Laughs. I would edit the post.
360° marketing? 
I think you’ll find that “feces” was a censor substitution for another word also meaning feces [wikipedia.org]. Still laughing? 
edit: added URL
Sure.
Yes, still laughing. And still saying the post should be edited (by the poster).
I understand that lots of us (I included) don’t have English as a first language and that makes us slip into funny errors; that’s only normal. But it doesn’t (shouldn’t) stop others from call attention.
Thanks anyway for your post and your link Kail, but I had already seen the page. My fault for not linked it.
Regards.
mod note: you sure about that Uncyclopedia URL? it’s not what I was referring to at all. kail
EDIT: url erased at the polite request of a mod (Kail) after an interesting change of PM’s.
mod edit: ta. kail
I just noticed Kail’s edit: If I misunderstood your post please accept my apologies.
And please PM me what you meant (so as not to jam the thread).
Regards.
mod note: PM sent. kail
I hope the Comodo team peace and success!
I use Comodo Firewall in combination with Avast Free Anti-Virus, and I can say that I have not seen anything better. I call it my Free Internet Security Suite.
But I have seen the Internet Security suite at action. I am happy to say that this is truly a great product, and most importantly it is free. But you know what, it feels like a cheat because this product is so great, people ought to pay for it! There are simply so many innovations in this, that you think twice whether this is fake or not.
Comodo works to prevent intrusions and not cure them. I support this, what does not go into my system does not harm me. But what Comodo does is that it check the validity of a programme with a server in real time. Simply outstanding. And the sandbox! Boy, I feel like its a blessing to be honest.
Now, I am going to bring in something controvertial here. I am also a Norton User, I use NIS 2009 for my laptop and I use Comodo and Avast on my Desktop. [for anyone wondering I did not buy the NIS, I got it when I bought the laptop ;D]
Norton is an outstanding product, and I had the highest respect of the corporation, until it repeated false allegations that free security was not suffice. You see, you only need the extra features that Norton gives if you do a lot of financial transactions on the web, and to be absolutely honest, even if you do a fair amount financial work on the internet, CIS, is more than enough to protect you. The only reason I believe anyone should buy Norton is if they want have no other way of spending their tech budget and if you want everything done for you without you knowing at all. I like to know what is happening. When my period for Norton runs out, I am not buying it again.
This is not the first time that Norton has done so, it did this before and Avast fought back. I think we need a union of free anti-virus providers to teach Symantec a lesson it will never forget. I think Melih is a hero for challenging them, but I believe he has a few hands to shake, so after Comodo beats Norton, it will never stand again, or lift it’s face up in shame.
Comodo Internet secuirty is of the highest standard, and its real time cloud based support could make Symantec run for cover. Its community, is really great, and so are the communities of a lot of free anti-virus and anti-malware programmes.
I really hope that this challenge is met, this challenge happens. I am sure that if both parties pay equally for the tests, that will make everything fair.
Melih, I regard you very highly for what you have done. And you are not the first, Avast have also spoken against Symantec when they made this claim in 2009. This needs to be stopped.
But, I think if the free security providers work in co-ordination ot bring Norton down, it will make AV history.
Ever since hearing that Melih stood up to the challenge, I have taken an internest into what he does. I have seen someone that cares for his comminty as well as someone who does a lot of work, who understands the commoner’s needs and a person who does his best to help. I find tour blog posts a pleasure to read.
I am only a student now, but inshAllah (if God wishes), if I ever get the chance to buy or to persuade someone to buy SSL certificates, I would make sure Comodo gets it! 
Perhaps Melih, if we can get more community members to spread the message, I believe developing countires will respond to free anti-virus, they usually have large populations, making this user-base bigger and bigger will mean a bigger community. I have come to believe that is Comodo keep up this revolutionary momentum as well as outstanding innovation, Comodo will jump up the ladder at lightning speed. Comodo is the better at protection, not it also needs to beat Norton at detection. I just saw a video on youtube, that compared NIS to CIS, but there was no internet. I think we need one with internet as well, languy was the person who made it, he said that Comodo is going to unveil a detection system soon, that will beat all the rivals real bad. I cant wait to see.
The Dude 321
Did you read this article containing Symantec’s reply.
Edit by EricJH: fixed the url
The link does not work. I believe this is what you were trying to link to.
I did read that. I am waiting for Cnet to say something. Because, I find both PCMag and PCWorld veterans of an older era, where tech comments where only for the paid. I have read it, and I believe that the results needs to come out. I believe that what many people have a problem with is the ideology behind Comodo, which tries to prvent things from happeing instead of letting them happen.
And I also believe this has a positive effect on the end user, because they learn a few things that they very well ought to.
I feel compelled to reply, even if I know this might end up bad.
Comodo and Melih:
If you really want to make a point, participate in an independent test regardless of Symantec.
You should have the resources and the product to back up your claims.
Symantec is under no obligation to respond to your challenge, it’s up to you to prove them wrong in a realistic and certified test (other free vendors already proved them wrong in previous tests but I don’t see them getting upset by PR propaganda).
A good suggestion would be AV-Comparatives and AV-Test, particulary AV-C has a dynamic test that might suit your extremely special requirements from a test:
Just a personal thought: I don’t see any other vendor imposing their requirements to the testing organization. You gotta stand where everyone else does to be measured.
Youtube tests, be it in favor of X or Y are largely irrelevant because they don’t follow a methodology and proper criteria. Even worse when you put a scenario when you know the result beforehand and a biased or not credible for both parties tester does it. (I’m not doubting languy. It’s the fact that he has affiliation with Comodo as a mod that undermines his credibility for anyone that might be a bit inquisitive).
I’m a Comodo user myself, I hold no allegiance to any vendor because I’m not a dogmatic or biased person.
I’m a software developer and realize that underneath it all it’s all plain machine code performing programmed functions. It’s inherently flawed and deficient. All software it’s the byproduct of a thinking process, therefore it’s under the flawed thinking of a human or a group of humans.
No software is free of faults - of any kind.
I own licenses for Kaspersky and Norton and use a mixture of free and paid solution over several computers, I know that security products can be good no matter if they are paid or free.
However I also feel that this has been blown way out of proportion unnecessarily and don’t really know what Melih or anyone would expect from a software seller… to claim that the free products are as good as the product they are selling for $X? that’s nonsense and too naive. Imagine the financial backlash.
Financially if there’s a threat you have to reassure your customer base that they are in the right path, therefore it’s not an uncommon practice to attempt to undermine potential competitors, anyone scandalized by this has never been in a highly competitive corporate enviroment. It’s not right - but most large corporations do it anyways. It’s a harsh world outside.
I choose to use a mixed setup because I have tested several configurations and this is the one that gave me better results, I picked the best alternative for a component from any vendor regardless of name.
Also you shouldn’t put all your bets in one vendor only - this applies to a lot of things and it’s a software development antipattern.
Comodo 5 is great, Norton 2011 is great, in my opinion both are great choices regardless of price.
Melih: If Symantec isn’t willing - you gotta make it happen yourself, with a real and impartial testing organization, not Youtube tests. I’d like to see the results and will look forward to it as tangible and impartial proof.
Hope I don’t get flamed or harassed, I use and like Comodo - but I like and see software as plain 1’s and 0’s, without any feelings attached to it. That only hinders your appreciation of its quality.
Edit: I just noticed. First post but joined quite a while ago. Been using Comodo since v3.
Here is one of the reviews done by one of your moderators that portray Norton in a positive light.
Edit by EricJH: fixed url
Yes, because languy always tries to make fair and valid conclusions. Comodo is not claiming Norton is bad, but that freeware is not useless as Norton corporate officials claim them to be.
As for drakester. I feel the same. Comodo should be able to have fortifications on all layers, that is what makes a balanced programme. But I believe Melih did the right thing by this outcry. I believe Comodo should go into AV comparitives.
+1
thats exactly the case!
thank you
Melih
Those independent tests they claim show other Free AV products doing really well, in some scenerios, better than Norton. So if those are the tests they believe in, then why are they spreading misinformation to public?
Melih
Because those tests show just a limited part of what a security product should do. What I believe Symatec are trying to say, is that paid security products as a whole (removal, prevention, customer support, ease of use, false positives, detection all in total) are better than free ones. To dispute their claim that their total product isn’t better than free alternatives is very difficult (as you yourself should realise, the methodology such as category weighting is subjective).
Their answer to your challenge to have an independent tests is that there already exist independent (and reputable) tests, and you are not yet part of them. That is a very fair point. It is especially disappoining not to see Comodo included in the recently publiched avc tests. I’m sure myself, and many other users would love to see the results - as should you really, if you are challenging Symantec.
Can you perhaps shed some light on this:
From IBK:
“btw, as I am getting some emails asking about this: “We may test also other products which are not part of the main test-series, but only separately and for a limited time-period.” → this means that we are testing also some few other products in parallel, but those are internal tests for the respective vendor(s) and it is up to them if they let us publish their results or not. I can not even disclose which vendors are tested separately, as that is under NDA.”
- So has Comodo been tested? You do not need to be part of the main tests to be tested in this.
Their point about Comodo’s removal capabilities is also very valid. What happens if Comodo is installed on an already infected machine? In all my testing, Comodo fails to remove common malware, such as TDSS rootkits.
You’re not reading what they are saying carefully enough. They are not claiming that paid products have better prevention. They claim that they are better overall. They are not misinforming the public in any way, as far as I can see.
You seem to be transfixed on one thing, and one thing only - prevention. That is only part of what you need to make a successful security suite. You’ve yet to show that Symantec’s claims that paid products are better than free ones is false - you’ve only addressed prevention - this is just one component of what makes a security suite. I’d love to hear your thoughts about these matters.
Please re-read. Norton 360 is a great product. But, this does not mean that Norton can say that free protection is insufficient. Their claim that free anti-viral programmes are cannot rival or give equal protection like paid ones. The only thing I see is that the paid anti-virus programmes are for people who know very little about computers. In Norton Internet Security and 360, you don’t get to do anyhting. I myself use NIS, and I can say that a Comodo Avast Combo can stand toe to toe with Norton any day.
Hi drakester and welcome to the forum. I think you have made some very valid comments here and I don’t think you should feel open to flaming on the Comodo forum for making a contribution to the discussion. I know we have rather a fanboy reputation in some places, but what I really like about this forum is the pleasant and friendly interaction between members and very rarely do the mods need to step in to sort out bad behaviour. :-TU
My thoughts and not just with security or even computers, but any product. If the item has enough good points it should not need to rubbish, compare, or even mention other products. eg If 1 car company says you should by our car 'cause it is better than the other car company, it actually turns me off thier car because I believe it has not got enough good points to sell itself. Also some of the best things in life are free. Kind regards to everyone.