Say what you think! [COMODO to keep COMODO Memory Firewall and BOClean]

Hello everyone!

The reason that made me create this poll is the following.

As you all may be aware of, COMODO with the new release of COMODO Internet Security suite, brought to users the technology provided by COMODO Memory Firewall.

Those are great news, for those users who use all COMODO security products… But, there’s always a catch. COMODO completely killed COMODO Memory Firewall, as a stand alone product.

That’s bad news, because, although someone may not use their firewall, they could use their memory firewall, so that they could prevent buffer overflow attacks.

Now, according to this;msg249080#msg249080, it seems that COMODO BOClean, after being implemented into COMODO Internet Security suite, will also vanish in the horizon. That means, that it also won’t be available as a stand alone tool.

One more bad news, I must say.

I totally dislike this COMODO attitude, and the reason is very simple.

Let’s see.

First, there was COMODO Firewall Pro. Then, COMODO brought their antivirus into life and implemented into a security suite, along side COMODO Firewall Pro.
Many of you, like me, whether you’re users of this forum, or just visit it to check on something, had to download COMODO Internet Security, just to use the firewall + hips module. This meant and still means, that everyone with limited monthly traffic is wasting traffic they can’t afford to waste, just to get a part of the bundle.

And, according to some people, it seems that even if you choose not to install COMODO Antivirus, it will still occupie space?

With the next release of COMODO Internet Security suite, we will see COMODO BOClean. More extras, that some of us may or may not be using. More monthly traffic wasted.

Why doesn’t COMODO make it possible for everyone be able to use what they wish? Why would anyone have to download a bundle, just to get a part of it?

So, I ask here to everyone to give their opinion about it.

Please note, this is not a thread to complaint about COMODO implementing COMODO Memory Firewall and COMODO BOClean into COMODO Internet Security, rather to complaint why COMODO won’t still make those products available as stand alone versions?

Also, why not, also make a stand alone version of the antivirus and COMODO Firewall Pro?

The way this is going, I’ll have no other choice than to stop using COMODO Firewall Pro, which is the only tool I use from COMODO. And as me, there are many others out there.
Should we be forced to download a bundle, just to get the firewall?

What’s better? Having users to download just COMODO Firewall Pro, or start losing them?

Consider this suggestion by eXPerience

If so, I think they should rethink their installer. They have to make something like the “windows live installer”.

It’s a downloader, you chose what programs you want and what not. It downloads and installs them… Simple and straightforward. There should also be a choice of downloading everything immediately.

Also considering an option to actually safeguard the download would be welcome.

Ultimately, this nothing more than my suggestion is. The ultimate decision lies within COMODO. I truly hope the right decision is done. I truly do.


P.S: Those saying No, say why not. Those saying Yes, I already know why.

I think it will be fine as long as they give the option to install seperate components in the installer, like firewall and AV is now. If not then it’s tough to say cause BOclean is known on some systems to cause instability and not everybody might want it.

That’s far from being an option. I mean, I do wish that COMODO makes the installation still optional, but the reason I started this thread is not that.

It’s indifferent whether or not COMODO makes the modules in CIS optional to install or not. What matters is that to install even just one module (one component), the user still will have to download the full package.

That’s a stupidity. Why would those users, who only wish COMODO Firewall Pro have to download all? Makes no sense.

I’m sorry, I thought this thread was for an opinion. I have given mine, and now you have given yours again. I’m quite happy with my opinion because well… it’s my opinion. I can understand why they do it all in one package because then they only need one installer for most of their apps. To have a seperate DL for each one then an installer is needed for each program. So weather you get the full CIS or just a single program a seperate installer would be required, especially since with program updates and such often when new elements are added to a program they installer needs to be changed to incorporate, so that actually makes more work for the programmers. Also, it isn’t like this is a large download either way, it’s 33.8 MB. AVG is actually 65.23 MB, Avast (home) which is just the AV is 29.81 MB, and Avira is 21.04 MB. None of these aformentioned programs have nearly as much packed into them as CIS so I don’t see it making much differance if it is something to do with the download size or bandwidth or even if you are using dial up. So if you want to use more then just one product of Comodos then it makes complete sense, however if you don’t want to use more then one it still isn’t a lager download by any means. Plus if you look at the download size of the firewall before they were merged the firewall was around 25 to 27 MB, then the AV alone was another 25 MB or so.

Never know, maybe I’m the only one with this OPINION.

And you’re entitled to your opinion.

But, I didn’t start this thread to discuss whether or not COMODO should make the components installation optional. Rather, to discusss why won’t COMODO still make those products available as stand alone versions.

And, the size of the installer, is only a small reason, but which reflects at the end, if I am downloading unneeded extras, doesn’t it?

My monthly traffic is limited and if I am wasting it on downloading things I won’t be using, then it is a waste, isn’t it? And it is so, because, I could be downloading something else, needed, and not be worried to exceed my limit, and pay extra money at the end of the month.

Because, what is truly into discussion, is why, in first place, should anyone be forced to download the full package, just to install one component. Secondly, and not less important, why killing the stand alone versions, for all other users, that despite not using COMODO Firewall Pro, would still like to use, let’s say, COMODO Memory Firewall?

easy answer then. It costs more money, and they don’t want to spend more then they have to considering it is a free product.

Sorry, but I don’t understand?

What FREE has to do with anything?

I think this is the best for boclean and most users… :-X
Since the DEV team can focus on other stuff than compatibility of a standalone and a built in app…

Also BOclean’s nice memmory scanner will enchant CIS and CIS got many signatures that BOclean now can use… And also D+ can be used by boclean to stop things from running… Both CIS and BOclean will be enchanted if they work together! :slight_smile:

it costs money to produce anything. by having to work away at individual installers for each product it costs more money the having them all in one not to mention the upkeep of each individual product. Plus this way you can have one group making the one installer for the full pack, as opposed to having more groups or people making multiple installers and updaters for multiple products. Comodo is spending money making these products and distributing them for free to the public, I’m sure they don’t want to spend any more then they have to. Looking at it from a business perspective it make sense to me.

And, that’s very welcome. I’m not saying the opposite.

But, why not maintaining also stand alone versions, for all users who just wish to use, let’s say COMODO Memory Firewall or just COMODO BOClean?

Will they be ignored, like, saying, if you don’t use our suite, then get lost and you won’t be using COMODO Memory Firewall nor BOClean anymore?

Is this what is happening, right now?

What if a user wishes is just to get COMODO BOClean (not bundled)? Etc… Has to use the full package?

Then, from a business perspective, it would make more sense to end with registry cleaners, etc., and stick with the security products and keep stand alone versions of those security tools?

Other future’s would suffer too as they would have to put coders on fixing bugs in the standalone versions too instead of having them all work on the same stuff! :slight_smile:

Its like saying, lets develop 2 versions of unbuntu, one whit only those futures bla bla, of course development would go slower. Unless they get more coders, but they could as well hire more coders and do one unbuntu, that would probably be optimal! 88)

Not really. A business key is always expansion. Especially when CSC is already one of the top rated tune up/registry cleaners according to Gizmo’s techsupportalert. The more products you have the more the name will get passed around, thus creating more demand. To shut down divisions only makes your holding power weaker, and looses public confidence. Same thing Chrysler and GM are going through. People have been loosing confidence in them because they keep closing down plants and then they are making less and less sales. Of course that is a bit off topic comparison, but the same ideals apply.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

My point is that GM and Chrysler have flawed business plans as opposed to Comodo’s which seems to be to expand not cut and shut down.

Chrysler and GM sell overpriced vehicles (European’s and Asian’s are much cheaper with more features). And just as safe if not more so.
This is a ‘free’ product. If you don’t like ‘free’, then purchase a package that isn’t free. Note though, your total DL size (of all stand alone packages you desire) will be even higher than the DL size of one ‘free’ suite.
Since DL size (bandwidth) is important to you (as you say), maybe you should consider this before you rip apart a ‘free’ application that you yourself know will outperform other similar packages, or the company that develops them.

I don’t think your comparison applies.

I’m not an expert on the matter but, one thing is what Chrysler and GM do, one other what COMODO does.

As far as I know, Chrysler and GM are only car manufacturers, right? Why would they move on manufacturing spounges, for example? One thing would be to manufacture, let’s say, iats, expanding their business that way.

The reason why those and some many other enterprises are closing some doors have two reasons: They move to countries with cheaper workers and, now, due to the world wide crisis they close some doors on the countries where the workers aren’t that cheap. Also because there are less people buying cars. At least, in first hand.

Getting back at COMODO. COMODO Firewall Pro was, let’s say, the car. Then, COMODO, decided to manufacture an antivirus, which we could say it’s a motorcycle.

In my opinion, when COMODO started to develop registry cleaner, etc., which I will correspond as being a spounge, started to enter a field in no way related to the security field.

Not to mention that COMODO started to develop tools that already exist out there for free and of great quality.

If COMODO wants to stand out in some field, let it be the security field. Why? For free, no other security company does the same. This is where COMODO should stick and not deviate.

But, this is an opinion I already expressed and won’t keep mentioning it anymore.

You still don’t get it, do you? You totally misunderstood.

Why would be the download size of COMODO Firewall Pro, alone, be bigger than CIS, with all the extras that will come/exist?

If one wishes to use the suite, one would still be able download the suite. No one’s saying to kill the suite or am I?

So, before coming with anything like that, read better, to better answer.

+1 Agree on that! =)

you should give CSC a try before you say to ditch it. It’s a great product and I would hate to see it tossed.

Personally, I would prefer Comodo to release their products seperately (as individual downloads), rather than an “all-in-one” package (as it seems to be going these days :frowning: ). That said, still have an interface (another seperate app) that could manage/configure currently installed Comodo products. I believe something like this existed but can’t remember the name right now.


I did, and that’s why I don’t see how innovative it is. All it does, other tools already do it, and also for free.

What others don’t do, and also for free, is to offer a damn good security as COMODO does!

So, would I rather see COMODO to end with such tools, rather than the stand alone security tools? YES!

Why? Because, what such cleaning tools, etc. do, others do it too, for free, as well.

But, in what comes to security, is a different thing. So, why would COMODO would want to private many users from using, for example, just COMODO Memory Firewall?

Isn’t Melih, who says that security should be a right and not a privilege? The right thing here, would be for any user be able to use the tool or tools he/she wishes. The privilege (and wrongly), would be for those users only benefit from X protection only if using the full Z security suite.

But, perhaps, not the case?