I've been using PC based firewall software for years. I know.. before you techno geeks start streaming in saying "you don't need no stinking firewall".. Not everyone lives in the rose colored glass world of no worries, when it comes to PC protection . First off, I have 4 desktops. One isn't used for nothing more then for me to teach the computer merit badge for my scout troop so it's used a few times a year. But I have 3 that are used daily,and 2 laptops. All have XP except one laptop and 1 desktop. Those have Vista (I know.. sucks to be me). I'm trying really hard to embrace Vista but how do you hug a 800lb tub of lard without getting it all over you? You can't. But I'm learning to just shake hands and move on . Ok.. I'll get to the point....

I just purchased, (yes purchased) Zone Alarm Security suite for the Vista PC's. I got it primally for it's parental controls and IM protection and background monitoring. Virus protection towards the back. My daughter is a text msg, I-M'ng freak-a-zoid (hey.. 5000 text msgs a month average) so I like to keep her laptop somewhat under control . However, I've learned a hard lesson. Don't assume just because it works well on a XP machine, doesn't mean it's going to play well on a Vista box just because it says so on the front of the box . Half of the "reasons for buying" the software does not work with Vista and doesn't even install. Hey, pay 50 bucks and it works well with "OLDER" OS's but the newest cram down your throat OS, no, it won't and one more kicker, though they SAY we will give you your money back, they just told me, "Sorry, we are not offering refunds on boxed versions". Say what??? So, I've pretty much pulled my support and recommendations for ZA. Even for a XP machine. I would load up on ram and hard drive space then install a few programs to gain the same features. I'll still run ZAISS on my xp machines which have copies that NEVER expire but I'll more then likely start looking at the lesser of 3 evils and consider another product as soon as I figure out what will give me the same protection as ZA once did without loading up on hungry resorce hogs.

Sorry for the rant but I really think MS and lots of other companies have really screwed the end user. I have found a large portion of my not so old software doesn't work well with vista or not at all. Luckey for me, I have alternitives but for most people, you don't. Tread softley and ask yourself one important question before buying a new machine. How much are willing to spend after the fact to get your old software or MP3 player and even your top of the line printer to work on that brand new killer desktop.

For those who say "you don't need a software firewall and there are free AV programs all over". Your right, maybe for you, but having 2 teens and a pre-teen, I don't want to spend 8 hours at work trouble shooting telephone network issues, then come home having to spend 8 hrs cleaning out my machines because of some rouge sofware download. I've been CLEAN since I've deployed ZA. It's kept my kids off sites I don't want to have to explain and it's also stopped crap on MY pc that would kill most boxes. So, I'm not sold on the "what happens, happens" as you don't go to sites I go to and since I ONLY use 1 PC for online banking.. I want it more secure then Ft. Knox's gold vault.

quote:

Sorry for the rant but I really think MS and lots of other companies have really screwed the end user.

Exactly why I'm migrating back to Apple. The first home computer we got was the original Apple Macintosh in 1984.

Apple has come a long way since and now, it is essentially a UNIX box with a GUI and the prefered platform of photographers and graphic artists.

And thusfar, only one Trojan Horse has been discovered infecting the Apple platform as opposed to (how many???) for the Windows platform.

Back to the topic, I use a router as a physical firewall and haven't had any intrusion or extrusion problems yet. You are correct when you say that the software firewalls are resource hogs. Something about computer security software that jives with what Benjamin Franklin said about giving up freedom for security and deserving neither.

For some wierd and warped reason, I still miss the UNISYS BTOS & CTOS work stations that consisted of the Coast Guard SWS-II - even though it was a command line based text system. Security, firewalls & anti-virus applications were not really a problem then.

Apologies for the reminising.

RM1

Have you tried installing it as administrator under XP SP2 compatibility mode?

Yep. Doesn't matter at this point. I took it back to BB after realizing that it had already been sold back in august and re-shelved. I ended up going into one of my vista's PC and playing with network security settings. Seems any methonds of trying to avoid vista's settings (installing under the XP SP2 mode), causing the program to crash when run. I'll keep it on my XP machins (3) and let it stay on my 2 vista machines as is.

Mark.. Though macs are better in some areas of the PC.. just because you can't pop the hood and "work" on things isn't always a good thing. I will stick my neck out here and say if not for the PC's, we wouldn't have as many IT types having (forced) to learn the in's/out's of PC's/software. My oldest spent 6 hrs at school today working on the school newspaper. They use MAC's for the desktop publishing. We used MAC's at RM/TC school for our DTP till we were FORCED to start using our templates for the WORDPRO on the Unisys boxes. The MAC's were retired. I don't mid cracking the box or tweaking the software, but I'm getting a little fed up of it being REQUIRED and being a never ending task almost weekly.. With the FOOT plus of snow we are to get tonight, I have better things to do.. oh wait, between doing a XP restore on my 11 years olds laptop and dealing with ZA this week, I pulled the snowblower out of the shed, fueled it up, ran it for about 20 minutes, lub'd it all up and parked it int he garage.. ready for this weeks snowstorm..

Dennis,

At this point in my life, I am more interested in the graphics capability of the Mac. As I mentioned, the Mac is the prefered platform for photographers and graphic artists. As I have all but bailed out of the wet film darkroom, the digital darkroom is now one of the most important parts of my photographic work flow.

Having compared between the two platforms, I much prefer the Mac as it presents the most accurate reporduction of colors, tones, shades and contrast between the two.

To be sure, the PC probably is the better of the two when it comes to business operations such as word processing, desk top publishing and spreadsheet operations.

I vary rarely go "under the hood" anymore anyway.

Regards and 73s,

Mark

I am sorry to hear your pains with Vista, No intentions to "upgrade" to that mess, yet.

With XP being around for so many years, I think it may be around for even more. The curve of upgrades and the lead or lag of hardware upgrades has reached a point where unless you have to buy new hardware, XP and existing hardware are good for many more years. Ran XP on .5 gig and a PII450 CPU. Upgraded to a PII733 CPU and it runs many programs including a number crunching satellite tracking program.

The XP firewall works great, but did not get along with Norton, Norton finally pooped out on us, after an upgrade on line, and after numerous attempts at customer service, we deleted the whole mess and now run Avast for free. A local system administrator at a hospital uses it with good success. That, the XP firewalls and the Router firewall keep the home system safe. Avast found tons of virus junk on the two computers that Norton had missed.

Mark, Ah the Mac. Bought a 512 back in 1985 wish I had waited for the machine with the SCSI port and upgradeable memory. Gave up Macs because the selection of software for genealogy and Amateur radio was nill by 1999. Owned a 512, LCII and a Performa 636. Solid hardware and software for the most part. Smartest thing Mac did was go to Unix base and Intel processors and other PC style hardware. Actually, developing alternative platforms for the internet such as the iPhone may just undermine Gates yet.

Might end up there again with a Mac some day. Local photographer friend here uses macs for digital photography as well.

quote:

Mark, Ah the Mac. Bought a 512 back in 1985 wish I had waited for the machine with the SCSI port and upgradeable memory. Gave up Macs because the selection of software for genealogy and Amateur radio was nill by 1999. Owned a 512, LCII and a Performa 636. Solid hardware and software for the most part. Smartest thing Mac did was go to Unix base and Intel processors and other PC style hardware. Actually, developing alternative platforms for the internet such as the iPhone may just undermine Gates yet.

My first Mac didn't even have a hard drive. Just two floppy drives, one for a floppy containing the OS, the other alternated between a floppy containing the applications software and a floppy where your stored your data. A frustrating operation in Juneau, Alaska where the electric power wasn't always reliable, especially during winter with cold winds howling down the mountains from the Juneau Icefields.

If I remember correctly, the first Mac had about 16K of RAM but was a hell of a lot better for writing than a typewriter and graphics with the primative MacDraw program. Even these early Macs had a pretty good Solitair program and with Hypercard, some interesting strategy games.

My biggest pain is the arse with the PC (MS XP) in using the Adobe Photoshop application is that what you see on your monitor isn't necessarily the output you're going to get on the printer. Colors can be hundreds of shades off and contrast/exposure completely fuked up despite how well and carefully you calibrate the monitor. Not necessarily so with the Macintosh system, which is why it is prefered by most photographes and graphic artists.

Says a lot about the Mac now that it's being retailed in both COSTCO and Aafes exchanges.