Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by mrhero, Nov 28, 2005.
But unfortunately it isn't version 4 . It is 3.16d.
*Turns green and rips shirt off*
Oh no, I didn't need to see this.... Something else to try over the weekend!
I can't get the file at the moment. I guess their servers are overwhelmed with the loading caused by the new release. One to re-try over the weekend, perhaps.
The servers were having problems yesterday. They're fixed now, since I was able to get it today.
Latest word from the sales dept. is that version 4 will not be released until next year. They don't know when, either. My personal opinion about the delays is the following: F-Prot for Windows supports many versions. They are probably having to work hard to make it run fast (always one of their top priorities) and stable on some older versions of Windows. Even document readers (Adobe Acrobat, for example) don't always support Windows 98. Antivirus software is much more complex than these, so writing it must be extremely difficult. They won't release it until it is right, which is the right way.
Now, I would like to see a beta (even a buggy one), but I can understand their reasoning behind not releasing one. Some (not blaming anyone here) people judge and review beta software, and complain all over the Internet about how bad it is, while not remembering that it is a beta and notifying the vendor so the problem can be fixed. FRISK doesn't want to gain a negative reputation from a beta.
My only big problem with the current version is the Updater. It doesn't integrate with the automatic checker that notifies Windows Security Center for one thing. The other thing that bothers me is that it forces its way out on the Internet without checking for an active connection. It's not unusual for my laptop not to have an Internet connection when I am away from home or work and there are no wireless networks that I'm authorized to use. On top of that, if the updater fails, it won't check for updates again until the next regularly scheduled time. This may result in a loss of protection if one doesn't pay attention. Incremental updates would be nice for users on a slow connection, but this feature can cause massive amounts of pain if not implemented correctly. The current version makes it easy to get the signatures manually, which is also important and should be maintained in future versions.
In terms of protection and speed, the current version is excellent. It is also extremely stable, as long as fast user switching isn't used in XP. I've seen other programs have trouble with this feature, but FRISK says that it will be fixed in version 4.
With the recent update, the proposed release of F-Prot 4 before Xmas was highly unlikely.
Apart from trying to run on a range of OS's, they must be having difficulties trying to maintain it's low footprint with the enhanced features.
Further, maybe they have seen/heard what some of the competition will soon release- KAV 2006 and NOD 3- and are now trying to add these new features to the package, e.g. proactive defense and a limited firewall?
However, if not releasing an open beta they should have least indicated what new features may be available in F-Prot 4.
It's just a pity that they have given release dates now several times which have not been met. Maybe they should have taken a leaf out of Command's book and kept very quiet!
Although not disputing that F-Prot will still give you good protection, I have moved on to other AV's that offer me basic features which I need; incremental updating, (as I am restricted to dial-up at home) better configuration of the RTM and a file/folder exclude for the running Guard.
I for one hope they don't add all those other features. All I want in an AV is an AV. The new KAV2006 beta's are loaded with all kinds of stuff. I been beta testing it, but for now am abandoning the effort. They keep adding features but the bugs remain. I have licenses for both F-prot, and KAV, and am going back to F-prot.
Yes, I would be surprised if KAV/KIS 2006 goes gold in early January as they appear to still have a lot to do. The problem of trying to fit in so many new features. But I am sure they will pull everything together soon
But, F-Prot could have released any new version in small steps; just more configuration of the RTM and an exclude feature would have been a good start.
I agree with you. If I need a firewall, I will buy a firewall. If I need a kitchen sink, I will buy a kitchen sink.
Not having incremental updates is a major drawback
Yep. With computer finally going faster again. ( Intel side........ past 2 year i dont see any performance improvement at all )
And KAV uses less memory usage than anyone expect. I officially gave up waiting for F-prot.
I am wondering if version 4 will EVER come out at all.
Geeez...we were promised this a year ago! I too have given up. I really liked FProt except for horrible GUI for XP. They could have least fixed that by now. I doubt they are ever going to get version 4 out.
They should get it out in mid-to-late 2006, and they probably want it to support Vista
Good point. One of the biggest advantages of F-Prot is that it runs fine on the oldest computer in the house, a Celeron 466 with 192MB of RAM and Windows XP.
I don't think so, since they have given no indication of this kind of feature. If the virus scanner function is good enough, there is no need for a limited firewall, since nothing should get past the virus scanner. The built-in firewall in XP does a good job for inbound protection and there are free software firewalls for those who have older versions of Windows.
In the end, these features have a tendency to be unnecessary bloat that goes against the entire F-Prot philosophy.
Nothing has ever been posted on the web site, but emails indicate that it will be much more automatic in terms of updates (yes, incremental updates will be included) and dealing with viruses in general. It will supposedly include more options as well, such as configuration for real time protection for Windows XP.
To be honest, most software developers would be better off with this approach. When one hears that a new version is almost ready, he/she will probably wait, making it more likely for the person to select another product or nothing at all.
History has indicated that they will not wait for Vista if F-Prot 4 is ready first. In the past, support for new operating systems has just been included in point releases.
(ending all quoting...)
As for everyone that wonders if v4 will ever be released, I'm sure that it will. FRISK is an honest company that cares about customers.
I had told myself that I wouldn't renew my subscription if version 4 wasn't released by November of this year, but I decided to renew it early in October. The speed, price, and support is making me come back.
Psst... if anyone from FRISK Software is hanging out here, I would like some screenshots of whatever's currently under development.
LOL........ you seriously need to rethink this sentence. As i believe this logic of security is untrue.
But to be honest i haven't see developer misses their release date by nearly 3 years. ( Apart from Microsoft Windows Vista ) Although they never officially gave the press release. But sales department do represent the company.
Um.... may be not this time? Since Vista is so much different in every aspect. I dont think a dot release will cope.
While some kind of firewall is important, we're talking about a virus scanner, not a firewall. Many people don't like the bloat from suites, especially if they have other solutions. I'm not going off topic by discussing firewalls right now.
Vista is quite different, but FRISK Software doesn't seem to care much about high version numbers. They have already had enhancements to the product (especially regarding the scanning engine) that they could have used to justify bumping the version number. However, they didn't.
They probably already have it running on Vista in some form. Even if version 4 comes out before Vista, it may be almost ready to support it. Full support can always be addressed closer to the release date of Vista.
I might email them on this to get an official answer.
Separate names with a comma.