CPF 2.3.4.45: comments on the newly released version

Feedback/Comments/Announcements/News
21

I found your pontification interesting and I am sure we are all delighted that your computer and software configuration isn’t causing you any problems. I am not sure I agree with your implication that users should only complain when and about things of which you personally experience and approve. However I am open to explore that concept further, so I am asking you for additional insight.

OK? Now in light of the message quoted below which indicates that Comodo has now found a fix for a user identified problem it seems to me that having a broad base of users working to identify problems is a good thing. … (in fact I think Comodo asked for our help). But you would you have preferred that we not mention it so it could be fixed?

On your WinXP SP2 … PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE share how you (apparently on your own) fixed the “Windows Security Center” flaw.

Come on Paul, don’t be a meanie! It is not polite for you to have all this knowledge and not share, at least a little bit, with the rest of us. Or perhaps we don’t need a solution … maybe our problems are not “real” unless you also experience them?

I hope you repond with your solution soon, then we won’t have to wait for the next Comodo release next week. Hey, faster is better when it comes to fixing problems.

(:LGH)

[b]This slow booting is about windows security center. We have fixed the issue which is also related to “Block all outgoing connections while booting” option. These 2 issues were because of the same reason.

Thx for the feedback,
Egemen[/b]

22

Please read in the modified quoted text first…

Perhaps I should be safe to assume you are one of those who are in the list I mentioned? Is this why you are frustrated? Obviously you lack ability to take something as what I wrote and actually understand what I am saying. Did I not mention that there are those with real problems and CPF does have real issues? Your childish anology and attack of what I meant proves nothing besides that you twisted my words around and those who can understand when reading , i’m sure would not take what I meant the wrong way.

For other reasons , I guess I have to sum up what I mean for some then…

I am simply making a point to new users who may be swayed away due to those who try to degrade CPF or have a better lack of understanding, or just throw temper tantrums to make CPF look worse.

Perhaps these 2 1\2 lines are better suited? Or in fact will I now be asked to explain these in detail and start all over?

Just to note: I have never gloated over the fact that my troubles with CPF are less than others and do try to help solve issues.

Cheers,

Paul

23

i agree with you comicfan2000. few days ago when the new version wasn’t released and
everyone was eagerly waiting for it, one member rudely pointed out that its only a
software not christmas. but now as the FREE software has some bugs, a lot of people are
dancing all over the place. oh, come on, its just a software which is provided for free.

every software will have some bugs and there is a way to report it. i’ve been reading this
forum for some days and some users do lack patience and consideration.

if there is a bug and you are reporting it then we all thank you as i might experience this
bug too and you are representing me. but please show some respect to the guys who are
providing you with a free software which is better than a lot of paid ones.

yes, i know i’ll be attacked by someone who’ll take it personally. if you have a valid point
then we can continue this discussion. rude and childish comments will just be ignored.

24

Thank you for putting that in perspective and is MUCH appreciated. I am thinking of having it deleted though due to my lack of forseeing what this would drudge up as much as I just wanted to make a point without offending those with true issues, and I don’t want it to polute this thread and was never my intention. My intention was simply to try and show how some of us don’t have issues and some do, and others make it sound like a nightmare, or lie completely, and have an impact on new users. You know, just kind of take this into consideration when judging comodo basically is where I was going with this. I thought it was very clear this wasn’t pointed to anyone specifically on here but some see it how they want I suppose. That said, I truly appreciate the kind words but if you find my post deleted, don’t be surprised. If it keeps getting attacked or junked, I will have no choice so I don’t degrade this thread.

Thank you Orion, :wink:

Paul

25

Hi Guys,

The reaction of the boy-next-door is quite understandable as people without any problems usually would not come to the Comodo support forums unless they did not have a problem. Happy users also come but i think they are exceptions(We are even receiving post cards from our happy users which encourage us very much).

So I would always expect more complains than good opinions here in the support forums.

In the software world, nothing is bug free. Especially for a complex system like CPF used in hundreds of thousands of PCs, such reports are quite expectable. The important point here is the response time of Comodo to such reports. We always try to respond and fix any verified bugs in a couple of days.

Thank you,

Egemen

26

Being one who always updated their firewall through the programs own updater, and with the current issues with the latest version, it would be a whole let easier to cope with if Comodo didn’t just have the latest version to download but all/most (including the previous stable version non beta) versions available to download as well.
At least then if you have problems with a new version, returning to a previous stable and happy to use version isn’t an issue.

27

Good suggestion.

We’ll discuss it internally to see if we can accomodate this.

thanks
Melih

28

I’ll keep this as short and simple as possible. My PC is a Windows XP SP2 DeskTop with 512MB RAM, and AOL Active Virus Shield as my Antivirus. (Without ToolBar) I have had no troubles since Friday with new release of Comodo Firewall, other than what seems to be a slight slow down when switching from one account to another. What I want to say though, is that after using a few other Firewalls over the past couple of months, the new Comodo is a refreshing change. First, Look N Stop was low on RAM usage, but had a Plain Jane look that I didn’t like, and was a little hard for a Novice like myself to understand. I then tried SKPF 4.3.246 which had a few bugs and it was reported to have vulnerabities, so I updated to a new version that fixed those problems, but then new troubles began so I uninstalled it. I then tried an older version which was fine, but in the end I just didn’t like having features listed in the GUI that couldn’t be used. After that I just had to try Zone Alarm Free, even after reading about all the problems quite a few people were having with it, and after using an older recommended “stable” version of that Firewall got a BSOD after installing AOL AVS. I of course uninstalled it and then had no problems. Went back to my Windows XP Firewall, and anxiously awaited the new Comodo Release. Which as I said seems fine so far, and I am sure any slowness I am experiencing will be “fixed” with the next version. This is at the heart of what I will end with. I did try Comodo awhile back, and couldn’t use it after my PC slowed down, plus I needed the Fast User Switching. Now only two versions later, I’m quite happy using it. This was not the case however, with any of the other Firewalls I tried, especially the last two well known ones that seemed to drag their feet when it came to fixing any problems. My guess here though, is that as usual Melih won’t have any scrapes on the bottom of his shoes, and the fixes will come rather quickly.

29

just to add a minor issue

looks like the install of 2.3.4.45 has left an orphaned entry in the registry

the orphaned entry is:-
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run]
“Comodo Personal Firewall”=“C:\Program Files\Comodo\Personal Firewall\CPF.exe sysrestart”

whilst the valid, new entry alongside it is:-
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run]
“Comodo Firewall”=“"C:\Program Files\Comodo\Firewall\CPF.exe" /background”

just a cleanup issue, but it will elongate startup if it’s looking for entries that aren’t really there…

30

It appears there are members of this forum who have been longstanding, satisfied users of CPF, and who have developed an almost “cheerleader” mentality when it comes to objectivity about the program.

I am a relatively short term user of CPF, having started with 2.2.0.11. I moved to CPF because of problems with current Zonealarm Pro versions and because of the complexity of firewall maintenance which that program has developed. I particularly dislike the current function of the privacy feature in Zonealarm.

Having said this, I was pleased with the performance and feature set of CPF 2.2.0.11. I am sure I will be happy with 2.3.4.45 when it is debugged. However, there were mistakes made with the release of 2.3.4.45 which I hope will NOT be made again. I don’t care if CPF is a PAID or FREE package, it is INEXCUSABLE to release an update, on the day before a long holiday weekend, which will NOT work with its own updater module. This is a most basic and simple thing to test.

I don’t expect anyone to fall on their sword over this, nor do I expect the “cheerleaders” to come forward and defend something as egregious as an update that won’t update… Further, while I can not yet say with clarity (because, while I did get 2.3.4.45 to run for a brief time, it failed with registry errors indicated, on two separate attempts), it appears that at least one app that I use regularly, and which worked well with 2.2.0.11, MAY not work well with 2.3.4.45. I can’t be sure until I am sure I have a solid install of 2.3.4.45. It appears that may occur next week.

I come to the forums for two reasons; to find a solution to a problem, and to provide feedback. I have done so, as have others, and I have seen obtuse responses from the “cheerleaders” indicating I, and others with similar issues “must be doing something wrong” because “I had no problem whatsoever”. I am as sure you had no problem at all as I am that I, and others, have. That is the nature of operating systems and apps… I have about 460 components logged in CPF, and I would venture maybe 30% of those might be common to someone running the identically configured operating system (and the chances of that are 1 in ???).

I like this app. I want to use this app. I hope that I can install 2.3.4.45 and have it play nice with my machine and apps. However, those hundreds of posters who are indicating 2.3.4.45 is not working for them are not wrong. The developers of CPF have gone to some lengths to make this program install a “no brainer” and, for the masses, that is a good thing. It is just wrong, as others have indicated, to expect the masses to forgive the app its transgressions, and implement workarounds many may not grasp…

Don’t forget, among the multiple support banners hoisted high by the graemlins on the reply page, there is one angry little fella. He is entitled to his input and opinion as well.

31

Yes, we all hope that

And here in Sweden we have a proverb that says - “You learn by your mistakes” , and I am sure Comodo is doing just that, so they don’t do the same mistake twice

32

I have used cpf since its initial release (v 1.0.0.0).
This not-updating problem is the first problem I experience … and what? I will patiently wait till it gets fixed.
(R)

33

Well you have a right to be angry but much like others it seems you take posts the WRONG way from us CHEERLEADERS. My post was simply made to those who don’t give Comodo a chance, don’t want a fix, just get on the forum to slam Comodo and nothing else. So while I don’t have a problem with those who have REAL issues much as you seem to, my statement if read CORRECTLY isn’t directed at people like you.

That said, here is your statement…>>
Having said this, I was pleased with the performance and feature set of CPF 2.2.0.11. I am sure I will be happy with 2.3.4.45 when it is debugged. However, there were mistakes made with the release of 2.3.4.45 which I hope will NOT be made again. I don’t care if CPF is a PAID or FREE package, it is INEXCUSABLE to release an update, on the day before a long holiday weekend, which will NOT work with its own updater module. This is a most basic and simple thing to test.

Then how do you explain ZoneAlarm’s major flaw about 2 years ago? I had to give up ZA (glad I did) because it wouldn’t allow my DSL to go through at all, I contacted support, no answer, contacted again, no answer. I was a customer for 6 years of ZA, could no longer connect to the internet, no help available, got ignored…How about Windows or ummm…winodws sp1 or ummmm…windows sp2…How about the thousand issues Norton has? If you don’t believe me, look it up. What about all of Microsofts under products, WMP etc…all have major flaws needs updates…Look up ANY update for a software and you will see a list >>>bugs fixed. I wonder why this is? So while you think this is inexcusable, it’s nice to know you may be mad at the technology world all together then considering everything is built on these flaws. I wonder if some think people build software by the click of a button not realizing the coding and many hours of work that goes into a software of any kind.

Cheers

Paul

34

I installed CPF 2.3.4.45 on W2k without any issue. Since I was previously running the CPF 2.3.3.33 Beta, I un-installed that first & then installed 2.3.4.45.

I only ran into trouble when I installed CAVS (that’s on another thread)… then I saw a crawling-death-startup.

35

Don’t make me furrow my brow at you.

I will… really… today’s a really bad day. I’m all out of licorice and the candy store is closed, so don’t mess with me!

36

I like you Afan! Level-headed assessment…

37

The angry little fella is the most valuable member of this community. More often than not, familiarity with an application means a bug becomes an endearing quirk, and the devoted tend to ignore it.

Keep it up, fella.

Ewen :slight_smile:

38

Like others, I get fed up with the cheerleaders here who think Comodo can do no wrong. I would like to make the following points.

  1. Comodo have taken on quite a challenge develop a firewall to degree equal or above commercial alternatives.

  2. As I understand it, this is not purely altruistic as they hope in the long term it will increase their Digital Certificate business.

  3. It does not matter whether this firewall is free or paid for. It is placed in a critical position in a computer and if it fails it deserves criticism.

  4. The more complaints received, whatever the motive, the better the developers can progress the program.

As for myself, I am not using it at the moment. I keep trying the new releases but always come across some bug (reported) that makes me uninstall it, and cannot say I feel truly comfortable with it. My current gripe is keeping the rules in the registry. This is being covered in another thread.

39

I don’t agree with you, I think we “cheerleaders” (Yes, I’m one of them, that thinks the FW is a masterpiece and getting better and better) understand that Comodo can do things wrong, but we also know that Comodo is working hard with the problems that comes up. And Comodo is listening to us customers…and I think all of the other “praise-the-lord-comodo-is-best” guys is thinking like me. I don’t think no one imagine that the FW is error-free, and perfect. And as I said…the FW is getting better and better.

40

Very well written post. Points 3 and 4 are I believe, the critical ones in your list - proper software development generally follows a “burst of genius - round of applause - eventual rumblings of discontent - back to the slog of bug tracking”. At least Comodo are exceptionally open in their user interactions, and willingly seek and take on board user suggestions and refinements.

I’ve got to agree with you about the cheerleaders. Mike and Justin in the short skirts and their pom-poms just look silly, but I do admire their gymnastic routines. :wink:

Seriously though, good software can, and does, develop a loyal following, and this is what I believe Comodo intend to foster through these forums. Some of the regulars may go a bit overboard in their defense of all things Comodo, but sanity will generally prevail. If it’s a bug, then it’s a bug. Comodo acknowledge that they aren’t perfect (what software company is??), sometimes it just takes the more fanatical of us a bit longer to come to the same conclusion.

I hope that you haven’t been put off Comodo’s desktop security products by our “cheerleading”.

Regards,
Ewen :slight_smile: