OA Free or Outpost Pro?

the question might sound weird, but id really like to see people's thoughts on if the limitations of the free version of OA compared to its payed version wuld still be better than the paid version of outpost FW.

so in short would the free version of OA be better than the PAID version of Outpost on a laptop (that moves around a lot) ?

 

This sounds just like one of those this versus that AV threads and a moderator should shut it down.

Once one reaches a certain level of performance in the firewall it becomes a matter of preference. Your question "the limitations of the free version of OA compared to its payed version wuld still be better than the paid version of outpost FW", is a subjective question and that wuld still be better gives us your view.

No OA free would not still be better than Outpost paid. OA paid is not better than Outpost paid either for those that prefer Outpost. Those that prefer OA have a different answer and why not compare OA free to Outpost free?

 

reason i ask for outpost paid is because i have a license for that while i dont have one for OA... and the reason i ask this question is cuz i hear OA is quieter but im wondering if its free versions limitations wuld still provide equal or better protection and system performance (system and internet slowdowns).

 

i don't think that it would be prohibited here to make an A vB product for the firewalls isn't it?

 

as far as i know, its only for AV's but my question is more regarding features, cuz im seeing if the limitations in free OA wuld still accomplish equal or perhaps more protection than outpost pro, plus id like to know which one has less system drag and less internet slow down?

 

Hi there,

Please, check this out...just in case: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=247046


Regards,

Carlos

 

well looking at why the admin closed that thread, he said it applies to AV's and OA vs Comodo threads, this is neither so it shuld be fine.

 

OA free does not protect at boot-up, so Outpost Pro (or free) would provide better protection on that aspect (protection during boot is the only reason for me to use Windows FW behind a router).

Off course there are other aspects, but can't go into that becasue this would be A versus B

 

well id like to hear these other aspects, if u culd PM me what u mean to avoid making this AvB then? it wuld be very helpful. and by protect at boot, do u mean that if i have OA free, i basically have no FW while im booting up?

 

PM-ed you,


Looking at your sig,

Why don't you download Vista FW control free, start all internet facing software, do all updates, then write down which programs require outbound connection and manually set Vista FW to be two-way (using Stem's guide to do so) for these programs. When ready uninstall VistaFW control.

cheers

 

Apols if I am simply being a bit slow, but what does "protected during boot-up" mean, and why do you need to be protected by the firewall during the boot-up process.. Surely one only connects say to the internet or outside world after boot up is complete? I know I do...

But, assuming I am missing something here.. If somehow connecting the computer to the internet is part of one's start up routine, then which comes first "as a process" - connecting to the internet or starting the firewall service..?? I'm clearly still confused.., because that then suggests there is a point, afer the firewall service has started whilst it decides not to protect (but it is still running as a service?), until a certain point when it then does protect, which is presumably what is deemed to be the completion of boot up.. What am I missing...

Whatever the answer is to the above, does OA paid act differently from OA free in that context (if not OT)?

Peter

 

OA free does not protect at boot up, OA paid does

Simply put , you want your software firewall to protect you asap.

Difference between OA free and OA paid, could be that the FW service starts default in protected or unprotected mode. Possibly the OA gui application by default activates this service (or checks whether it is running properly, when not starts it). This could be an easy way of differentiating this between the free and the paid version.

Hopes this helps

 

Yes thanks, it does..

Looking at the OA site, I notice they also describe "limited autostart protection" as being a difference between the paid / unpaid product. Could this be referring to their autoruns feature (ie monitoring what sits on the start up list), or is it this which is suggesting some sort of limited boot-up protection? It's not too clear, and I have struggled to find any other reference at all..

 

I'd rather use outpost free than its pro version even if I'm given a license of pro for free.

Maybe it helps.

 

why exactly? is it because Matousec says its better?

 

My computer had problems with pro. And the tips to solve those relatively common problems I read in a forum is that "turn off feartures which pro has".

 

i dont think "bloated" is a good term to use for having a web scanner... and id much rather disable a webscanner than have to see that annoying popup every update AND the fact that u can only update once every 24 hours (their might be a way around this, but why have to find a work-around when with premium u can set it to w/e u want)

 

If you use Avira along with outpost,the web guard and antispyware features are turned off for better compatibility. Now you are almost left with the "attack detection" feature which has false alarms. It kept reporting that Opendns which I was using was attacking me with "port scan attack". That's ridiculous. And I also read that most of the other internet attack methods outpost protect from are useless if you are using "XP,Vista,7". I can't confirm it though.

 

Are there any comparisons between OA and OP that don't have something to do with Avira? Not to go too far off topic, but what about OA and OP paid versions?

 

You might be able to configure Outpost FW to work with Avira, I was able to do that with NOD which initially caused the Outpost Anti-Spyware to shut down. http://www.agnitum.com/support/kb/article.php?id=1000253&lang=en

Acadia

 

FAQ on OP free: http://www.outpostfirewall.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24216

Better or worst than anything else? Only you can answer that. I certainly can't.

 

On freebie level with good HIPS there is Comodo and OP Free (OA does not provide boot protection which is a knock ut criteria for me). Overall OP is much more transparent and easier to use. Using Comodo D+ only on pro-active mode, makes it a good HIPS.

On Paid level OA Paid and OP Pro, I would choose OA (OP having life time lisence advantage). When you intent to use a different AV, OP Pro's benefits are in the Firewall logs.

 

ye im not gunna use CIS but i think im gunna have to go with OP Pro since i dont feel like paying $40 for a firewall then have to renew that yearly and OA free is missing that important boot time protection .

my only concern now is how Outpost peforms when it comes to internet speeds, does OP slow down ur internet considerably or in any way? and i heard their used to be an issue when using P2P that memory usage wuld just climb continuously, can anyone confirm if this is fixed or not or any other insight u culd give on the topic of performance and resource usage wuld be much appreciated. any info anyone can give me wuld be great.

 

The renewal is $14.95 - and it's not mandatory

 

That's a very good renewal price. By "not mandatory" you mean the version you are running continues to work, just without updates - right?