Comodo vs Outpost?

Hey guys. i was just wondering which you guys recommend. please put aside the fact that comodo is free. money is not an issue in this decision. reliability, ease of use, and uses small resources are the important factors. thanks!

 

quite happy with comodo. doesn't seem to slow down the system and does what it should do.

 

cool. but why over the outpost? please include that in ur answers! thanks!

 

Comodo has worked fine for me. The learning mode takes a little time to get all approved prg approved for out bound service. This way you know what app are addressing the web. But for startup there is app search.

 

I would like to know if it's better than the free version of zonealarm? Comodo also seems to have other great software for free.

Is is any good?

 

I've been using comodo for about six months now, and it's worked fine. You do need to indicate which apps you wish to allow access to the internet.

I previously used Zone Alarms, and it worked fine. However, it does use more resources, and it bagan to give me problems (I had to manually launch it, then quit out of it before I could connect to the internet)

After spending quite a bit of time trying to figure out what the problem with Zone Alarm was, and why it was causing problems, I ended up simply downloading Comodo, removing Zone Alarm, and haven't really given it any thought since.

 

please keep the topic on comodo vs outpost 3.5 please. for those who like comodo, why comodo over outpost?

 

Comodo is full-featured whereas Zone Alarm isn't. You will need to buy Zone Alarm Pro to get all of the featrures. Comodo is commited to never selling these products.

The Comodo Group is a major provider of security certificates and other online security services. By providing a series of free fully-featured security products such as firewall, anti-virus and encyrption, they hope to leverage this to enhance their name and services.

 

As I told you in a previous thread, choose whatever works for you. I even believe XP firewall is sufficient for most people especially those whose computers are sitted behind a router. Outpost is a very good and I do believe that it is better than Comodo. However it is not that much better to warrant paying for it over something that is free. This is ultimately why I chose Comodo.

At the same time too, the market for personal firewalls is incredibly crowded and leaves very little room for growth. Thus products such as Outpost and ZoneAlarm try their hardest to come up with features to make them stand out. The problem is that such features add to bloat which in turn taxes resources. The freeware market does not necessarily go to such lengths and thus are more likely to be streamlined.

 

I use Comodo, and i'm happy with it.
Well I haven't used Outpost so can't comment on that.

 

How are the other comodo products? (antivirus)

 

I havn't tried it, but I've heard pretty bad things about it.

If you're wantin a free AV, i'd stick with AVG, Avast!, or AntiVir.

 

If there is one thing I've learned is that you can't trust most of the reviews that you read on cnet/download.com. Whether the reviews are Good or Bad.

 

I know; but the average of the reviews usually represents the overall quality of the product fairly accurately.

 

Well I just started using their Anti-Virus product and as an application goes, its very simple and well designed. As far as AV is concerned, I haven't had a virus in years so until that happens, its hard to say. It is very light on resources. I am also using their iVault for managing passwords and like. Not bad but it doesn't work yet on FireFox.

 

Comodo Firewall is good, but the AV consumes lotz of memory. It's the second largest process interms of memory usage, in my PC. (btw 1'st is yahoo messenger)

 

I installed my version this past Monday and so far it only consumes 35K.

 

can we keep this on the firewall topic and not the AV product

 

I've been using Outpost since v2 and I've never actually considered anything else until hearing about Comodo. I've temporarily disabled Outpost and am trying out Comodo (for a few days already), and it seems to be pretty good so far.

It's not really all that much lighter on the system than Outpost. Outpost used to use up about 20+ Mb of RAM, while Comodo uses about 16Mb. After having used Outpost for so long, it's a bit hard to get used to their pop-up dialog boxes. Sometimes, I don't know why they have numerous popups for the same program accessing the same protocol through the same port. The component control seems a bit iffy as of now, I'll have test it out more to see if it is really up to what Outpost offered. The network activity log files aren't as detailed as I'd like them to be; Outlook is superior in this aspect.

All in all, I guess that Comodo is pretty darn good for a freebie. It's pretty lean, fairly easy to setup, and so far seems to be almost on par with Outpost with regard to security and protection, although not in terms of features. If I actually turn out to like it over the next few weeks, I suppose I might just forgo upgrading Outpost to v4 when it eventually gets released (but the new feature-set of Outpost v4 indeed looks tempting...).

cheers!

 

I believe you mean 35000 K or 35 Megs.

That seems quite a bit much, Norton/Symantec range, or more (I remember something like ~25 for them). Of course, if Comodo still feels faster, that's more important.

Avg (Free) only using about 13 Megs on my system.

 

I think all your firewall questions have been pretty much answered. No need to force people to stay on topic. We're not really going offtopic anyways, more like branching off. I think a lot of people (including me) are learning a lot from the branching in this topic, and that's the beauty of message boards.

 

Yes you're absolutely correct