Faronics' latest version of Anti-Executable heads back to the lab

http://www.betanews.com/article/Far...tiExecutable_heads_back_to_the_lab/1222976682

 

I've experienced problems with version 3 as well. There was a problem running Firefox. Now the touchpad driver. Don't these guys test their software? And whats worse, once you install it, you cant trial it again. What a joke.

 

Ugh; regular imaging of your system comes handy, huh...

 

Twice I tried it and twice the endless loop blue screen reboots.couldn't execute my OS My F-1 Key worked great w FD_Rescue.

 

Faronics makes you buy a one year update subscription when you originally purchase the software. Mine has expired. Do I now have to pay extra $$ just to get the corrected version??
I also told them both versions of AE (2 and 3) crash when running SuperAntispyware. I doubt they've done anything about this.

 

My Vista machine wouldn't even reboot with the new version of AE (That was back in June). Support was great, they offered to analyze my system at their expense which I declined because it involved too much work and attention from my part.

They have recently contacted me again informing me that they found a pattern with other computers which behave similarly to mine, and they would let me know when the next update would occur.

they are definitely doing something about it, but I agree I had to re image twice my system...

 

Received the following notice from Faronics this evening...

"Faronics Anti-Executable has been updated to version 3.10 -- your active maintenance package entitles you to this update at no charge.

This release resolves several bugs, and introduces the following new features:

- Loadin installer is now an executable .exe file. The installer can detect the system locale and start the program in the appropriate language.
(Enterprise edition)

- The Command Line Interface is now a separate application AEC.exe.
(Enterprise edition)

- Modified White List Editor -- While modifying an Active White List through the White List Editor, an Apply button appears instead of the Save button. When clicked, the changes made to the Active White List are applied immediately.
(Enterprise and Standard editions)

For a full list of the known issues and bug fixes, please consult the release notes:

http://www.faronics.com/doc/rn/ReleaseNotes_AEStd.pdf
(Standard edition)

http://www.faronics.com/doc/rn/ReleaseNotes_AEEnt.pdf
(Enterprise edition)"

Thunderbird now works for me. I assume Firefox will now work as well. I'll know in the morning if the Synaptics conflict is resolved on my Thinkpad. It has been according to the release notes. I submitted my Synaptics bug report in early July.

Nick

 

dont install 3.10.2100.37 if u run sandboxie ... it will paralyse it give wierd SB error and sb icon apear exclamation mark and blink...

they became avery disappoint company added the last big bug...

the previous version 3.0.1111.23 work on same machine configartion perfect

if some one can email them or test the problem also and mail after ....it be
good

cheers

 

now 3.10.2100.37 cant be d/l from the site....maybe its got some more problem? duno..... damn wierd

 

I've also received the same notification a few hours ago, and I'm happy to say that the new update from AE version 3.10.1111.37 so far is working perfectly with my Vista 32 system (First time I tested it, it wouldn't even reboot my computer!). Support kept their word, and if I have any problems I'll certainly post them here.

The program is definitely different in its configuration possibilities: With the old version one had the feeling to deal with something that had a life of its own, the new version seems to be more transparent particularly regarding the white list of executables that is finally visible and accessible.

 

Might be a tad OT, but let's look at the picture in real terms. By introducing Vista, all commercial software developers are having HUGE support requests coming at them in liue of compatibility problems in having to expend finanaces/revenue to attempt to address issues w/Vista. In other words, they are having now (Thanks to Vista) to raise costs or cut services to maintain some semblance of a profit and stay in business IMO.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

At any rate back OT, glad Faronic's fixed the problem pronto if indeed that is the case because i've always had really good success w/ Faronic's programs for XP, but as for Vista, they are not the only company having to re-adjust their approach to accommadate Vista, and thats costing them additional time, testing, resources, and capital.

 

with the big fat money they ask for their products,hell they owe their dignity to hire extra peronell if they cannot manage themselves..especially when their product comes out on enterprice versions.....what easter is saying has its basis but its not a valid excuse for incompatibilities of say with FF,since we are talking about AE.i gotta say i was a fan of this product but its definately been the biggest bloat of 2008 (since ver 3.xx).

 

It's understood the concensus of disappointed and feeling slighted customers who dish out faithfully for products that consistently are found below their expectations and/or those company's claims, and that right there is exactly why i personally always stick to the early version of some security programs and to heck with license renewals for so-called free upgrades, because i never seen an upgrade yet that didn't have their share of issues and with some having to wait what seems like an eternity for a decent working version again.

If i said it once, i said a hundred times over untill blue in the face that newer NEVER ALWAYS and NEVER WILL ALWAYS equate to being better then the version or versions preceeding these newer releases, and as long as the old versions are still reliable enough when joined with other security apps, and some of those strickly FREEWARE (in my case, RTD, Returnil, EQS, etc.) my security remains satisfied with BALANCE and not filled with the gamble of a new app that runs a real risk that may require reform to bring it to the same standards that have been and remain quite adequate.

So just one point i would like to accent on here, i sincerely make NO EXCUSES for those firms that add insult to injury or cause embarrassment to their own reputations and risk the outrage of their customers for falling short. This might not be rocket science but it is computer science and if they can make their programs reliable and safe before, they can take the time to ensure that they remain that way.

Some actually do, and they & you know who they are. LoL

 

45 dollars isn't really fat money, this is the going price for the average security application (ShadowProtect is almost 100 $), and it is one off if MS doesn't change OSs every year. As for the incompatibilities, you ought to try the last update, I can't be certain yet (I've had it for less than a day) but so far I haven't experienced any.

 

MS anything but changes OS every year..i was a teenager when XP came out and hell vista practically is still fresh...as for win seven,well i do no trust MS's calendar's that it will be out in a year or two.its time to cut the crap if u ask me and they get to work..other OS's change almost every 3-6 months and their programm's stability is far greater than we can even dream of those we pay to get(not to mention theirs is free)..harsh words but "keep up or get left behind"..

 

Lot easier to fix the issues with open-source system than investigating a black box behaviour...

To get your comparison into into some context, after many years there are still many desktop applications that have issues with Linux stuff such as SELinux/AppArmor/PaX etc., which would about amount to the changes made b/w XP and Vista.

 

I would be interested to see if the SuperAntispyware issue has been resolved.
I doubt it.