced their heuristics for this and among other things for it YET.
Why pay a lot of $$$$$ for a product when you have a free top notch firewall and hips???. The only thing your paying for is a lot of money just to increase the anti-virus detection rate by 1-2%!!!. kaspersky hasn’t been build for lightweight performance(important if your into gaming) in mind. Although comodo doesn’t have a game mode either.
Here, you get good forum help and you can even PM the ceo of the company. What more can you ask for. If you still need something else like a bandwith meter and stuff, go to download.com to fill in the missing gaps
Give it a year and kaspersky is going to get spanked, yeah that’s right, spanked
I think if they meant standalone, they would have said standalone. Free is a very odd choice of words if they meant standalone. Not to mention that they mention “more mature paid suites” in the same sentence. Nobody (with the exception of you apparently, no offense intended…) is going to infer that “free” means anything other than something you don’t have to pay for, in that context…
I used to be a Symantec fan back when they were pretty much the game in town. It didn’t take me long to become disillusioned with the continuing licensing and AV update fees.
The straw that broke the camels back for me though was when it stopped letting me update. Email to tech support suggested that something had become corrupted and I should try a clean uninstall, then reinstall and described exactly how to do it. Following the instructions to the letter, I was a bit surprised when it wouldn’t let me reinstall it because parts of it were still there. Ummm… So what does clean uninstall mean to you guys? ???
After doing a bit of research on the internet and finding that even Symantecs own methods still leave bits and pieces of it all over the system, I hunted down every last lingering piece of what If I remember correctly, was System Works 2000 and promptly went with another product… 88)
Sure, they may have changed some in 9 years, but I doubt it.
Systemworks 2000 was the first Norton product I ever used and I loved it. It was the one that got me into my 10 year stay with their products. Who cares if a few “bits and pieces” get left behind by uninstalling things? Most software, including Comodo, does the same thing. As long as it does no harm being there, big deal.
I would agree that bits and pieces that harm nothing aren’t a big deal. However, when these bits and pieces are keeping me from reinstalling the software then there is a problem. Tech supports answer was to reformat my system… That was what made me look on the internet for more info. I couldn’t believe such drastic measures were necessary as the only problems I was having was with System Works 2000. Turns out there was nothing wrong with my OS other than the fact that I had installed System Works 2000 on it… 88)
Fair enough. After I made my post , I remembered that I never did uninstall Systemworks 2000 on my older computer. I simply bought a new machine with XP and Norton Internet Security pre-installed. I will say though with certainty that the Norton products since 2007 have done a very good job of uninstallation. I even was able to upgrade 2007 on this machine to 2008 and then a year later to 2009 without even uninstalling the previous version first. The upgrades were free too, they were included in the yearly subscription price. I would still be using Norton Internet Security if I wouldn’t have been in dire financial straits when the time came to renew my subscription. I decided to try CIS instead and so far, I have seen no reason to return to Norton. I do miss the seamless no interaction required operation of Norton at times but Comodo seems to be commited to moving more in that direction and the more it gets that way, the happier I will be. Saving 50 bucks a year isn’t bad either. ;D
Symantec are being hurt by the free security that is out there today. These guys are being threatened by outstanding security products from any vendor (Since they mention AV more, I will say the following take alot of market share from Symantec):
Avast! Antivirus FREE
Avira Antivirus FREE
AVG Antivirus FREE
And let’s not forget… Microsoft Security Essentials is in beta and will be released later in the year, The amount of people who will be using it will be HUGE, And won’t think twice paying for security! Now, Talking about “full paid security suites” How they mention Free Antivirus can’t keep up with full-paid suites, We do have Security Suite, only difference is that it’s free and provides world-leading protection where prevention comes first (COMODO Internet Security).
Symnatec are hurt by the Free AV’s taking Market Share from them, Including CIS doing even more damage, and wait till Microsoft Security Essentials is out. And and as soon as Comodo’s AV component is one of the best in detection, it will cause further damage to Symnatec, Along with the other COMODO free products.
You see some people say, we have to charge for security for consumers cos we have to eat. Well of course we all have to eat :)… of course we should all make money. But the assumption of : “the only way to make money while securing consumers is to directly charge them” is too 80s…is outdated…is yesterday…
Responsible people should make as much money as possible because they will do responsible things with it. As long as a company follows a responsible business model then they should make as much money as possible as they will do responsible things with it. The only way to provide security to end users is to give it for free. Making it a luxury only few can afford or charge them 50% or more of the total cost the PC just to secure them (over the lifetime of the PC) is NOT the way to secure them as only few can afford. So a new business model is required… A business model where consumers can have access to top notch security for free.
That is what Comodo brings to table. A business model where consumers have access to top notch security for free, while still Comodo makes money from online businesses and enterprises as well as providing other additional services to its users if they need them. This is the business model that we all need to have a secure computing platform!
Charging a lot of money for Anti Virus products that doesn’t detect the latest viruses and allowing them to infect us does not work anymore!
Thank you for your support! Please spread the good word, COMODO is here to secure you for FREE!
Here is a question: How many Symantec users were infected by Confiker?
and here is another question: How many Comodo users were infected by Confiker?
(you can check the forums for that)…
You will see that protecting users require a new technology… Prevention based technology…not the 1980’s detection based technology!
Once you answer yourself as to whats more important to you (Protecting you or Detecting malware) will realise who can protect you better Because you don’t need to detect to Prevent!
The only problem that I have the the protection that D+ offers is that it is very user dependent. Yes it can protect you but if you don’t get a threatcast popup, as in it’s a zero-day malware most people (99%) of them will not know what to do and allow it. If I popped my dad in front of the computer he would have no idea how to respond to the pop-ups and would allow them all thinking that it is all normal.
I totally agree. As I have said before, CIS provides top notch protection but is not suitable for the masses yet. I would recommend Symantec over Comodo to novice users. (If they were willing to pay for it)
remember if security software just like in anything else has to depend on a human making decisions, it will fail. Humans will introduce too many variables and we are not beings that think with reason. Comodo needs to be made into a program that almost takes everything out of the hands of the user. No pop ups or anything. The only time it should make a sound is when something bad is happening and even then it should just tell you it blocked something, not ask you to make a decision.
EDIT: the best way to do this in my opinion is to use something that comodo already has. It should use threatcast ratings to automatically make the decision for you. So if let’s say 70% and above have allowed this action it should automatically allow it without making any noise. But if lots have denied this action it should block it. It is a very simple solution and it would make the program tons more usable.
I would not rely strictly on threatcast because just as there are novices that will allow something they should block, there are also the paranoid who will do exactly the opposite. In my threatcast ratings I see people blocking a lot of harmless things.
Well it would have to show a trend of a couple of hundred of users. Not the first one I know but after a few thousand users have clicked allow or deny it should show a fairly accurate portrait of how safe or unsafe the file it.
It would be useful if Threatcast had a rating system, other that just user input, which is notoriously unreliable. There are lots of ‘alert’ sites out there, maybe it could pull data from them…
it really does not matter how they do it but something that works like that would easily make comodo the most user friendly and secure HIPS/Firewall out there.
.