Comodo Firewall vs. PC Tools Firewall

I'd like to get opinions on which free firewall is better--Comodo or PC Tools. I have Comodo on my Vista laptop and PC Tools on my XP desktop and it seems to me that PC Tools is easier to understand. I'm wondering, though, if there is some dominating reason to use one or the other. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

I've not used Comodo's firewall but believe it is considered one of the most(if not the most) effective from a security stand point. PC Tools firewall is considered one of the easiest to use and quite effective. I've used the PC Tools firewall and liked it.

One complaint about Comodo's firewall seen quite often is it's configuration complexity. A complaint I've seen numerous times(in the past) about PC Tools firewall is, when booting, a connection will be established before the firewall is up and running.

Given that the firewalls are already installed, working properly and not interfering with other installed applications, in the case of Comodo I would be inclined to spend more time learning how to configure it before going through an uninstall, a proper clean up procedure and then installing a different firewall.

When switching from one resident security application to another, if the sequence of steps for removal of the first security application aren't followed correctly, problems can and many times do crop up when the second security application is installed.

 

I've been very satisfied with PC Tools Personal Firewall. Not bloated with running processes or NT services like many other firewalls. Sheer simplicity and it updates itself. Remember to turn off Windows firewall when using another firewall, unless Windows firewall is forced off when installing or running your preferred program.

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

comodo only firewall evaluated at 100%

http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php

 

wow!

 

What removal and "clean up" steps would you recommend for either PC Tools Firewall Plus Free or Comodo Firewall?

I am considering replacing PC Tools FW with Comodo (firewall Only) since Comodo has a higher protection rating form the latest matousec evaluation and some people have reported smoother system/ browser operation with Comodo over PC Tools.

 

These couple of ratings from the matousec link, posted earlier, explain it better than any comments needed, IMO.

Bazza

 

I think a LOT depends on the OS you are using.

I have XP SP3, and I use PC Tools Firewall Plus, and have had no issues with it at all. Very user friendly, and no problems with it. I like it quite well.

I think it would be good to hear what some Vista users are using, because some OS will work better on one, and not the other.

 

I personally use Comodo (without the AV portion) on all my machines.
If you have all your defensive (antispyware, AV, and other programs you want installed) in place BEFORE you install Comodo, you will not get as many nags when you use them.
And it automatically disables the Windows firewall when being installed
A reboot is required to finalize the installation.

 

frybo, you might want to check this thread about PC Tools FW - don't know if it applies, but it might...

 

The link in the "How to protect your computer from malware" sticky on how to configure Comodo Firewall seems to not be working. I used Comodo Firewall in the past and had some bad experiences with it (constant pop-ups, some games wouldn't work while the firewall was on even if I allowed the game, etc.). Maybe I had it configured incorrectly, though.

 

The only link I saw was the product information and download page.

I don't recall seeing anything [in the malware section] about how to configure the Comodo firewall.

I also have XP SP3 with PC Tools FW and also have had no problems.

However, now that the standalone Firewall is being retired, this may change the picture somewhat.

PC Tools: Latest Release Information

Now I'm beginning to question the validity of matousec's firewall ratings.
As their testing methods change, some previously good performers have fallen down the list into the "Not Recommended" zone.

Does that mean that the firewall can no longer be trusted as effective??
A few people on this forum have commented that they are [still] using an old version of a particular firewall
because they believe it be effective and possibly also because the older version is relatively free of 'extra features'
and the resulting software bloat.

How does this compare to present day "typical" internet use??
I put typical in quotes because there may not be a scenario that can be reasonably described as typical,
since internet use is probably as individually unique as are personalities.