Suggesting to them that have to add bloatware following the mass of tools oriented to catch naive users with heavy marketing on a wide keyword surface area isn’t a wise suggestion.
Comodo should focus on improving what brought most users to use it: Firewall and HIPS, it hasn’t to copy from mainstream junkware security suites overbloated with useless and resource wasting tools that also adds further maintenance hassles to developers that have to keep them updated and fix more bugs.
Otherwise rather than getting more users it will fast lose its user base.
I would certainly drop the program like a hot potato if they did that. I don’t get the sense they are going to. They seem to be moving more toward pure security as they’ve removed some of the extras that came with the installer before. The argument was made that there are security suites that include such utilities that don’t slow down things at all. I personally find that hard to believe, but even if it didn’t, there’s still a cost as you point out, of maintenance to developers.
Every almost useless/unimportant feature you add is development time taken away from developing, improving, and optimizing core areas, even when they don’t have a significant impact on performance (that often isn’t the case: things as browser extensions or things that requires additional services workload, always have an impact on resource usage and performances).
The way you’re talking, it sounds like you’re using a computer from the 2000.
Guys, we are in 2024, any machine with a good processor and a number of GB of RAM and an SSD will do the job smoothly even if COMODO puts everything you are talking about.
Just look at the amount of security software on the market that has all of this and no one complains about having an extra tool.
About the developers, very simple to solve this. just and hire more, like other companies do. There are Antivirus companies that have more than 3,500 developers. apart from other areas.
And today they are making millions, just go to Wikipedia and enter the name of the antivirus manufacturers and you will see the number of employees they have.
How will they pay all those new programmers? With money from thin air? Comodo doesn’t have money like that be investing in hundreds much less thousands of extra staff.
My friend, I have a 5700G Ryzen 7 processor and 16 gb of ram and ssd of course, and believe me i tried kaspersky free version and bit defender free, and i noticed a slowdown and a difficulty of the system unlike the old cis version that i use now. I mean the old version and not the beta one. no offence
It’s not that since the computer are more powerful we have to add senseless way to waste resources on them as if they haven’t a better purpose to serve.
The way you are talking seems you just you should install one of those gazillion of junkware suites there are on the web, rather than pretending that Comodo turns its software in yet another bloatware filled toy-software.
We are in 2024, right, for this reason security suites has to evolve their core features where matters since they are far to be complete and perfect, rather than adding poor value bloat as browser extensions and so, to just mask their inability to offer new real value to users.
Hello, my friend, your machine is good, it’s not as bad as you said.
I remember that independent websites such as AV-TEST and AV-COMPARATIVES carry out antivirus tests and, precisely, an impact test was carried out on the system, they always list ESET and Kaspersky as software that has the least impact on the operating system.
That’s why I cited this example that AVs have several functionalities and do not impact the operating system.
Tests from independent sites such as AV-TEST and AV-COMPARATIVES do not say that these additional programs in the software have an impact on the system.
I don’t need that “av comparatives” tell me that if you add services these have an impact on the systems and that more browser addons there are, more resources are needed for the browser to do its job (to be fair I find also biased and flawed AV Comparatives tests for many other reasons but this is another story).
It is intrinsic in the way addons and services work, not mentioning the added points of failure these imply and the already mentioned diversion of a significant slice of developers work force away of improvement and evolution of really important things.
I disabled even many default not important stock Windows services, and I see noticeable improvements on start and disk and CPU usage, compared to freshly installed Windows 11, despite I have 64GB of RAM and a 8 cores 16 threads CPU.
But if it isn’t as obvious for you their impact on resources e.g. at this link you can see some practical tests to check popular browser extensions impact, in this test there are also browser extensions of popular security software as safe shopping and such.
Little drops of water make a mighty ocean, little waste of resources here and there for this and that questionable feature, make a modern powerful PC more clumsy than a decade old PC with a clean software configuration.
Nice of you to make that comparison. Thank you very much.
However, I see no mention of metrics for BitDefender, Eset, Kaspersky, Malwarebytes, Webroot, and no Comodo.
It loses all meaning if Comodo is not compared with the fastest.
The tests presented by our good friend new_style XD are more representative of the comparison between security software.
And Comodo, which didn’t have all the defenses provided by the others (as you’d expect), wasn’t any faster than those with more extensive defenses. Quite the contrary!
By the way… Could we have a beta version of Comodo CIS 2025 that is 100% 64-bit?
Is this the case?
I asked this question several months ago, to no avail…
If it is indeed reprogrammed in 64 bits with the bugs removed, the question will no longer arise. It will be much faster. And that will put an end to all debate. It will be the fastest!
And we’ll all be happier for it.
If the beta hasn’t been released yet, it’s certainly because they’re working ■■■■■■■ it.
Not sure what you mean with “faster” here since I’m talking about the impact on general PC performance and resource usage not about the speed of the virus scan engine.
Latest time I have tried KIS (around a year ago) that you have mentioned among the fast ones, it had a significantly heavier impact on PC resources compared to CIS.
And even assuming that CIS is so worse optimized than competitors that uses more resources despite less feature, this makes the logic of asking more bloat even more senseless and counterproductive…
CIS is a 64 bit application. What of CIS isn’t 64-bit? Speed-wise it’s not at all definite that 64 bit applications are any faster than 32 bit applications. There are benefits, but speed isn’t typically one of them.
As you said.
“There are benefits, but speed is typically not one of them.”
If it has benefits other than speed you should consider it. what do you think?
It should be considered, yes, but again, CIS is a 64 bit application. The main benefit is being able to allocate much more memory, but that isn’t always needed. Depends on the application.
in 2022 CIS was rebranded to Xcitium because of its Auto-Containment module now called ZeroDwell Containment or ZeroThreat isolation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-scHDh1bwlA
