my "fact" was I was not experiencing any bugs on my win10 running CF@cs.
Subjective fact.
Only you can proof that.
Your experience is not reproducible, lot of other Comodo users already reported bugs (even using Win10 and CS variation).
I recall CF being updated several times, but do not recall the dates. Clearly my FWIW.
Last CF update was around 2 or 3 years ago.
But that's no so relevant for a Firewall.
The real problem were and still are the tons of unfixed Firewall bugs.
Folks on the comodo forum are experts with CF?
At Comodo Forum you have Comodo employees, and they're the experts. That's the difference between here MT and Comodo Forum.
At Comodo Forum you have chances to receive feedback directly from the experts.
That said, it's important to mention that at Comodo Forum you have several "Comodo Hard Testers", very advanced users (experienced veterans) dedicating hours (along years) to test several different Comodo products (including CF). One of the participants at Comodo Forum is CS.
Here MT is kindergarten compared to Comodo Forum.
If so, then the "real" experts must have thought those reported "bugs" were minor & irrelevant to protection, since apparently they were not fixed (my subjective assumption
)
Nope.
As I explained you, the main problems were:
1. A shady Comodo Policy deleted Comodo list of bugs;
2. Comodo always lied;
3. Comodo always promised solutions that never delivered;
The 3 factors above exterminated the base of Comodo users.
Bugs never were fixed, and the consequence was the evaporation of Comodo users.
Comodo committed suicide.
(were folks at comodo forum claiming their containment failed and they were infected?)
With all due respect, this contradicts your other statement: "I had no reason to read the Comodo forum and never did."
If you want answers, please go and read Comodo Forum.
I'm not going to answer you. I'm not here to convince you about nothing. If you really want objectiveness, then go and read Comodo Forum.
By the way, your question is interesting because it proofs that only Containment is relevant. Everything else at Comodo is trash (low quality).
You don't care about updates, upgrades, bugs, Win11 incompatibilities whatever. You only care about Containment and infections. And you're right! But at the same time, you become the proof that Comodo is trash = low quality.
Unfortunately, the Containment feature is part of a security software as a whole, you can't isolate a single feature from the rest of the software. If that would be the case, then it would be better to have a Comodo Containment App. But in reality is the opposite! For example, the latest Comodo Antivirus includes the Containment feature. Can you imagine a trashy Comodo Antivirus with Containment? What for? If the Antivirus is low quality (and incompatible with Win11), there is no Containment feature that can make the miracle.
Same logic applies to Firewall, CIS, whatever.
You can't save a security software with a single feature.
I recall someone MT posting "free app," no harm no foul, perhaps "as is" -- use at your own risk, & since CF was working for me, seemed no point in reading the EULA.
As I said, personal opinions are untouchable.
The problem becomes when personal opinions are treated as universal truths.
Was comodo guaranteeing it or offering a warranty? Seems unlikely. Use it or not, up to the user. hopefully the 2024 version will be released before 31 Dec 2024. Peace
That's not the point.
If Comodo offers faulty products, with bugs, no updates/upgrades, incompatible with Win11 etc etc etc... Comodo harms people (who end up with infected computers). That's wrong and also is kind of immoral.
Therefore, it's a matter of Comodo irresponsibility.
But IMHO, the worst problem is here, at MT, a Security Software Forum, where fanboys/girls or other irresponsible people, are encouraging the use of (any) security software with bugs, without updates/upgrades for years, incompatible with Win11 etc.
