PG - Is it too complex for the typical home user?

Discussion in 'ProcessGuard' started by Cyborg, Apr 29, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Hi Vikoor,

    You are totally, 100%, right.

    Rich
     
  2. Jaws

    Jaws Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Posts:
    210
    Hi Vikorr,

    Do you mean something like what WinPatrol Plus does. That would seem easy to do. Maybe in the next version something like that could be included to dispense with the complexity issue.

    Regards,

    Jaws

    PS: Would PG and WinPatrol Plus be a good match together or are they similar programs? Are the two redundant? Can you access WinPatrol when PG is asking to allow a process? Sorry asking about WinPatrol in PG forum, Mods, please delete Postscript if not apporpriate. Thanks.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2005
  3. Jaws

    Jaws Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Posts:
    210
    Hi Wayne,

    Is PGs help file available without loading the program? It would be nice if someone could study the help files first before loading the program to become familar with the program.

    Thanks,

    Jaws
     
  4. Disciple

    Disciple Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Posts:
    292
    Location:
    Ellijay, Georgia - USA
    PG and WinPatrol (WP) have peacefully co-existed on my system for some time now. As for redundancy, I don't think so, I feel they are different in what they do that they compliment each other. However since adding RegDefend to my security arsenal I have disabled most of the WP monitoring since RegDefend is more configurable and works in real time instead of on a polling/scanning basis. I say this as a satisfied WP+ user.
     
  5. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Hi all,

    I usually Google the program name in order to see if it is a good one or not. Usually it is pretty obvious. Sometimes there may be a question.

    WinPatrol is a nice program and I have the free version running sometimes along with ProcessGuard and RegDefend. I prefer for the same reasons that Disciple does, but WinPatrol does provide some interesting information so I look at it now and then.

    Rich
     
  6. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    http://www.diamondcs.com.au/processguard/index.php?page=help

    And, BTW - If someone is able to read and understand the "Help" file, and read the forum and use it to post questions when necessary, the no, PG is not too complex for the average user.

    I hate to say it, but if I can learn how to use PG to effectively protect my computer - anyone can. Pete
     
  7. rickontheweb

    rickontheweb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    129
    I definately will agree with Dieter and Vikorr on the update issue. We should be able to turn it off, exit and then over install and still retain our settings. The "typical home user" probably doesn't customize settings too much so maybe starting over wouldn't be a bad thing with an update, but it can put them off like Dieter mentioned.

    I think the recent addition of the database question mark button on the protection tab was a great idea particilarly to help "typical home users" and for mid level to expert mode people to share setting strategies. But the database really needs to include most things the "typical home user" might encounter in a prompt like wmiadap.exe, etc. Even if the info was minimal you could have a google query link on each database page to encourage people to do some learning on their own. Maybe even a query link on the database page for each service or unknown service against this forum. Anything to encourage typical home users to start investing a couple clicks to learn something about their system. It'll help them make better choices in responding to a prompts in the future.

    EDIT: Shows how often I check the database, you already have google queries and references to this forum on your database for processes! Ummmm, nevermind on that. :) But it could be a little bit more comprehensive. But I can't say I blame you, maintaining a database can be time consuming.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2005
  8. Wake2

    Wake2 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    205
    I consider my wife, and i to be average users,
    wife runs the laptop, i am stuck with a desktop,
    and due to a recent encounter with the bube virus
    we both decided to take a more proactive approach
    to our computer's security.

    One program we purchased was process guard, and as
    stated we are both average computer users, prior to
    installing pg we read the documentation, installed
    pg with little fanfare, ran the program in learning
    mode, ran all our software programs, we followed the
    alerts, when in doubt we checked with the diamondcs
    file information database, or googled, and it took
    us a day to get pg up and running on both computers.

    When the newest version of pg was released we both
    uninstalled the old version, and installed the new
    version and this time being more familiar with pg
    and the software we have installed it took us even
    less time to get pg up and running.

    So yes i think for the majority of average computer
    users most anyone can run process guard if they use
    some common sense, and take the time to read all the
    documentation, and once installed i think most will
    find that process guard is a good addition.
     
  9. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    I would venture to say that PG is easier than a firewall to set up. The only thing that I think might be confusing to a new user is the terminology, but go through the help file and there should be no problems there. This will, of course, also help to understand what PG is doing.

    If you can handle something like ZoneAlarm, PG should be a breeze.. no rules to create, and you don't need to know anything about internet connections to go with the app control.. you will only need to change special permissions if you see that little yellow balloon, and then they've made the process of allowing it those permissions very easy. :) Running PG in Learning Mode for a couple days will get most things that need to be protected, then just go through the protection list and remove anything that's not a system process (this is why it's important to start on a clean system), security software, or an internet app., and that's pretty much it. Good speed to the new users!
     
  10. rickontheweb

    rickontheweb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    129
    Actually I see a potential solution to this question. When development shifts to PG, you could consider dumping ProcessGuard Free and differentiate the product into ProcessGuard "Lite" and ProcessGuard "Pro" and offer fully functional 30 day trials of both.

    What would go into a limited "Lite" version that people would pay for and offered some basic protection could be tricky.

    But on the plus side you could blacklist modifying 3rd party products that blacklist the use of ProcessGuard "Pro" in the "Lite" version. So people that want to use something like PunkBuster to play online games can use an unblacklisted "lite" version of PG that offers some of the protection they require, while offering a "Pro" version for those that choose full configurability instead.

    It could provide a solution to the PunkBuster scenario and create a new revenue stream from people looking for a simpler and easier to use version at the same time.
     
  11. Hard_Warrior

    Hard_Warrior Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2004
    Posts:
    17
    Even moreso when someone takes it upon themselves to force others to justify the importance of their computers and the security measures they take to protect them. Yeah, you're fishing Pollmaster, so that makes the real question why you feel the necessity. As rick said use\don't use whatever you want.
     
  12. Vikorr

    Vikorr Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Posts:
    662
    Hi Jaws, yes I did mean something like Winpatrol Plus. And Winpatrol and PG can happily run side by side, but winpatrol is not similar to PG in the protection it provides. PG is part of any good IPS, whilst winpatrol is an IDS.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Oh, and I never said that PG wasn't learnable by anyone, including an average home user, just that most people (and most people aren't truly security conscious) want programs that are userfriendly to setup, and don't take long to set up....for the first time user PG doesn't pass the mark on either of these...especially if you are interested in what you are allowing and disallowing.

    So I can't help feeling that a library, yes like Winpatrol Plus would make PG much more user friendly, reduce the setup time (because you dont have to search google anymore), and increase it's popularity.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.