AppGuard is software restriction policy. It is not an anti-executable. Comparing software restriction policy and anti-executable is invalid. I even made that mistake once, but you live and learn.
AppGuard is the better product.
Edit: Despite no requirement to do so, a member here feels sorely affronted by my original post so I will make a clarification to pacify that person.
As I explained to that person this thread is an opinion thread with an opinion poll attached to it and therefore the part of my of original post that states "AppGuard is the better product" reflects my personal opinion and based upon my own experience. Such a statement is permitted since the FTC rules governing advertising and marketing do not apply here.
I am entitled to my own opinions and I am entitled to express them.
Legally, the Federal Trade Commission permits companies to promote their products with claims of superiority over competing products—or over previous versions of the company's own products. A certain latitude of boasts is expected and permitted by the FTC. However, that was not the case here.
Besides, the original post is not an advertisement. It certainly was not a false nor misleading advertisement. And finally, my statements did not harm, nor could they have harmed, any person nor party to the standard required to prove a violation of any state or federal business or consumer protection laws.
AppGuard is the better product.
Edit: Despite no requirement to do so, a member here feels sorely affronted by my original post so I will make a clarification to pacify that person.
As I explained to that person this thread is an opinion thread with an opinion poll attached to it and therefore the part of my of original post that states "AppGuard is the better product" reflects my personal opinion and based upon my own experience. Such a statement is permitted since the FTC rules governing advertising and marketing do not apply here.
I am entitled to my own opinions and I am entitled to express them.
Legally, the Federal Trade Commission permits companies to promote their products with claims of superiority over competing products—or over previous versions of the company's own products. A certain latitude of boasts is expected and permitted by the FTC. However, that was not the case here.
Besides, the original post is not an advertisement. It certainly was not a false nor misleading advertisement. And finally, my statements did not harm, nor could they have harmed, any person nor party to the standard required to prove a violation of any state or federal business or consumer protection laws.
Last edited by a moderator:
