Difference between ProSecurity Free and Pro

Just a personal observation.
I didn't have PS. Bever bought it.
But I think you are coming across as aggressive and insulting. Kind of like internet bullying.
People have a right to be unhappy and to talk about it without being attacked.

Jie probably should have at least removed the registration requirements when he sold or closed his business. After all he did take peoples money for a product they can't use.
I also don't think that any part of this is Comodo's problem or fault.
However I think that if his new employers wanted to, they could probably put a little gentle persuasion to good use in so far as getting him to help his former customers. They don't have to do it, but it wouldn't hurt.
Hugger

 

Did anyone here actually ask Melih by PM if Jie can give an explanation?

 

I said Jie .... not Comodo just read the post don't make up what you want to read.


I don't like comodo products ... I don't dislike them. I also don't use them at the moment....... I have no axe to grind with them


By following the course Jie has taken I would not back or support anything he does. If Comodo deliver good product and I like it I would use it . But I expect nothing from Comodo

 

Melih is not responsbile for employees' past actions .... that would be unfair

 

It,s unfair to expect from Comodo any compensation as they have not acquired the code of PS.

However the behavior of Jie is totally un-ethical IMO. He must have compensated his customers, atleast to the extent he can.

 

Yes, it might be difficult. They hired Jie as an employee, they have not bought Him.

All this must be done by Jie himself infact.

 

There are 3 things I know for sure

1. ProSecurity HIPS Owner/Developer Joined Comodo.
2. Comodo did NOT acquire the code.
3. Comodo and/or ProSecurity HIPS Developer will NOT be continuing development on ProSecurityHIPS.The Owner/Developer has already contributed to Comodo Internet Security (Hence we still don't know what he has been hired to work on, But we DO know he is NOT counting to work on and maintain ProSecurity! It's gone.) Enough said IMO.

 

Not enough said by a long shot.

Comodo has no obligation to do anything about this, but Jie does.

I'm fortunate enough to still use my license only for 1.4PB2 because it's my favourite version of the software, and has no registration issues, but everyone else who paid money and can't use the software has been RIPPED OFF.

Ripping people off is bad. Jie does have an obligation to these people, it would be interesting to know if he could be sued, I'd expect he could be.

 

That's just wonderful... See another (hypothetical) example. Comodo hires Kevin Mitnick. He hacked a lot of people 10+ years ago. Comodo you'd better hurry up and compensate them all - ya know, business ethics.

No, they couldn't. That'd suggest they've acquired the code, which clearly isn't true. Ask the developer and copyright owner to put up such site. Seriously, what's this frenzy with blaming Comodo for an abandoned piece of SW they've never written, acquired, sold, advertised or anything else.

 

Fortunately, that's not the case with 1.4PB2, Peter. As long as the license key is valid, it doesn't complain and works 100%.

I still love it, never took to the updated GUI.

Is it legal for me to upload the 1.4PB2 install package somewhere for everyone who wants it and has a legal key? By default it's a trial that expires after 30 days anyway...

 

vERSION 1.43 AND NOT THE LATEST GIVEAWAY is a reliable time and again HIPS that is dependable in my exoeriences with it.

The choices really are uo to your own ideas how much protection they can offer you.

EASTER

 

I'm asking again: what is the difference between the original version 1.43 and the latest giveaway (which I believe you are refering to 1.43+) ?

 

Well Remouald i installed the free giveaway and found it not nearly as aggresive as the original 1.43 on XP Pro, but thats just what i experienced with it.

So i reverted back to the original 1.43 and all is now as what was expected from it. Other users may offer differing opinions, but i see the differences and i much rather employ the first 1.43 IMHO.

EASTER

 

Ok thanks for your reply EASTER !

 

Glad to help. I really don't like to have to resort to stigmatize one app to another in this type of offering, but in my opinion the differences are really obvious in comparison to the commercial 1.43 version from my own experiences and testings after using commercial 1.43.

It really didn't take very long before i completely returned back to the version that showed & proved the most security without sacrificing features that gave a user a good security set up for the safety and protections of their own PC.

easter

 

Oh Easter (or any other members who have tested both 1.43 and 1.43+), can you give us concrete examples of what features or securities were removed/abandonned in latest 1.43+ ? I thought only the online activation was fixed in this version

 

I've had the earlier 1.43 if you want to call it, or it's last commercial offering for sometime but with EQS never really bothered with it untill i cleared a hard drive to install it on. I admire the way it interrupts the entire screen untill you answer the prompt, but with the free release for some reason didn't behave in the same manner at all as that one, and that was enough for me.

I prefer a complete interuption like ProSec uses with any HIPS to bring it's data to a user;s immediate attention for an answer. The freebie offered didn't perform the same and that's important for me to know the very instant any unknown is been alerted to and passes that data over to the user's attention to exercise their decision whether to continue or not.

EASTER

 

Er... prolly from this post
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1291218&postcount=14

Cheers

 

Someone should upload the file to mediafire or something similar.

If the developer doesn't have a problem with 'ripping' people off (which is clearly the case), then users should apply the same principle.