firewall without all the bloat
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: Microsoft Office Live Beta
Next: Avira AntiVir
From: Comodo on 1 Sep 2006 21:18 »Q« wrote: > "Comodo" <melih(a)COMODOGROUP.COM> wrote in > <news:1157151632.302403.184860(a)e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>: > > > »Q« wrote: > > > >> solving the PR problem you have at the moment here. > > > > eh? > > > > which PR problem? > > I thought you considered it a problem that some people don't trust your > software, and I thought you were posting in this thread to try to get > them to reconsider. If you don't perceive a problem, I have no idea > why you have made any of your recent posts. I won't waste any more of > your time with suggestions about how to solve the problem you (don't) > have. There is a big difference between a PR problem and few guys opinion! > > > There are no questions about launchpad, just unfounded opinions! > > First you said my impression that you haven't answered questions here > is wrong, and now you claim that there aren't even any questions. > There are questions in this very thread which people have asked you > specifically, and you still have not answered them. > > > I am more than happy to answer any specific questions about the > > Launchpad! > > Yet you seem even happier not to answer them. > > > BTW: For everyone who said we don't listen to our users : Today we > > launched CPF v2.3 and it has the option to disable launchpad as was > > requested by our users! > > But launchpad still comes bundled with the firewall's installer? (Note > the "?" symbol, indicating that a question is being asked of you.) What you refer to Launchpad bundling is a wrong statement. Let me explain why: Launchpad is not and cannot be a stand alone product. Its simply a control panel indicating other products Comodo makes available to users. Nothing else! So does the firewall at installation have a feature that shows the users what other products they can have from comodo should be the question. And answer to that is yes. Can the user simply disable this? (look its a question mark! :-) ) the answer is yes they can! Don't you think you are a tiny bit OTT talking so much about a simple feature that promotes the Company's own products in a really tasteful manner? (and majority of these products are free). > > -- > »Q«
From: Comodo on 1 Sep 2006 21:20 Bear Bottoms wrote: > On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 18:00:32 -0500, Comodo <melih(a)comodogroup.com> wrote: > > > Are you certain v2.3.4 will allow users to disable Launch Pad? > > > -- > I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com Yep and here is how... right click on the launchpad icon on the sys tray icon click on options untick Start Comodo Launchpad on Windows startup. Voila! Our user's wishes granted! :-) Melih
From: Comodo on 1 Sep 2006 21:26 John Fitzsimons wrote: > On 31 Aug 2006 19:20:37 -0700, "Comodo" <melih(a)COMODOGROUP.COM> wrote: > > >»Q« wrote: > > < snip > > > >> AFAICT, every time you have been asked about what Launchpad does and > >> why it is bundled without the option not to install it, you have not > >> answered but only invited people to your forum to discuss it. I don't > >> have any idea whether Launchpad is good, bad, or ugly, but I'm pretty > >> sure that if you won't answer questions about it here, people here will > >> continue to be suspicious of it. If all you want is to make your forum > >> users happy, posting answers only there is fine. If you want to > >> satisfy people in a.c.f as well, the only way to do it is to post > >> answers here also. > > >> »Q« > >Q > > >you will see that your statement above is not true > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/browse_thread/thread/8a40c609cc084cf/eb27ceb3bd5b0bd1?lnk=st&q=comodo+firewall+launchpad&rnum=3&hl=en#eb27ceb3bd5b0bd1 > >pls check the others ngs where i have explained the reasons many times > >before. the above is one example. > > Sending people to a thread of 149 posts ? < ROFL > A rather creative > way to avoid answering a direct question. > > >The reason why I refer people to forums is because, all the arguments > >have already been made and all the explanations have already been made > >and decision about launchpad's future already has been reached by its > >users. > > Looks like you are only interested in "preaching to the choir". Your > "users" are obviously not going to represent the general computing > population. But of course you already know that. > > >Its all there, publicly available. No point in re-writing all > >that hence why I refer to the link. > > Nobody asked you for a re-write of everyone's comments in your forum. > Only answers to direct questions that have been asked of you. > > >If you think we haven't covered any > >point about launchpad, we would love to hear from you! As you will see > >our users are sophisticated and tech savvy users who know what they > >want and what they need! And they have been great at helping Comodo > >shape its firewall! > > >Melih > > There are plenty of people here who are "tech savvy users who know > what they want and what they need!" > > I guess you haven't been paying attention. > > Regards, John. John Your arrogance about Comodo users is saddening! Comodo user's range from most tech savvy guys to novices! They all appreciate what Comodo is doing for them by spending huge amount of investement to protect their PC! Do you have a question about Launchpad? Melih
From: Comodo on 1 Sep 2006 21:28 John Fitzsimons wrote: > On 1 Sep 2006 16:00:32 -0700, "Comodo" <melih(a)COMODOGROUP.COM> wrote: > > >»Q« wrote: > > < snip > > > >> I don't doubt it, but it's irrelevant to solving the PR problem you > >> have at the moment here. > > >> »Q« > > >eh? > > >which PR problem? > > If you don't see that you have a PR problem then you obviously aren't > paying attention. > > I have no idea why you would want to alienate people who could > recommend you products/site but I guess that is your choice to make. > > >There are no questions about launchpad, just unfounded opinions! I am > >more than happy to answer any specific questions about the Launchpad! > > Okay, how about this specific question.. > > Can one now install your firewall without installing the Launchpad ? > > Going by your past performance I expect that you will avoid giving a > direct answer to this question. > > >BTW: For everyone who said we don't listen to our users : Today we > >launched CPF v2.3 and it has the option to disable launchpad as was > >requested by our users! > > >Melih > > Looks like you aren't paying attention. Many people don't want to > "disable" Launchpad. They simply don't want to install it. > > Regards, John. John Launchpad is NOT an application! Its not a bundle! Its a feature! Some people want this feature some people don't! So we have given the option to disable the feature! Melih
From: John Fitzsimons on 1 Sep 2006 21:37
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 13:32:08 +0000 (UTC), "In_Parentheses" <quoder(a)demonstrand.um> wrote: >MLC <marialuisac(a)gmail.com> wrote in news:7wdcg783frff$.dlg(a)maluc.it: >> venerd? 1 settembre 2006 In_Parentheses ha scritto: >>> Ah, I already wondered when the "Quoting police" would come in. >>> Peter: you're boring, a PITA, and this is usenet alt (still >>> unmoderated), so either ignore the thread, or kill file me, but stop >>> interefering with a discussion if you have nothing to add to it! >> Well, I'm boring you me too, but your laziness makes unreadable an >> interesting thread. It's not about moderated or unmoderated group, >> it's about not wasting bandwith, money, time, expecially for the few >> of us who are still on dialup. >> I think it shouldn't cost you too much to fulfill Peter's polite >> request, which is also mine. Of course we can killfile or use other >> methods to avoid this hassle, but maybe we'd rather read also your >> contribute to this unmoderated _and_ well-mannered news group. >> I still hope in your disposition to favour our request. >Bon giorno Marie Luisa, >But someone plunging into this thread starting at your post wouldn't have >any clue whatsoever what this is all about, wouldn't they? They would if they looked at previous posts in the thread. >The idea, in >contradiction to your statement of me/us being "lazy" is that newcomers >to this thread can reconstruct what this all is about from the message at >any point in the discussion; given the number of replies to it, and if >everyone would cut the post to what they were replying to, the thread >would be mutilated in a terrible way, and even worse to read. It is usually a matter of courtesy to in include what one is commenting on and EXCLUDE what one isn't commenting on. Using your logic, if one added a reply to post 140 in a 140 post thread they should include all of the previous 140 posts. Er..no. Not a good idea IMO. >BTW: Calling someone "lazy" is not exactly what I think of as being >polite, but perhaps the norm for that is different in your country. The overwhelming reason why people quote all of a previous post is laziness. That doesn't apply to 100% of posters. Maybe only 99%. You may be in the 1%. >BTW2: I am absolutely allergic to people telling me what to do, and what >I shouldn't, in these "unmoderated" newsgroups; and I must say that the >"moderation level" of acf has been quite high in the past, I just hope >that doesn't start all over again! There is a difference between someone giving sound advice and "moderation". You appear to not see any difference between the two. Regards, John. |