I think there should be a scheduling option to be set per each rule. If it makes a minor performance drop, then so be it (although it might be a good idea to add a small info box telling the user it decreases performance), the user probably wants to turn it on only a small number of applications or groups, if he/she does.
You know all these today-so-common autoupdaters? Surely you do. You know how annoying it might be to know e.g. Google’s autoupdater connects to internet on every single system start up and there is no chance to make it connect only on… let’s say… fridays? Well you knew it or not in my opinion it is annoying, and this is one very important feature CIS is currently missing. In my opinion.
Screenshot of uTorrent’s scheduling window. Something like that should be perfect.
:-TD
100+ views and only 3 votes? I think the general public have already spoken rather clearly on this issue.
so a bump really wasn’t called for.
Personally the fact google autoupdater updates every boot doesn’t effect my bootup because i simply disable it in startup on the rare occasions i actually have it installed. A firewall Scheduler such as your depicting (image notwithstanding) would actually cause more bootup issues since the google updater (or whatever autoupdater your attempting to block) will use even more resources repeatedly trying to connect to the net if your actively blocking it.
My apologies. You are entirely correct i did miss the point. I reviewed it again and although it doesn’t change my vote i see what your aiming at.
This is an interesting and novel idea worthy of further consideration… but as a separate application rather then an embedded one. One of the hardest things to do with any software is balance out excess coding with “KISS” (Keep It Simple Stup**) while still giving the end user something they like and are willing/able to work with. the main problem being the more apps you embed in, the further away from KISS you get and the more excess code you have to right/debug/rewrite. I can see the appeal of the firewall application scheduler you are proposing but only to a very limited group. Personally out of the 100+ people i know/work with etc only 1 or 2 MIGHT use this type of functionality and even then mostly because its there not because they actually need it. It would require the ability to kill procs in order to be effective which if used incorrectly tends to leave a lot of end users crying “your software doesn’t work!” because they misunderstood the purpose of a component. Kudo’s for the idea… i still vote no at this time :?)