May i ask if there will be any kind of update to a trey icon of BoClean ? Program itself is cool, main window is a bit different than usual but trey icon, well trey icon is so ugly i can’t stand it. I don’t even know what it should represent and it looks like a flashing microwave with something hanging out of it on the right side (like a worm or something)… I usually replace the icon myself with something else if there are separate resources but here i’d have to hack the EXE itself and i don’t like doing that with security apps. So please, save us and replace the trey icon with something nicer.
This is all i’m asking
Ah, yes it’s a brush, I didn’t look to much at it when I downloaded. But it doesn’t look like a brush when it’s that small, like the tray icon. Anyways, you can ‘Permanently hide traybar icon and alerts’, tho I don’t recommend it. Just do it if you get sick from seeing the icon Because if you make BOClean not show any alerts, I guess the infected program just won’t start, and you might think there’s some problem, because it doesn’t start.
Just shut down BoClean and replace EXE file (only for version 4.24!).
Make sure you make backup of original file before replacing!
Also please note that icons are hacked so use this modified executable ONLY as preview and not for regular usage (there might be stability or security problems because of that!)
I know it’s probably still not perfect but i decided to go with blue (as in BoClean logo background) and letter “B” as BoClean initial letter. Tell me what you think
Ok, this time some better icons made from scratch. They are very simple but they also look very nice in Vista
I’ve used 32bit icons (24bit + 8 bit for transparency) which look much more smooth on edges.
I’ve dedicated an iconic status icon to each BoClean state so you can always know what it’s doing at given time. Hope you’ll like it
From left to right: 10 second re-calibration icon, everything Ok icon (nothing scanned), process/program is being scanned icon and malware detected icon (or BoClean panel opened).
Read info how to use this few posts above…
Can someone please test the icons on Windows 98 system and post a screenshot here?
Problem is that pre-Win2000 systems cannot render 32bit icons with transparency effects and that might look weird. Thx
I genuinely hate to whiz on anyone’s parade here, but I really need to put out a WARNING here! And an explanation so people understand WHY. The MAIN BOClean program is written in BORLAND C. Folks can remember all the “hoo-hah” over “Kevin WARNED COMODO, yada, yada yada” over the 4.23 release and we’re ON that exact SAME slippery slope here!
To explain … when code is written in BORLAND C, the offsets of functions are VERY different from those of Microsoft MSVC. what blew the qwap out of 4.23 was a number of functions that COMODO’s programmers did for the licensing code, and the ICONS for 4.23. MSVC went and completely broke “stack pointers” in the BOClean code and that’s why there were so many wild and wolly problems in 4.23 whilst most folks ran 4.23 with no problems whatsoever. THAT is what BROKE 4.23!!!
There’s an old classic out there called RESHACK (don’t remember which version) which will allow you to open and then save changes to various “resource files” and that actually WORKS with BOClean and can change things … but if anything ELSE was used, I’d CAUTION anyone against downloading the “hack” simply because MSVC based resources are at FIXED addresses which are NOT compatible with Borland code and could result in BOClean NOT working properly! That’s EXACTLY what happened with 4.23!
BORLAND code allowed oh so MANY “tricks” which made BOClean what it was, and to the end BOClean was written in Borland. Microsoft never liked Borland and went out of their way to use different file formats (COFF vs. OMF) just to trip up Borland and make people abandon it. And much like Borland’s OTHER powerful “bad stuff for security” (Delphi and other languages) those of us who DIDN’T code in MSVC had FAR greater control over a system than the commercial vendors who did it all in ATL/MFC garbage.
I’m WAY too busy now on the AV side of COMODO to play with the fix, I’ll leave that up to our analysts and “those who dare” … but I just want to say that I don’t want to accept any responsibility for “hacked BOClean” code … since it’s RESOURCES and not “internal code” then BOClean ain’t gonna complain about it since it doesn’t affect the CODE, but if this “hack” has a wrong address offset as a result of the recompile, then we just might have a “4.23 redux” and that’s NOT good.
CAUTION is advised … BOClean is NOT your father’s Oldsmobile to become a low ride.
Sorry … additional info on the limitations of Borland … the resource compiler with Borland C Builder 6 follows another limitation that has always been a part fo the Borland “resource compiler” that folks should be aware of … you can have ONE and ONLY one icon for a program or a “LoadIcon” call within a Borland program (C, anyway) … you’re limited to 256 colours, AND you’re limited to ONE. We chose a 32x32x256 icon for each - the original “vacuum cleaner” icon of 4.22 and earlier was replaced with COMODO’s … I am not an artist and the one Nancy designed back in 1997 was for Win95, and has remained unchanged since. 64x64 “XP/Vista icons” cannot be read by Win2000 or earlier, and again we were stuck with having only ONE size and colour arrangement for backward compatibility and Borland’s design.
Once again, ALL the problems with BOClean 4.23 were the DIRECT result of slapping MSVC “resource” stuff on top of a BORLAND program … just wanted to be certain that everyone was clear on this. And BOClean will be ported to MSVC in the future, but just this past night I’ve had about 200 errors on an MSVC compile of some of BOClean’s code which just reminded me of WHY we didn’t do MSVC where it truly mattered.
Personally, I’m honored that someone made use of MACINTOSH icons for BOClean, Nancy likes it. Heh. I won’t even bother with possible copyright questions (not my job anymore) … but like I said, all depends on whether the mods were done with an older “what was this compiled with and respect the resource offset locations” or whether it was done with something else more “MSVC clueless” resource compiler. I’m merely expressing that given BOClean 4.23, I’d be MIGHTY worried about it phucking up BOClean myself …
Like I said, don’t mean to get anyone worried, but the BOClean code isn’t like any other code and REALLY bad things happened with resources destroying valuable program pointers in 4.23 and causeing SO much trouble as a result of the “intermixing” … and in trying to port Borland code for COMODO lately, I’ve seen some HORRIBLE things happen in code I’m working on RIGHT NOW as a reult.
A LOT of “resource hacks” out there depend on Microsoft code, and if the “hacked BOClean” has MORE than just ONE icon in it, it will DEFINITELY turn 4.24 into 4.23 again, and that’s OUR worst nightmare!