One free software better than Process Hacker
- Thread starter ocsi
- Start date
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
Killswitch can be useful as a malware hunter on Windows regular mode but is a bad choice for a process manager. Too buggy and takes forever to load, if you have a hung process you need to kill it would be much faster to just reboot your system then to use Killswitch.
All of the rest PH, SE, PE, TM, etc. launch right up and are ready to kill any process.
All of of those fanboys who thinks Killswitch is the best, I dare you to try the others and compare and you will see what I mean.
Thanks.
All of the rest PH, SE, PE, TM, etc. launch right up and are ready to kill any process.
All of of those fanboys who thinks Killswitch is the best, I dare you to try the others and compare and you will see what I mean.
Thanks.
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
HeffeD said:Earth said:
Uses a spin-off, but isn't a fan of spin-offs... :s
You are of course aware that Process Hacker is a spin-off of Process Explorer?
Process Explorer is a spin off of Windows Task Manager.
System Explorer on the other hand is the grand daddy of process monitors. It offers original features not copied from others. All of the others are just following in its footsteps and still not keeping up. The first version was before Process Explorer and Windows Task Manager on XP.
You can still download the old version for Windows 2K- here. (will not run on Windows XP and newer)
Enjoy!!
Littlebits said:
"hand in the air, screaming, pick me, pick me, im one of those!" :lol:
All jokes aside, i do not have that problem using Killswitch, when i need to stop a hung process for any reason ,it does the job, as well as hunting malware and several other things, which is why i chose it over all the others..
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
Look which process monitor get the best review at Gizmo's Freeware.
It doesn't surprise me since I have been using process monitors since the days of Windows 98.
Enjoy!!
It doesn't surprise me since I have been using process monitors since the days of Windows 98.
Enjoy!!
- Jan 8, 2011
- 22,361
Comodo has ZERO mention of Process Explorer, only Process Hacker.
I would consider PH original, as it's open-source, even if it's based of PE (or Windows TM).
Btw, I use Windows Task Manager (and only trying out Emsi. for reviewing it's effectiveness).
I would consider PH original, as it's open-source, even if it's based of PE (or Windows TM).
Btw, I use Windows Task Manager (and only trying out Emsi. for reviewing it's effectiveness).
HeffeD said:Earth said:
Uses a spin-off, but isn't a fan of spin-offs... :s
You are of course aware that Process Hacker is a spin-off of Process Explorer?
- Jan 8, 2011
- 22,361
Back when KillSwitch was first released there was controversy over it's Source Code (I believe?). In the end, credits were given to Process Hacker's developer. Later I heard Comodo would re-write KillSwitch from scratch, was that true? Thanks.
Earth said:Back when KillSwitch was first released there was controversy over it's Source Code (I believe?). In the end, credits were given to Process Hacker's developer. Later I heard Comodo would re-write KillSwitch from scratch, was that true? Thanks.
They always gave credit to wj32 and provided a link to the PH download. There was a beta release when the credit part of their code missed a merge and wasn't in the build, but that was unintentional and the credit returned with the next beta build.
The controversy was that wj32 wasn't happy with the way they were putting their patented technology into a .dll and not supplying the source code for the .dll, which he said violated the license.
So to avoid any further issues, they wrote their own version.
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
Earth said:Back when KillSwitch was first released there was controversy over it's Source Code (I believe?). In the end, credits were given to Process Hacker's developer. Later I heard Comodo would re-write KillSwitch from scratch, was that true? Thanks.
I don't believe the dispute over license was ever settled.
There has been only one release of KillSwitch since Comodo announced they wrote their own code, as the image posted says "Patents Pending", their is no info about the developers who supposedly wrote the code.
As far as I know there is no info about any future development of KillSwitch. I'm sure it is because of the license issues and problems getting the patents. The project may already be dead. There is so many bug reports since the last release on July 10, 2012 and still no word if a new version is in the works. Process Hacker has had 3 releases since then and System Explorer has had 10 releases in the same time period some of which were betas.
So what is the deal will Comodo release a new version of KillSwitch that will fix the bugs or is the project dead and they have not told anyone?
Thanks.
Littlebits said:
What's to settle? Wj32 complained that they were violating the open source license unless they released the source to their .dll, so they said, OK, we'll no longer use your code. That was the end of that.
If you feel that wj32 isn't savvy enough to decompile the current version of killswitch to see if this is indeed the case, I think you're doing him a great disservice.
As I said during our previous discussions on this topic, if he hasn't said they're copying any of his code, then I feel it's safe to assume they haven't. He was vocal enough when he felt they were violating the open source license, don't you think he would become even more vocal if not only were they still violating the license, but now they were no longer giving him credit? :huh: I mean, I know if it were me, I would be extremely suspicious if a company was using my code and then they went closed source and said they were no longer using my code. I'd do anything in my power to see if they were ripping me off...
As I've also mentioned before, I'm still not quite sure why you think they would be so mind numbingly stupid to say they re-wrote the code from scratch if they were still using PH code, because there are far too many competent code writers that could fairly easily verify if this was the case or not...
Not to mention that I actually asked them this very question. I was told they had nothing to hide, the code was written in-house. And since there have been no comments in the nearly two years since the split from PH from wj32, I see no reason to doubt them.
Littlebits said:
Killswitch 2.0 debuted in CCE 1.8 on September 13th, 2011. I count five or six public (not beta) releases since then.
I'm not sure why you feel it odd that the image doesn't say anything about the developers. Quite often when development is in-house, credit is given to the company, not the developers.
Patents Pending also doesn't raise any eyebrows. That is standard practice. Manufacturers will even put that into the actual molds for items they're manufacturing so it's permanently embedded in the end product.
Littlebits said:
Feel free to carry on with your conspiracy theories, but If you want to give the latest version of Killswitch a try, (Version 6.x) you can download it from within CIS 6. I don't know why it isn't downloadable as a standalone on the website yet. I can only assume they've been too busy with the CIS 6 release.
- Jul 8, 2012
- 835
Well i was using Process Hacker, but then i saw that several members mentioned System Explorer. So installed it to take a look at it, and i have to say that i really like it...so to those of you who mentioned System Explorer...Thank you very much.
Gnosis
Level 5
- Apr 26, 2011
- 2,779
I like Comodo for forcing things shut. I like Process Hacker II for its services tab and interface; easy to read and view.
Who makes System Explorer? I have never heard of it.
No one is mentioning XueTr, A.K.A. PCHunter. It gives you a lot of intel that the others spoken of cannot.
Now that I have gone there, I will go so far as to say that PCHunter would run circles around all of 'em, esp. when considering the mass intel that PCHunter relays.
Who makes System Explorer? I have never heard of it.
No one is mentioning XueTr, A.K.A. PCHunter. It gives you a lot of intel that the others spoken of cannot.
Now that I have gone there, I will go so far as to say that PCHunter would run circles around all of 'em, esp. when considering the mass intel that PCHunter relays.
- Status
Similar threads
