3 comments about ZoneAlarm Internet Security Suite 2008 - 3 User Pack.

1. I lost trust if a company failed me twice.
   As many users found out update version 7.0.047 is a piece of junk, I must roll back to version 7.0.462 to make the software work again.
   This is the second time ZoneAlarm did to their customers or at least, me.
   
   My side job needs me to try out many different (security) software and recommend to my clients, so sorry ZoneAlarm is currently out of my list.
   Also, I need to call and follow up the rebate or they just think it's their money.
   Although Norton is a bit bulky, their software is as good as ZoneAlarm and rebate check arrived within a month and worry free (big improvement compare with past history).



2. You always have to be suspicious about fake customer reviews from those associated with a competing product, so for whatever little this is worth, ZA 7.0.470 seems to work just fine on my computer. It doesn't seem to be causing any noticeable problems and I haven't had any serious intrusions while using it. I don't fully trust ANY one product to fully do the job, so I also use additional anti-spyware and anti-virus software. The other anti-virus didnt find anything. The other anti-spyware product found some minor stuff and one keylogger that ZA didn't tell me about. As I said, it's best to have more than one to increase your chances of being properly covered, and ZA is getting along with my other products. Not going to mention what those are because I don't want anyone thinking I am putting in a plug for someone else. I've been fair and honest. What and who you want to believe is up to you.



3. I installed this software on a PC running XP. After the installation the computer ran painfully slow and could no longer connect to the internet. Rebooting several times did not help.
   
   At that point, I felt my choices were to spend who-knows-how-long trying to troubleshoot this problematic software, or simply uninstall it. I choose the later and the computer was completely back to normal after the uninstall.
   
   I am not a computer novice. I have installed other internet security software packages on other computers with no problems.
   
   I performed the ZoneAlarm installation per their instructions. I find it unacceptable that their installation wizard botches the job.
   
   I should not have to be an IT guy or make phone calls to their tech support to get the product to work. The installation wizard should get it to work. I will choose another product. I recommend you do the same.

5 comments about Kaspersky Internet Security 6.0 [OLD VERSION].

1. After reading reviews at amazon.com,[...] I decided to switch to Kaspersky Internet Security from ZoneAlarm ISS (which was not performing well recently, update failure, etc). Awesome deal from Amazon, it was free after MIR! Installation was not that bad, after a full scan, it detected and deleted some fatal trojans and stabilized my system. My IE used to shut down for some unknown reason (probably because of those nasty worms) for some very popular sites including Sony, Blockbuster, Apple, Cnet, etc, now they all open in IE. Good job here.
   Now, the bad news! This IS is not good for non-technical people at all. I am not a software expert, but have handled and completely understood many softwares (the way it works), not this one. Configuring this software is very confusing. It does not know the difference between the good and the bad! Even for very popular programs/websites, it gives me warning until I add them to trusted zone. For instance, it detects YahooMessenger program as invader. I could tell you more examples, but it could be non-ending. I normally visit one website (anandabazar.com) for the newspaper in my mother tongue (Bengali), but Kaspersky does not allow it to display its fonts and detects it as malicious object (adware). Even if I ask Kaspersky to allow the process, the fonts cannot be displayed either. Only after shutting down the IS, fonts can be displayed. After doing this, when I turn Kaspersky back on, it asks me to delete TDServer Control installed by the website. I don't find any problem with the above-mentioned website, but Kaspersky does not understand it.
   Bottomline: Kaspersky may be regarded as good IS, but not the best. Its limitations cover up its advantages. I have also used the following softwares:
   Mcafee anti-virus, Symantec anti-virus.
   And I must say all are good, but none of them gave me peace of mind.
   I am now planning to switch to Spysweeper anti-virus/antispyware security suite after reading pcmag review. Not to mention, I have used Spysweeper anti-spyware before and stopped using it as it failed to "sweep" (unable to connect). Hope that they have fixed the bugs in the new version.



2. This is typical Kaspersky. It does it's job, more thoroughly than the others. We've used them all, since we're in the business but prefer this.



3. Having switched from Norton Internet Security because it was slowing down my system and was especially bothersome for this reason in addition to the cumbersome functioning of auto-upgrades and regular scans, I see that Kaspersky presents great improvements in these areas.
   
   In addition, it is much more transparent and interactive. In brief, while no security system may be perfect, this, from an end user standpoint, beats Norton and MacAffee hands down because it is smoother, faster, less cumbersome and more transparent. From this standpoint, it's a better made product and a breath of fresh air.



4. Kapersky was a much needed replacement for my computer security.
   
   I switched from Norton to Kapersky Internet Security when my Norton Internet Security program began malfunctioning like the HAL 9000 computer. I ended up having a professional computer whiz uninstall the Norton program. At the time I was told that the challenges I experienced with the Norton program were not uncommon. What were the challenges? I'm glad you asked.
   
   Norton Internet Security began blocking access to any "https" sites. As such you could access sites, such as banking and on-line catalogue ordering, but you could not log-on. The security icon would show that my computer was at risk, but when I clicked to get more information I was greeted with a warning that I was not an administrator. The system would likewise not allow me to disable the firewall or uninstall the program as I was not an administrator.
   
   Since I replaced the security program with Kapersky I have had no problems with my system.



5. This product is totally invisible while it's working. I haven't noticed any degradation in preformance on my computer like I did with Norton.
   
   My only issue with it is that it is a 3-user license. I installed it on 3 computers, thinking that the 1-year license clock starts independently for each machine. Wrong. Even though I installed it on the third machine a full 3 months after I installed it on the first, the expiration date was the same. All three licenses expire one year after it is installed on the first machine (even though I will only get 9 months of use from it on the thirs machine).

5 comments about Norton Internet Security 2008 5 User.

1. Norton Internet Security 2008 is a resource hog. It slowed my 2-year-old computer with 1GB RAM so much that it became unusable. My only option was to remove it. You cannot choose to install just part of it (like Antivirus) -- so I will return it to Amazon for a refund. I've used Norton products for more than 10 years, but I'll find an alternative for 2008. Don't buy it.



2. I have been using the Norton Internet Security suite for several years. Since I have several computers networked at home the multiple user edition is the only way to go. I have never had a situation where anything got past the software. Easy to set up and configure. Definitely worth the peace of mind when family members may not be as cautious where they surf.



3. As an IT Support person, it is mandatory for me to "keep abreast" of what security products are best for my clients' computers, considering the cost and level of protection accommodated.
   And, in my opinion, Norton Internet Security 2008 is "the best bang for the buck" as compared to alternative security packages.
   Norton has (in my opinion) ALWAYS been the "best of the best" (with the glaring exception of NIS2006 - God only knows how that got out of the Symantec Security labs and into distribution) - but there is a price to pay for this protection level, also...
   Yes, it DOES slow a computer down and you'd be better off with as much RAM as you can install with this product installed on either Windows XP or Vista (which already demand large "pools" of memory available for adequate operation anyway...).
   Of some significant note, tho, is NIS2008's tendency to "block" certain software operations that its predecessor (NIS2007) had no problem with.
   Case in point: my own Windows Media computer now can no longer operate the ATI Remote Wonder wireless remote control "applet" if NIS2008 is installed.
   Prior to "upgrading" to NIS2008, the installed version of NIS 2007 worked flawlessly with the ATI Remote Wonder, but NIS 2008 simply will not allow this "trusted application" to function (which, by the way I had to manually "allow" yet still will not work - and even Symantec's own support personnel cannot seem to get to work, either.. At least "so far"...).
   I appreciate the security, fellas, but I'd also like the same level of operability I enjoyed before I "upgraded" to NIS 2008.
   
   For a "normal" users point of view, no other security package compares to the level of protection that Norton Internet Security offers - just be prepared to find "a few issues" as regards "system performance" if you have a microprocessor with only a "single core" running at less than 2.4 GHz and less than 1 GB of RAM installed, and if something that is not on Norton's built-in "trusted application" list that once was working no longer functions, you may hve to "roll back" to NIS 2007 (by the way, if you already HAVE Norton Internet Security 2007 installed - stay there. Just "renew" your subscription. But if you have upgraded - like me - and if you need to 'roll-back' to NIS 2007, the license nubmer for NIS 2008 WILL work on an expired version of NIS 2007 and this will allow Symantec the time it obviously needs to "work the bugs out" of NIS 2008, in the meantime...).



4. Very good product, I have installed more than a doz copies. One mysterious aspect. Nowhere on the box does it mention anti-spam and you would conclude that anti spam is not featured. Wrong - there is an add-on included on the installation disk which, although neither the disk nor the flimsy manual mentions it, does include anti-spam and parental controls. The anti spam is well integrated with Outlook, Outlook Express, and Windows Mail in Vista.



5. This product was an absolute disaster. I previously used Norton Internet Security 2007, which worked fine. I live in China and use my computer for my job, which requires me to use USB flash drives and often connect to the internet, which are dangerous things to do in China because there are so many viruses on Chinese websites. Anyway, the 2007 program always did a fine job of keeping my VAIO running well.
   
   So I upgraded to 2008, and LiveUpdate (the part of the program that downloads the information about the new viruses, etc.) wouldn't work. I spent over 11 hours on the internet and the phone (long distance from China) trying to get some help. After 11 hours I still did not have a functioning anti-virus product.
   
   Avoid this program at all costs.

No comments about Adobe Flex Builder 3.0.

No comments about Adobe Creative Suite 3.3 Web Premium Upsell [Mac].

No comments about Adobe Creative Suite 3.3 Web Premium Upsell.

No comments about Adobe Creative Suite 3.3 Design Premium Upsell [Mac].

5 comments about Microsoft FrontPage 2002 [OLD VERSION].

1. Quite simply this software does not work, and I've been using other versions of FrontPage since it first came out--check out the Microsoft web site--they have loads of 'fixes' for this software. None of the web component functions work, and neither does shared borders. I can't imagine that they would continue to sell this.



2. I read some of these reviews and I must say that 2002 is so deep I think I feel into a hole. As far as the software being difficult, I spent considerable time in the library with some great books. I also bought some books, visual being the best and worked with the software. I took my first order for a web site while I was still learning and let me tell you forms just beat the living hell out of me. What I did was to look at some of the preformed pages of front page and looked at the html andlearned how to use tables with forms and learned even more.
   
   I use front page every day with my ebay items and it is a very professional presentation.
   
   What a wonderful powerful program. I literally have no problem with this program. I don't use the microsoft templates anymore as I make my own using microsoft photodraw v2.
   
   Someday I guess, as I get better I will take some courses in dreamweaver, which I understand is difficult. But Microsoft Front Page 2002 was a piece of software that I was able to challanage myself. Truthfully it is maybe 100 hours of learning and practice, but it is well worth it.
   
   Good job Microsoft, hey, did I say that? In the end if you buy this and think it will be an easy learn, forget it. It is web design. Difficulty is moderate, but you must focus and practice to learn this software.
   
   Take command and get and learn front page, find a good host and boom you are in with a professional website for your business.



3. I started off with FrontPage 97... and gradually worked up to FrontPage 2002. I used to think FrontPage was a godsend, boy was I wrong. Things only work if using MS Internet Explorer for a browser, or just plain doesn't work if your ISP doesn't support it's extensions.
   
   I now use Macromedia Dreamweaver. However, between using FrontPage and being able to afford Dreamweaver, I used a nice product by some folks with a funny name. A product named "HotDog Pro" made by Sausage Software! Funny tho it may be, their software is nothing to laugh at! It is a GREAT product, and costs A LOT LESS than MS FrontPage!
   
   http://www.sausage.com/products.html



4. Microsoft Office FrontPage 2002 delivers on its title's promise -- it is a real solution for creating and managing Web sites. Although I began using FrontPage only from this version, and in 2007 -- when Expression Web and SharePoint Designer have already "hit the road" -- is still is a great program. First and formost, you don't have to perform the tedious problem of coding HTML (HyperText Markup Language) -- instead you can enter what you want the browser to display, like in Microsoft Word. Then, you can easily add hit counters and other Web components. As a "special edition", my copy included some bCentral eCommerce Web components, that make managing a business Web site easy as pie. Therefore, I doubt the popular belief that you can't manage a business Web site with FrontPage. Next, adding scripts and other Office documents is easy -- you don't have "call" the script from the server -- actually, you don't even need a server to do this at all! Instead, you can add or edit scripts in the HTML view, in Microsoft Script Editior, or in Visual Basic Editor. Finally, publishing Web sites is easy with FrontPage -- you don't have to publish everything, but instead, you can simply choose what you want to publish. I probably will be upgrading to neither Expression Web nor SharePoint Designer. But I certainly will upgrade to Microsoft Office FrontPage 2003 sooner or later. Microsoft says that Expression Web is for professionals, and SharePoint Designer is for businesses, and that FrontPage is good for neither of these. But as I found out, FrontPage is good for both.



5. 
   After learning some HTML on my own, and struggling to set up my first Web page, I came to appreciate FrontPage 98. Later, I upgraded to FrontPage 2002. Microsoft had a winner in this affordable, easy-to-use Web page design tool.
   
   I use it exlusively to do all of my Web site design these days. It has a few quirks, and is not always as intuitive as I think that it should be, but, hey--it sure beats doing markup manually!
   
   I like it!

No comments about Microsoft InfoPath 2007.

4 comments about Trend Micro Antivirus 2008.

1. WORST SERVICE EVER!!!
   
   I bought the last version of TrendMicro and it crashed my computer. So I switched to another anti-virus software. A year goes by. Then just a few days ago, I find out that TrendMicro had signed me up for automatic renewal -- without my knowing it. (You have to check an obscure box in the fineprint to prevent automatic renewal.) I went to the site and specified that I did not want to be renewed and got an email confirmation of that. But despite all my efforts to ward off automatic renewal, the company charged my credit card anyway. Don't give this company your credit card, because they'll find every way they can to keep on using it!



2. This is the ONE PC version, with very few features.
   The one you want is the same price:
   
   Trend Micro Internet Security 2008 3-User



3. I purchased the 2007 version of Trend Micro for Vista. It installed easily and is very simple to use. It doesn't slow my computer down like Norton antivirus did. And it isn't as expensive as Norton. The reason I changed from Norton is because after installing the last version of Norton my computer worked much more slowly than before.



4. Trend Micro's antivirus is very fast and, although it does tend to use up RAM, the real time virus scanner uses very little CPU resources on your computer.
   
   But unfortunately you will find this product completely unsuitable because the limitations of this antivirus make it unusable for scanning email.
   
   Trend Micro's antivirus will refuse to download emails with attachments larger than 3Meg. Let me repeat that - emails with attachments larger than 3Meg will stay on your server. And you won't even know it.
   
   Anybody who works for a living knows that emails with big attachments are almost always important emails.
   
   This makes Trend Micro useless for any work environment, whether you work for a big company or a home office, because your important emails will remain on your server and you'll have absolutely no idea that they are there.
   
   Imagine your boss or your client emailing you a PowerPoint presentation that demands your attention - and you never know it's there. Talk about an anxiety attack!
   
   To download an email larger than 3M, you've got to disable the email scan which can only be done in administrator mode on Windows XP/2000/Vista. Of course, that's assuming that you know there's something for you to download in the first place.
   
   Also, since V-COM's products license Trend Micro's antivirus engine, V-COM has the same limitation.
   
   Now, here's the really scary news: neither Trend Micro or V-COM will tell you about this extreme limitation.
   
   And if you search their documentation, you won't find this anyplace at all.
   
   If you call in with the problem of "some of my emails aren't downloading" (and this assumes that you have someone smart enough to tel you that the virus scanner is causing this mess), Support will tell you the same thing: "uninstall the email antivirus". Duh!
   
   Only if you press them, will they finally confess that their email antivirus unfortunately won't allow all of your emails to be downloaded, AND it always has had this limitation, AND there are no plans to change it. And no, they won't refund your money.
   
   Can you hear them laughing at us?