ProSecurity beta 3

Bellgamin

You make a valid point but that is perhaps because a number of people out there do find SSM overcomplicated (despite the fact that your daughter understands it fine) and they happen to be the ones that speak up. These are purely an expression of personal preference and in no way demean the very good product that SSM is by all accounts.

I do not think that anyone in this thread was intentionally panning SSM, most posts making it clear that they were expressing pesonal preferences and that SSM is a good product. If anything the strongest posts were against the new ProSecurity GUI and not SSM.

There is room for all and for all to express preferences in a civilised and constructive way...after all that is one of the the things that forums are about.

On a side note and funnily enough I have just had a look at EQSecure (following a post by Easter) and very much like what I saw...better and more comprehensible GUI than ProSecurity but does not yet cover as much. Having said that the application would appear to have potential for the future...and I for one will be watching it closely.

 

A) Others to watch include but are not limited to...

Emsisoft/Asquared's Mamutu -- check THIS Wilder's thread

Commodo's Firewall beta 3 -- includes HIPS capability very comparable to PS, SSM, EQS etc -- check THIS Wilder's thread

B) Which ones will still be around in several more months? Who knows. My sentiments nothwithstanding, of those I've listed in this thread, the only sure-fire one (IMO) is Comodo. Why? They have the $$. They have the technical staff. They have aggressive leadership. Moreover, the Comodo HIPS is nicely & logically packaged with a firewall (in security program relationships, HIPS is heads//Firewall is tails -- same coin.)

C) AFAIK, the other HIPS programs that I have listed herein are all 1-man operations, & are VERY specialized niche programs. If 2 or 3 of them merged their talents, they might have a chance. Otherwise. . . . .

D) Meanwhile, back at thread -- I liked the previous PS GUI better than the new one. Even so, one must recall that we are STILL discussing a public beta version of PS. One prime purpose of a public beta is to give the friends of PS a chance to point out bugs and express preferences. There4, Jei has not *imposed* the new GUI on us, but is (I think) offering us the opportunity to see if we like it & make suggestions for improvments.

 

Except CFP- all are one man show and sadly I see most of them dying in the future! They simple can,t make enough money to justify the effort put into their development.

 

The way they are all going they all have excellent chances to survive IF they continue development.

 

@Pete- Good-oh. I stand corrected. I also have licenses for both SSM & PS. I RUN both of them, but on two different images.

@Aigle- I thought Emsisoft (a-squared) had more than 1 on staff. No?

 

I was talking of classical HIPS strictly- SSM, PS, EQS, NG etc.

Emsisoft one is a behav blocker like TF and PRSC.

 

O I C. Thanx

 

I like the gui of PS more than SSM, and the gui for eqsecure totally confuses me. But that's just a personal preference. Some guy might like SSM's gui better so what?

But GUI aside I would use SSM Pro over PS.

 

Interested to know why?

I did use SSM pro rather than PS but switched over a couple of months ago on my machine

 

Seems to be a GUI thread now. Let me say, I like the GUI of NG most!

 

This is certainly a possibility. As with any good security product, I will support this with the purchase of a license (where required~ as I have done with PS / SSM etc.). But, I now see a need to activate PS online.
I can understand some need to try and stop "cracked" versions, but, as with any product, with what ever security/ online registration is put in place, the product will still be cracked. It will be users like myself with valid license who could have problems, such as servers being down when activation needed (my setup changes constantly, certainly with testing firewalls with HIPS installed), or the possibility as mentioned, if for whatever reason PS was to stop development and close down.

 

Online activation for such an application is highly un-acceptable.

It means if the product dies anytime, u might not be able to use it any more.

 

This is now required.
If this was in force before I purchased a license, then I would not of purchased.

 

What is sad is that people like me will not ever pay for a software the requires online activation, no matter how good. On top of that I would rather donate money to a freeware company that does not require the online activation.

Most of these cracking groups have a point to prove and believe it or not a lot of them pay for their software.

I have friends that crack software just to get rid of the nag screen so they can properly evaluate it and then turn around and actually purchase the software.

I do not support cracking software, but I feel even worse about purchasing software that requires online activation, so this leaves me not able to use software like ProSecurity at all.

Just my view of things though

 

I will not buy a software license that requires online activiation unless there is absolutely, positively NO other choice for a given software capability that I need.

 

Please re-read my post, I think you are mis-understanding what I wrote.

 

I'm afraid Peter2150 is pretty much forecasting things to come, at least in some of the more prominent commercial security and other (un) related programs, and it is due to mass redistribution of their released products by those underground groups who somehow have the tools & know how to disassemble programming code.

What's to be gain by them from such practice is beyond me, but it's a sure bet if they can open a progam up to modify it's protection, then it's just as easy for them to insert backdoors, time-released viruses, and who knows what all else. A very risky venture on both ends of that mischief.

On-Line activation is likely their only best alternative to some lost sales i suppose and we the consumer buyer just have to go with that flow.

I dunno, i've purchased software where the company sends me a email code and picked up activation from their sites after confirmation of a sale with a reference number.

I will say this, i prefer if at all possible to call my orders in where possible because i feel better speaking with a "live" customer/sales support then hold my breath entering information to a website. I do the majority of my computer software purchases by phone when i can. I always look for the company's phone number on the site if they provide one.

I just realized we are going way off topic here

 

I am not sure that we are that far off topic or off topic at all.

This thread is for discusing features of ProSecurity beta 3 and Online Activation is a new(?) feature.

With all that aside, one of the coolest new GUI features in ProSecurity is how it handles pop-ups. I love how everything turns dark and disabled exept for the pop-up. Whoever came up with this idea(the developer?) is very innovative to use that feature which seams to be built into windows in the first place

 

The feature is optional:

-Settings->Warning Box
-use own desktop

 

It is not a new technique as this is how the Daddy of this type of application, Process Guard, orginally handled its popups (if memory serves) when it was first released but it changed them to a more traditional format because most users did not like the effect. ProSec's developer has been clerver to make the feature switchable so that those that like it can use it and those that don't do not have to.

It is little touchs like that that make me ferverently hope that he is one of the ones that survive.

 

There is no reason for ProSecurity to have trouble surviving as long as he continues development (which he obviously is).

No matter how good COMODO and others get they can never satisfy 100% of the market. I honestly think ProSecurity will be the main competitor with COMODO in the future.