HIPS in Online Armor and Comodo Firewall

Then to be fair they MUST to warn the people on the very first page of their site that people should not trust their results because results may be wrong.

 

Then why would anyone bother look at the results then?

 

This is true, nobody wants to look at the wrong results. But then there are the options:

1.) to publish the correct results (preffered)
2.) do not publish results until they are checked at least twice by different people.
3.) to warn the people the results are incorrect.

Either way is good. But current way is not. Current results disinform people pretending to be correct.

Do you really not understand what I'm talking about ?

 

But since this is community run we dont always have the people to check each and every firewall twice or more. There is a system where results are averaged if there are multiple testers for a single firewall.

1) Possible
2) Also good
3) ??

I can tell these ideas to the group.

 

It is indeed a top-notch product, but I simply don't want to spend any money on security products at this time, and CFP is slightly better-featured than OA free.

That is impressive. Still, I'll stick with Comodo because of the automatic updates and some other features. I expect Comodo will also patch their vulnerabilities quickly. Plus, I'm hopeful that the ThreatCast feature will evolve into something beneficial.

I agree, Melih comes across as quite reactionary and immature in his comments. Strange behavior for a CEO. But that doesn't detract from their product.

I don't know about the results (OA was pretty close to Comodo actually), but the table was definitely misleading in making it seem like you have to pay for OA to get that level of protection. You don't, the free version offers the same protection AFAIK. I thought this was pretty slimy. (Edit: plus, it should be "Armor," not "Armour." ) So I'm really rooting for OA, but the economics of the situation make it difficult for them, since most people (like myself) like full-featured free stuff, and the paid OA is probably Tall Emu's only significant revenue stream.

 

Seems like you missed something.
http://www.tallemu.com.au

BTW I don't understand this never ending fanboy rivals, instead of being happy about top free apps to choose from, too many are focused on this who is biggest who is best charade.
What a waste of lifetime.

Cheers

 

That's why I said "probably," since I wasn't sure. Anyway, I'm glad to see that Tall Emu does indeed have another revenue stream. It would be pretty unfair if OA was their only revenue and then Comodo was like, "Here, we got the same thing for free!"

 

Big and small companies come and go all the time. The ones that survive must have a loyal consumer base and new fresh ideas to succeed.

I just hope that both Online Armor and Comodo will continue to improve and grow in the coming years.

It would be nice if Online Armor would have a lite paid version sometime this year. Like a 20 to 30 dollar range. Advance Firewall and full Keylogger setting only version.

 

I think tests like Matousec's will certainly encourage this.

At the risk of going OT may I ask why? Is price the issue, or is it just some features that you do not want to have, or both? Maybe best to send me a PM or start a thread at the OA forums.

 

I have received plenty of email or PMs from people who have said that they transferred to OA paid from a free product (or another paid product) just because they liked OA better, found it easier to use, loved the GUI, all sorts of reasons.

Of course - I get a lot more emails about people choosing OA Free over other products