Yes… the same what D+ does. (snadbox - decisions are making by Comodo, Defense + - decisions are making by user).
I think that Comodo came up with auto sandbox to make CIS friendlier - auto sandbox decides what to allow and what to block (according to limitation level).
I am not a Lawyer so I can’t say the differences between Warrantee/Guarantee, but I can have an opinion and in my opinion the 2 do overlap with meanings, the two are legal documents, the two have multiple meanings, the two have strict terms & conditions, so on and so on.
For anyone to infect themselves intentionally, I would imagine a clause somewhere to make any form of Guarantee void in this case and probably fall under fraudulent acts.
As far as whether $500 is enough to cover expenses could be debatable, but in my opinion if your information and files are that important or expensive common sense would have a reasonable good back up in place.
It is like the food I buy,
Product quality Satisfaction Guaranteed, now this is not saying I will be satisfied it is saying compensation will be given if the product has failed in quality in some way and all terms are met.
Just like the Comodo ad Guaranteed to block 100% malware, it is not saying it will it is saying you will be compensated in some way if it does fail and all terms are met.
I think we all need to appreciate compensation in any form, and stop trivial nigglings.
I have zero intent to offend anyone, but I have 100% intent to back a company that in my opinion is creating fine products and is willing to trust their products enough to put some insurance measures in place.
Kind regards.
Indeed that is the KEY DIFFERENCE that not many appreciate. Thank you for pointing this out!
If other AV companies trust their products to protect the users, why don’t they offer Insurance?
If they can’t offer insurance, why don’t you ask yourself as to why you would buy from a company who can’t back their own products?
At captainsticks and at melih,
Why are we still talking about waranty/guarantee?
We are talking about false advertising about 100% blocking malware.
WITH or WITHOUT guarantee, there is no such thing.
About COMODO products reliability and top-notch protection? There is no doubt!
COMODO is far superior than any others.
Eventhough I agree with you on COMODO “creating fine products and its willing to trust their products enough…”, I dont agree on backing up false advertising = lying to customers.
Here is how OnlineArmor handled these 4 malware:
Full screening: Online Armor vs Full Screening malware part 1 - YouTube - pass
Online Armor vs Full Screening malware - part2 - YouTube - FAILED
blackday and gpcode - OnlineArmor vs gpcode and black day malware - YouTube PASS & PASS
So,
OnlineArmor - 3/4 - 75%
Comodo - 0/4 - 0%
http://i.imgur.com/kqddk.gif
http://i.imgur.com/kqddk.gif
http://i.imgur.com/kqddk.gif
(the worst thing is that comodo desn’t want to fix it :-TD).
In my country, The Netherlands, companies are not allowed to make false claims in advertising. When taken to court and proven to be false a judge will order to withdraw the campaign.
This is beyound just a language issue. Apparently there are rules, a paradigm if you wish, that allows av companies to lie promising 100% detection. Which is more than just a bit unfortunate. We all know that the 100% detection is a lie. Second of all speaking about producing lies as just semantics is adding a a layer of deflection. Please don’t adapt to that deflection.
We didn't create it. We are trying to educate people but we have to help consumers who are purchasing and making decision based on these 100% signs etc...W-e-v’s point is not about the credibility of Comodo products. He has stated he believes in them. His point is that no company, including Comodo, should make that 100% claim.I don’t like it anymore than you…but i know at least by getting the customer to us they will get truly a better product and service.
and i agree with him…i wish there was a way to stop them all…
Let’s get Dutch legislation about advertising deployed all over the world… 88) :-X
How does one strategize against institutionalized lies and fear mongering? I wish I knew but adapting to that particular strategy may not be the best one.
The guarantee/warranty is what truly sets Comodo apart from the rest and shows Comodo’s commitment to end user’s computer security. In my view Comodo’s has two unique selling points:
I’d suggest to focus on the above two points and try to abstain from the fear mongering which comes with claims that can never be met.
i found another example. from Free Antivirus Cleaner 2024 | Download Free Virus Cleaner App
"Ongoing, 100% Guaranteed Malware Protection
100% Antivirus Protection From All Malware, Spyware, Viruses and Trojans
We give you the best virus prevention technology on the market. Our Antivirus identifies and eliminates viruses, worms, spyware, adware, Trojan Horses, rootkits and all other malware. No exceptions."
(the highlighting of some words is my edit.)
and when i read now in this topic, most of the 100% percent statements would be related in any form to the “help covered with a guarantee after a possible infection”, and if you forget even for a second the quoted text from the comodo antiviruspage above, then still think about one thing:
this guarantee is not valid for the whole world! all the maybe related 100% statements are not covered for a big part of the people. so i would not put this guarantee as the “explaining of useage of 100% terms”.
but anyway, in the quoted text is enough “100%” again, without any relating to a “backed up guarantee”. it is just speaking about the antivirus abillities. and btw, it is in the row for the free product, too. you see?
no, its not like the satisfaction about the food you buy. satisfaction is a subjective fact. while 100% blocking is an objective fact.
i find it strange to bent now words until they fit to the given advertisements. “guaranteed, 100%, ensured, all…”, this are words which have a meaning! use them like they are meant, or use other ones. but dont bent.
i dont want to live in a world, where these words mean near random nothing, for just an advertising could be justified as beeing right.
[b]100% Guaranteed Malware Protection
100% Antivirus Protection From All Malware, Spyware, Viruses and Trojans
We give you the best virus prevention technology on the market. Our Antivirus identifies and eliminates viruses, worms, spyware, adware, Trojan Horses, rootkits and all other malware. No exceptions."[/b]
If we have to analyze it with a fine tooth comb, it means It will block 100% of the malware it can detect. I don’t see where the confusion is. It doesn’t say it detects 100% of malware. It detects and blocks 100% of the malware it detects as malware.
Comodo identifies viruses and eliminates them. Well, that’s what an AV is supposed to do…so kudos to Comodo for letting us know it works like every other antivirus software ever created.
It doesn’t say however, “Comodo finds and eliminates every virus ever made”. the term “Antivirus Protection” is ambiguous. Is Comodo protecting the antivirus? What does that mean?
100% Malware protection. So we’re protecting malware now?
100% protection against malware will NEVER be possible. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or dreaming. Providing a written $500 guarantee doesn’t change this. It just means that the small chance of having to pay up is considered worth the additional sales to people who believe the claim.
I’m not against Comodo - in fact I have used Comodo Firewall (with another AV plus various on-demand scanners) since version 2 and have never been infected. Does this prove that my protection is perfect? No of course not, it just means that so far I have been lucky enough not to encounter the relatively small percentage of malware that could have got past CFW and my AV.
If a security product did provide 100% protection it would never need to be updated because 100% protection means protection against ALL currently known malware AND all new malware. If at any time an update was required to protect against new malware then all PCs would be vulnerable (i.e. <100% protection) until that update was created, tested, and installed.
I believe that CIS provides good protection, but unfortunately it is almost impossible to prove whether it is better than other security suites because of amount of time required to test. AV-Comparatives probably performs the most comprehensive tests, but it takes them weeks to test against less than 10% of all known malware and they only test detection rather than protection. Their report is out-of-date before it has been published because of the new malware being created.
There are many discussions on this forum about new CIS features, DACS, Valkyrie, Defense+, Auto-Sandbox, Whitelists, Blacklists, Trusted Vendor Lists, Cloud Computing, etc. There is no doubt that CIS (like its competition) is improving, but basically all of these features are aimed at reducing the need to detect (rather than protect against) malware, reducing the need for user responses, and reducing the time to implement protection against new malware. NONE of these features will ever be able to provide 100% protection.
you seem to not understand the thing. if you READ what is standing there on the page and on the box, it says it would do 100%. when you say, it counts what it “could mean”, you take away what makes comodo special. comodo says, its wrong to claim 100% when you dont provide it.
following your “analyze”, every antivirus vendor can now again say, we protect you 100%. “because that means like with comodo, 100% if it is detected”.
(insert any name of a good antivirus vendor here) gives 100% antivirus protection.
when you want to know what it says, read especially this sentence again:
“Our Antivirus identifies and eliminates viruses, worms, spyware, adware, Trojan Horses, rootkits and all other malware. No exceptions.”
i am sure, if this sentence had been made by another antivirus producer, it would be discussed here. so it would look inconsequent, if just the name comodo in front of this sentence and claims would make it a good statement.
NO anti-virus will ever have 100% protection.
Our Antivirus identifies and eliminates viruses, worms, spyware, adware, Trojan Horses, rootkits and all other malware. No exceptions."
No exceptions to what? It identifies and eliminates malware, correct?
That’s what it says it does and that’s what it does. You are twisting the meaning of the statement around.
YOU spoke about the MEANING, and you twisted with it. i just say what is standing there!
to make it more easy to understand:
“Our Antivirus identifies and eliminates… No exceptions.”
would you say its ok, if any other vendor uses this sentences?
This 100% guarantee debate appears to be going nowhere. In my view the guarantee makes sense. If Comodo were to say that they have a 99% guarantee, couldn’t they just never pay up when someone is infected because they could claim that that infection was within the 1% margin? A guarantee makes sense only if it is 100%. Would it really be so different if instead of putting “100%”, they wrote, “You’re guaranteed to never be infected with malware”? If even that is no good (and it’s really saying the exact same thing), then are you just against guarantees?
Anyone knows you dont have to use such words in advertising a service or product: ever made, the best in the world, etc. So that statement of yours has no basis. (Unless you know someone who lives 4 ever to witness that statement of yours).
COMODO its always discussing how other vendors make false advertising, claiming 100% protection or blocking.
But they dont like to talk about it when we address their attention to them doing EXACTLY the same.
Just because they give you a Guarantee, that doesnt change.
In fact, they even know you can get infected… why you think they have GeekBuddy?
So doing something like that, COMODOs credibility… starts going down.
You dont believe me?
Check this post… shared so we can comment about others vendors ads:
https://forums.comodo.com/general-discussion-off-topic-anything-and-everything/100-detection-t74679.0.html;msg532808#msg532808
But like I said, most important how do they the advertising, its time that they listen to us when we say that COMODOs CIS architecture started to brake down against some malware.
this topic was sideposted with arguments about the money and repair guarantee. and it came out to be anyway not covering 100% of the people with it. it covers only citizens of the usa.
but this topic was actually about the 100% claims about protection and detection/elimination without exception.
no one is against guarantees. but everyone is against guarantees which are not guaranteed. claiming, 100% protection is such a guarantee.
this debate goes to nowhere as long as the people argument different when the name of the product is comodo. and when they try to argument, that 100% doesnt have to be 100% suddenly.
right you are clockwork.
So in other words:
COMODO can acuse competitors because they shouldnt be saying 100% protection or blocking.
But COMODO can use 100% protection or blocking, because we have a guarantee.
CIS stops 99% of malware and viruses, Guarantee stops 1% resting.
Like if the Guarantee itself will stop malware that corrupts or destroys your files.
To be clear Geekbuddy isn’t just about removing viruses. It’s also about setup and fixing Windows-related issues.
Going back to the never-ending guarantee argument. You have to guarantee 100% because if you don’t, the guarantee doesn’t mean anything. If you buy a product that is guaranteed to be free from defects, then they have to honor that guarantee for any defect. If the guarantee is to be free from defects almost every time, then your defect doesn’t have to be honored. If Comodo isn’t honoring their warranty, that’s another issue. The debate should really end about the “100% guarantee”. We should focus on times when Comodo has claimed their product blocks 100% of malware because that is the actual false claim. It’s a subtle, but meaningful difference.
