Which Free ZA Version?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by Need Protection, Jan 30, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. What ZoneAlarm free version is the best? I've heard the early versions are just as reliable, work just as well and do so with less resources and bugs. Will version 2.6, 3.7 or 4.5 be a good choice? Will these protect me as well as the latest ones?
     
  2. crockett

    crockett Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Posts:
    333
    Hi ;)

    I'm on XPSP1; I continually switch from OutpostPro(374.370) to ZoneAlarmFree 2.6.357 just for the fun of it. Very different FW's, but never had any problem whatsoever with this version of ZA...

    I like its simplicity and low CPU usage. Newer versions I never grew to like as much as that one.

    No problem to survive the Exploits test on PCFlank, and get a perfect stealth on GRC

    http://www.pcflank.com/exploits.htm

    https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2

    Rgds, Crockett :cool:
     
  3. Jimbob1989

    Jimbob1989 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    Posts:
    2,529
    Why use Zone Alarm? just out of interest.

    Jimbob
     
  4. INTOXSICKATED

    INTOXSICKATED Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Posts:
    485
    Location:
    Suburbia Hell
    i have always liked, and been a big fan, of 4.5. never had any problems with zonealarm until version 5 came out. i wouldn't hesitate to recommend 4.5.
     
  5. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds
    Hi INTOXSICKATED,

    I'm curious to know what kinds of problems you've encountered with v. 5,
    and why you think that 4.5 is better ?

    I've been using ZA (free) for a few years now, and even with v.5 don't seem to have problems with it.

    Please tell me your opinion...It would be greatly appreciated.

    Thank You ! :)


    EDIT: Isn't there a reason why we should always upgrade to the newest build ~ security wise ? Whenever ZA updates, which is unfortunately not very often, it always says something like "Security update".
    Hmmm...just wondering.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2005
  6. INTOXSICKATED

    INTOXSICKATED Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Posts:
    485
    Location:
    Suburbia Hell
    my only problem with versions 5 and up were that they made my system run a little sluggish. it also didn't work well with yahoo messenger. i had all kinds of problems trying to configure za to work well with messenger after upgrading past version 4.5. i know others didn't have the same problems i had, but allot did. i have many posts in the za forums about trying to get the 2 to work together without having log-off problems. since i spend allot of time in chat, this was a big issue for me. after getting rid of za, i was amazed at just how much better everything on my computer seemed to run.

    i will admit, i didn't use the free version of za however. i was using zass, and i never felt secure or safe behind their anti-virus protection. i've switched to sygate and nod32 in za's place and never looked back.

    on an odd note, i ended-up dumping yahoo messenger for yahelite as well. if i never had the problems with yahoo messenger in the first place, i would probably still be using za today (since i did pay for it).
     
  7. INTOXSICKATED

    INTOXSICKATED Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Posts:
    485
    Location:
    Suburbia Hell
    i should add that i spent allot of time in the za forums, and it wasn't until the latest version came out on dec, 2nd, that even the za "gurus" themselves started advising people to finally upgrade past 4.5.
     
  8. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds
    ~INTOXSICKATED~: Those problems you've been having I find rather odd.

    ZA is actually very easy, one of the reasons I use it. All one has to do is
    either 'allow' or 'disallow', when an alert pops up. And thats all to it.

    Even with my YAHOO! messenger, smooth and easy...and I notice no slow down
    of my puter.

    But who knows. Are you perhaps on an older computer...?...maybe that's why
    all those troubles ? :doubt:

    But it's a known fact that some applications work for some..and others don't. We just have to accept that , won't we ? :)
    So, if you're happy with what you've got now...go for it, and I'm happy for you !


    Thank's for the reply.

    P.S. Oh, and yeah, if you used the zass, instead of the free v. I suppose there could be a bit more tinkering and probs involved.
     
  9. INTOXSICKATED

    INTOXSICKATED Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Posts:
    485
    Location:
    Suburbia Hell
    za is definately the easiest to configure, i agree with that. thats what drove me crazy about the messenger problems! anyways, i have a 3.2 ghz p4 sony computer, so it's not that old. i've tweaked the hell out of it tho, so maybe my problems were somewhere in all my tweaking.

    my main problems in yahoo messenger were in the chat rooms after 10-15 minutes of use. if i never went into a chat room, i never had a problem. now that i think of it, maybe the bots were booting me? hmmmm......i still think za is a resource hog. it wasn't until i started using different firewalls that i realized this. i need another drink.
     
  10. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds

    Oh yes, tweaking can be made to actually 'mess something' up.
    I have experience in this...:rolleyes:

    And being in those chat rooms is a pain sometimes.
    I'm almost positive those bots there, were having their 'fun' with you.....and thousands of other people.
    Especially when you go in overcrowded rooms with 'idiots' playing around.
    And you can be as nice as can be...they have no pardon for you.

    I've heard there are some programs that can prevent being booted, but since I rarely go in chat rooms, i forgot where I found it.


    ~cheers~ :D
     
  11. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    Me too. I am not using any ZA product at the moment. But I still have a warm spot in my heart for the oldie but goodie versions. :) First Firewall first love..... just me I guess..... :D
     
  12. snowbound

    snowbound Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Posts:
    8,723
    Location:
    The Big Smoke
    I,ve stuck with ZA+ 4.5 and have no intention of ever upgrading even though it is obsolete now. ;)

    It serves me well as it is. :)



    snowbound
     
  13. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds

    snowbound...if you or anyone never upgrades to the newest version, wouldn't that compromise security ?

    Whenever there IS an upgrade, which is not often as I've mentioned already,
    the message says it's for a 'Security' upgrade - better detection or something to that.

    Just curious why you wouldn't want to 'stay on track' so to say.....?
     
  14. snowbound

    snowbound Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Posts:
    8,723
    Location:
    The Big Smoke
    Until i have a security breach, it will stay as is because i don't want any of the problems associated with the newer versions, plus bells and whistles i don't need that are covered by my other security apps. If it fails me someday i will simply move on to a new Firewall.




    snowbound
     
  15. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds
    OK snowbound, good enough reason, I suppose. :)

    Although the free version really doesn't come with any bells and whistles.
    I wish it did.
    Just simply to block the basics and that's it.
     
  16. INTOXSICKATED

    INTOXSICKATED Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Posts:
    485
    Location:
    Suburbia Hell
    besides, maybe it's just me, but the only thing new about za since 4.5 is the ability for windows security center to recognize za. (which i have disabled anyway). and i forgot the part where za now tells u if ur antivirus is running and up to date. but, do u really need za to tell you if your antivirus is up to date? i never had a problem running za with sp2. and if u look at za release history, most fixes since 4.5 have been done due to what they screwed up since the 5.0 release fiasco. hope this makes sense, i am a drunk you know!
     
  17. snowbound

    snowbound Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Posts:
    8,723
    Location:
    The Big Smoke
    It's a pity they discontinued the + version....

    It allows u to write your own rules along with a few other options, without all that other unnecessary junk added in the later versions.



    snowbound
     
  18. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds
    I actually loved the ZA Pro I had at one time. It had options that in my opinion added more to security - in general I found it much better.
    But after the liscence ran out, I just went back to Basic.

    (What is it exactly you perceive as 'junk', snowbound ? )
     
  19. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds
    Only with the comercial Anti-virus scanners.
    When I got rid of norton, and added AVAST, it warned me I had no virus protection installed. Hahaha.
     
  20. INTOXSICKATED

    INTOXSICKATED Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Posts:
    485
    Location:
    Suburbia Hell
    nat:
    just out of curiosity, but did u have 4.5 pro before ur lisence ran out? u can always revert back to the last paid version u used. i would sure as hell rather have 4.5 pro than any free release since! :D
     
  21. ~*Nat*~

    ~*Nat*~ Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    8,129
    Location:
    Germany/Ohio-USA ~ between two worlds
    To be honest with you, I really don't remember.
    I had the PRO version..oh...maybe 2 years ago ??
    I wouldn't know how to go about it.....:doubt:
     
  22. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    Obsolete....heck I reckon my 2.6.362 would be a dinosaur then :cool:
     
  23. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    That's the best one... ;)
     
  24. crockett

    crockett Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Posts:
    333
    Hi ;)
    See below, and feel the pain :D
    Hello :)
    Please tell me what makes you think so... I'm serious, I'd like to know.

    Rgds, Crockett :cool:
     

    Attached Files:

    • ZA.gif
      ZA.gif
      File size:
      2.1 KB
      Views:
      186
  25. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    I guess the main reason I like 2.6 is because it has absolutely no unnecessary "features". Just the bare bones stateful firewall with some app control. Very light, and gets the job done. I alternate between 2.6 Pro and ZA Plus 4.0. Right now it's ZA Plus 4.0. Both are great though... :)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.