News and Reviews > Best Firewall

agnitum outpost v3 - the horror?

<< < (4/7) > >>

db90h:
I agree. Like all things tainted and twisted by money, ZoneAlarm's formerly superior software has become bloatware designed only to part people from their hard earned money.

Most people don't need anything more than the built in XP firewall. As of SP2, XP offers some protection against unauthorized outbound traffic, but if there were to be anything people might need in combination with XP, its what ZoneAlarm used to be -- a tight little outbound traffic monitor. 

Oh.. and for those people still running anything but XP (or server 2003), please don't reply saying 'what about people who aren't running XP?'. If you aren't running XP, its time to upgrade. Get over your fear of change and just do it.

Anyway.. Creating a very simple one wouldn't be so difficult at all. Making it secure, compatible, and user-friendly would, however, be a daunting task.

Carol Haynes:
When I had calmed down enough to think rationally (and not want to hit anything) I tried again with ZA.

It is now running pretty well (I even got the free version working).

Oddly if you install the free version first and then allow it to upgrade to the full version it doesn't seem to switch on all the bells and whistles. Leaving them switched off seems to leave a decent firewall.

I think I will leave it until the end of the 15 day trial and then just use the free version, at least for the time being. I don't spend hours tweaking my firewall anyway so the basic free version should do the trick.

GBark:
                                          CAUTION: long post ahead.

Mouser,

Today I decided to check out any recent updates to the Outpost Pro firewall review page and your red warning text hit me like an old Hai Karate slap! I was going to immediately slam out a scathing reply; or at least fire off a long defensive post. Fortunately I decided to follow your links to the OPP forums (where I'm a long time reader and occasional poster) and find out what happened to change your position. After all, I too have been using OP since the OP Free days and your sudden change of heart caught me way off guard.

I read your posts over at the OPP forums and the followups and then checked out the rest of the posts here. (I was beginning to calm down somewhat.) Then I factored in the other posts at the OPP forum that I've followed over the past 4-6 months (since version 3.x was released.) I don't read every thread, but I'd say probably75% make it to my eyes.

I say all that - to say that I do think that you may (I say MAY) be overstating the situation. I use OPP v3.0.543.5722 (431) running under WinME and, yes, I have some problems with the current version but nothing like BSOD's or the like. Many (most?) posters at the OPP forums run XP and have been able to get OPP to run acceptably well with a little (lot?) tweaking.

What I'm saying is that perhaps you could clarify your statement. OPP is really not for the ZoneAlarm Free type of user. I know the promos claim it works "Out of the box" and all, and I suppose it does, usually, but it really shines for people that like to "get their hands a little dirty" by refining the various system and application rules. The recent addition of the "quick-tune" plug-in and the anti-spyware plug-in do smack of ZoneAlarm's propensity for bloat, but they and any/all of the plug-ins can be turned off without any cost to system stability or resources.

I believe that most users that are willing to dig into the myriad of settings, rules options, plug-ins and the like can, (with the most excellent help of the OPP forum admins and users) get an OPP installation that will be second to none in inbound/outbound security and configurability.

Granted, there are some  hardware/software combinations that just don't work out, but is that so surprising when one factor is  as low-level as a software firewall must be? Given the simple fact that there exists such a large and ever-growing, very dedicated, OPP user following (despite Agnitum's direct support being quite possibly the worst in the industry) is direct evidence that the program is worth some effort.

Well, I guess I still ended up with a long and somewhat defensive post, but certainly different than the one I started to write. At any rate, I hope your having taken the bold step of such a recommendation will impact Agnitum in a positive way. I respect you tremendously for having taken the time to post your concerns and an explanation in a calm and reasonable way on both this forum and over at the OPP forums. I know the mods there value your input and candor.

There's certainly no doubt that OPP could be greatly improved and perhaps your involvement will help in some way. Meanwhile here's hoping that anyone who wants to "give it a go" will stop by the OPP forums (linkto:"http://www.outpostfirewall.com/forum"). They make the effort a lot easier!

Sorry for the long post. Keep up the great work here!

mouser:
GBark thank you as well for your thoughtful and reasonable comments.

i've softened a bit since that post and i did add that big red warning in the heat of anger.  i think you grasped my motivations for keeping that warning up there, and that's the hope that somehow someone in agnitum will see it and start to take seriously the need to make some changes to their current approach, and start to take stability and bugfixing more seriously.  for a security app it's extremely troubling that they seem to have such a cavalier attitude about fixing bugs.  that troubles me greatly.  if not for that user run forum i wouldn't go near the program.

having said that, i have always been a huge fan of outpost - the user interface and the design approach.  and i've really been a cheerleader for it, which is partly what makes me feel like i have somewhat of a right to be hard on them when i think they are heading down a dangerous path.  i don't want them to go the way of kerio and tiny and keep adding features before the previous ones are stable.

I *DO* still recommend people try outpost - if it works well for you for a week or so, then go for it.  but i don't feel like i can recommend people buy it until i see some progress on their part at devoting some more attention to bugfixing.

if agnitum is listening, and want some advice here's some concrete suggestions:
1) put up a public bugtracker or at least list of known bugs and state clearly an intent to fix them in a timely fashion.
2) have official paid agnitum support personell interact on the forum - task them with collecting problems users have.
3) commit to making a stable and secure program first, and adding extras like spyware and antivirus code second.

GBark:
Mouser,

I think we're really on the same page here. Agnitum direct support is truly abysimal. The forum is what makes the program useable. If I wern't such a glutton for punishment, and desirous of a secure system, I'd never have stayed long enough to make it work.

I think your suggestions are exactly what Agnitum needs to do to effect a turn-around in what's left of their public image. They should have done those things years ago. They are, like aliens or something. Maybe Moulder was right; the truth is out there, but you really have to work to find it.

My license recently expired and I don't plan to renew until I read several week's worth of reviews whenever the next update is released. If they haven't fixed a lot of the known (some from several versions back) problems I'll probably just stay with version 3.0.543.5722 (431).  :-\

Ya know, I don't remember having these headaches with my Osborn-1 and it's CP/M operating system.  ;)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page