F-Prot for Windows development stoped?

There's a lot of room for improvements:

- Incremental signature updates
- Access to Sheduler and Updater through the RealTime Protector icon.
There's no need to have more than one icon in the tray.
- Refurbished interface. Do away this nineties style.
- For the peace of mind: the possibility to scan every filetype through the
context menu.



> Don't know, but there is no reason to make a major version number change
> unless they feel that they have made major programming changes. Maybe the
> same scanning techniques still work. And if it isn't broke, why fix it?
>
> They are publishing updates very frequently, and that's what really
> counts.
>
> They don't seem interested in becoming a toolbox (like Norton), but are
> sticking to their specialty. My guess is that they are depending mostly on
> subscriptions, not initial purchases, for cash flow. So there isn't any
> motivation to create a new 'version' to sell.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

lover schreef:

> Does anyone know if F-Prot for Windows gets still developed? I think
> version three came out the last millenium and now they are still at 3.14b?
> What will be the next big Windows release? 3.14c at the end of this year? It
> seems the only F-Prot versions they care about are those for unix and linux.

Oh, but isn't that better than Symantec's practice, which seems to
consist in selling a slightly improved (oh well, not always) product as
a wholly new version?
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

lover schreef:

> - Refurbished interface. Do away this nineties style.

I don't use the Windows version so I couldn't care less. Still one can
only hope that if they are working on a new interface, they won't
succumb to the temptation of making it dependent on IE or as bloated as
that of NAV for example.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 10:03:13 +0100, "lover" <lover DeleteThis @nomail.com> wrote:

>Does anyone know if F-Prot for Windows gets still developed?

IIRC they posted here (or in acv) not too long ago that the dos
version was the only one not being developed.


Jim.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

On 7 Feb 2004 16:48:35 GMT, Boyd Williston <boydwilliston.badstring.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "lover" <lover.TakeThisOut@nomail.com> wrote in
> news:c029ku$n71$03$1@news.t-online.com:
>
> > Does anyone know if F-Prot for Windows gets still developed? I think
> > version three came out the last millenium and now they are still at
> > 3.14b? What will be the next big Windows release? 3.14c at the end of
> > this year? It seems the only F-Prot versions they care about are those
> > for unix and linux.
> >
> >
>
> Don't know, but there is no reason to make a major version number change
> unless they feel that they have made major programming changes. Maybe the
> same scanning techniques still work. And if it isn't broke, why fix it?
>
> They are publishing updates very frequently, and that's what really
> counts.
>
I must say, it's nice to see praise for good ol' F-PROT rather than the eternal
damnation heaped upon some of the other software. I'm perfectly happy
with F-PROT for DOS and I hope Frisk doesn't succumb to a case of the bloats.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

"lover" <lover RemoveThis @nomail.com> wrote in message news:<c029ku$n71$03$1@news.t-online.com>...
> Does anyone know if F-Prot for Windows gets still developed? I think
> version three came out the last millenium and now they are still at 3.14b?
> What will be the next big Windows release?

3.15 is due soon, but that will probably be the last of the 3.x series
- most of the Windows development team is busy working on version 4.0

-frisk
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

Sure it's better - I don't want to go it Symantecs way. But now F-Prot for
Windows seems to be in that part of a softwares life where it doesn't get's
developed any longer although still sporadically patches come out. Though
such software is actually dead, the manufacturer usually refuses any
comments and on the newsgroups rumors keep popping up about "something big
is about to come" and "it's not dead". The really true believers among the
users don't even want any changes because:

"why change it if it's not broke?"

It reminds me so much of the situation Adobe keeps FrameMaker in. In
adobe.framemaker is a wishlist thread with feature requests for the next
version which now has a few hundred postings and actually every poster knows
that their wishes will never be implemented. It's so sad.

Maybe the above is a bit exaggerated. I like F-Prot and the FRISK company
and love Iceland because it has no army but fairies and what not - but
F-Prot for Windows really needs a facelift and not just some Botox.




> Oh, but isn't that better than Symantec's practice, which seems to
> consist in selling a slightly improved (oh well, not always) product as
> a wholly new version?
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

lover schreef:

> Sure it's better - I don't want to go it Symantecs way. But now F-Prot for
> Windows seems to be in that part of a softwares life where it doesn't get's
> developed any longer although still sporadically patches come out. Though
> such software is actually dead, the manufacturer usually refuses any
> comments and on the newsgroups rumors keep popping up about "something big
> is about to come" and "it's not dead". The really true believers among the
> users don't even want any changes because:
>
> "why change it if it's not broke?"

Exactly. It works fine, why change it? It has always been like this;
they have always stinted on major releases.

Okay, so it needs some improvements here and there. But there is nothing
dramatic.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

James Egan schreef:

> IIRC they posted here (or in acv) not too long ago that the dos
> version was the only one not being developed.

What a pity.

I fear the day where only GUI scanners will be available. That will be
the Apocalypse, celebrated with fireworks of bloat.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

null.RemoveThis@zilch.com schreef:

> Do you have an estimate of the future of F-Prot DOS? A time when it
> will no longer be useful on Win 9x/ME PCs since it no longer has the
> capabiity of detecting/handling all the malware the Windows version
> handles? Is this time near or rather far off? Will there be a version
> 4.0 of F-Prot DOS?

Or at least a command line version?
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

frisk.TakeThisOut@complex.is (Fridrik Skulason) wrote:

[...]

>3.15 is due soon, but that will probably be the last of the 3.x series
>- most of the Windows development team is busy working on version 4.0

Will there be a version not vulnerable by ZIP bombs (e.g. 42.ZIP)?

Will the command line version be continued/improved (e.g. long file
names _and_ "scanning all local disks"?

Oliver
--
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

Oliver Betz <OBetz RemoveThis @despammed.com> wrote in message news:<402c38cb.12797028 RemoveThis @z1.oliverbetz.de>...
> frisk RemoveThis @complex.is (Fridrik Skulason) wrote:

> Will there be a version not vulnerable by ZIP bombs (e.g. 42.ZIP)?

We are adding bzip scanning, and due to the apperance of some bzip
bombs, we added a feature which should solve this problem - it will
work as well for 42.ZIP and other similar files.

> Will the command line version be continued/improved (e.g. long file
> names

Uhm....what do you mean - the command-line scanner (fpcmd.exe) *has*
long file name handling - it has been supported there since the
beginning.

_and_ "scanning all local disks"

That's not on the to-do list - probably because no customers have
requested that feature.

-frisk
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped? 

Jeffrey A. Setaro wrote:
> In article <c038pb$c6f$05$1@news.t-online.com>, lover.DeleteThis@nomail.com says...
>
>>There's a lot of room for improvements:
>> ...
>>- Refurbished interface. Do away this nineties style.
>
> What makes you think that Frisk & company aren't working on these
> things?
>

Nooooh, I hope they'll leave the nineties style and not go to this stupid
xp/web style that has become so popular. If I want to see a webpage, I'll
start my browser.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Windows development stoped?