Explain why is WG4 is taking so long.

Discussion in 'WormGuard' started by muf, Nov 21, 2004.

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

    muf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    926
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    DCS have abandoned their WG customers in favour of TDS and PG. It's plainly obvious! I can understand that they are currebtly the more prominent application's. But when you promise something, you deliver. You don't bring out a new application(PG) and develop it through two new versions while abandoning development on WG. Why would you do that? Because PG is your new 'baby'?

    It's obvious that TDS4 will be released before WG4, and rightly so! What has annoyed me is that you were supposed to be developing WG4 as a side project while working on TDS4. But PG has come along and jumped the queue and i wouldn't be surprised to see PG4 before WG4. It must be an embarassment to DCS that they have treated their WG customers this way? You can find time to develop PG but not find time to develop WG. Why is that? Has PG sold more copies than WG? Is the priority in development based on sales figures? Never mind excuses, just admit that it has nothing to do with "not rushing it", "adding new features", "improving the GUI". When it comes down to it, DSC have quarantined development of it while they concentrate on TDS4 and PG.

    muf
     
  2. controler

    controler Guest

    I don't know about you but in my help about, wormguard shows 4.0 lol
     
  3. Snook

    Snook Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Posts:
    182
    Mistakes are made if projects are rushed. That's my input.
     
  4. Dazed_and_Confused

    Dazed_and_Confused Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Posts:
    1,831
    Location:
    USA
    I see no reason to rush. Current version seems to work just fine. ;)
     
  5. Snook

    Snook Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Posts:
    182
    Yes, rushing some people might just put them in a neurosis. wink
     
  6. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,050
    Hi Muf

    The same question has been asked about TDS-4. I believe in part the answer lies in that some of the technology needed for the "4" series is the technology that is in ProcessGuard. It therefore made sense to take that to the logical conclusion. I also use Wormguard and value it for what it does, but if I had to chose between Wormguard 4 and having the total protection that ProcessGuard provides ProcessGuard is a hands down winner.

    As a customer of all the DCS products I love them all, but am willing to wait as they work out what is the best use of their efforts. I realize that if you are just a Wormguard customer you might view it differently, but there is the big picture.

    Pete
     
  7. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    I don’t even have any DCS products but all I can say is that too many companies these days RUSH to get their products out as soon as they can … and then we all pay for it; I would rather a company take its time and get it right!

    Acadia
     
  8. muf

    muf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    926
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    That leaves me to suspect that WG4 will not work on Win 9x operating systems. PG doesn't work on Win 9x systems due to the 'technology' used, so it seems logical that if they are incorporating the same technology into WG4 then it will not work on Win 9x systems. I do hope this is not the case otherwise i will be seeking a refund for WG3. One of the reasons i purchased it in the first place was the promise that i get free upgrade to version 4. What good will a free upgrade be if i don't have the OS to use it on?

    muf
     
  9. Pilli

    Pilli Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    6,217
    Location:
    Hampshire UK
    Hi muf, I do know that TDS4 will be compatible with W9* as TDS3 is now but even in TDS3 there are options that do not work or are not relevant to W9*, I believe that this will also be the case for TDS4 / WG4 :D

    HTH Pilli
     
  10. muf

    muf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    926
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    Thanks for the info Pilli. It is re-assuring to hear that WG4 could have compatibilities with Win 9x systems. Some of us have to use these older systems, not because we don't won't to change but because we can't afford to. :( It's a lot cheaper to buy a piece of software for $30 to $50 than fork out between $700 and $1500 for a new pc. I'm sure my wife would love it if i had a brand new state of the art pc and our children have worn clothes. This is why i appreciate software being developed that still function's on Win 9x systems. This way i can still keep my pc protected from the latest threats and i can keep my children fed and clothed at the same time. :)

    muf
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2004
  11. Wayne - DiamondCS

    Wayne - DiamondCS Security Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Posts:
    1,533
    Location:
    Perth, Oz
    We're only a small software house (two coders, one analyst) so there's only so much we can do so fast - we're already stretching that limit as it is, so that's one factor. Another factor is that various technologies we've developed will be shared by several of the new programs (TDS4, WG4, PG3, Port Explorer). To give you just one example without being able to give too much info away, Port Explorer's port-to-process mapping capabilities will be used in TDS4 so that when an alert on a process is made you'll instantly be able to see if that process is using any sockets/ports. Another factor is that a lot of this development is based on the research of undocumented areas and structures in the Windows kernel, and consequently it takes a lot of time to develop such technologies, simply because you're the first one that has ever done it. There are many factors, these are just a few, but we hope to release a new WG4 soon.

    Remember, all registered users of our software get completely FREE upgrades. For example we have several customers who purchased a license for TDS1 over half a decade ago and haven't paid a single cent since, and they've upgraded to TDS2, TDS3, and very soon will also receive a free upgrade to TDS4.

    Hope that helps,
    Wayne
     
  12. Wayne - DiamondCS

    Wayne - DiamondCS Security Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Posts:
    1,533
    Location:
    Perth, Oz
    PS. Just in regards to being compatible with Win9x, yes, both TDS4 and WG4 will both be compatible, although you'll enjoy several additional benefits when using it under NT/2K/XP - to give just one example, TDS3 currently lets you know if it detects a trojan mutex, but its not able to tell you which process it belongs to ... but now for TDS4 we've developed a method that works under NT/2K/XP that allows TDS4 to determine which process owns the mutex, thus pinpointing the trojan.
     
  13. muf

    muf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    926
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    Thanks Wayne for the input. It is appreciated. I'm sorry that i had a mini rant but i'm an impatient sort of person and have been gagging to get my hands on WG4 for what must be about 18 months now. Who knows, maybe one day i'll get a new pc and have XP/Longhorn on it. When that day arrives i'm sure i'll invest in ProcessGuard. I already own Port Explorer. I may look at TDS4 when it comes out. Not wanting to go off on a tangent here but i have had my 30 days trial with TDS3 about a year ago. If i install the trial of TDS4 will it still let me use it or will it say my 30 days are up?

    Thanks,
    muf
     
  14. Dazed_and_Confused

    Dazed_and_Confused Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Posts:
    1,831
    Location:
    USA
    Well, if that's true, you hide it well. Quality work, guys. Don't change a thing! :D


    That's an amazing statistic that I was unaware of. :eek: I only wish Microsoft had such an outstanding policy. :rolleyes:
     
  15. Arctic

    Arctic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    46
    I think the Diamonds crew has the right idea. They should take their time and make the product the best they can. I to love all the Diamonds products. They are the best. There is no comparison. Friday I got hit with the Bofra/IFrame Exploits. Of course Mcafee alerted me and I did a scan and it said it was clean, however I do not trust Mcafee as much as I do TDS-3 so I did a scan with TDS-3 and it found the trojan was still resident. TDS-3 cleaned it up. So, yes I say,,, Diamonds take your time and get it right the first time. Don't be like Microsoft and not care about a product and just rush it to market to make a dollar.

    I must say THANK YOU DIAMONDS for all of your wonderful products. I am a very satisfied customer and I recommend your products to everyone I know. ;)
     
  16. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Can one say .... "Norton".

    Acadia
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.