40 replies to this topic

[Mercurybird]

IMHO, Ilya needs to be careful in knowing which users to pitch the new version at.

That would be as easy as knowing who to pitch Fords, or wheat bread to. How would this be even remotely practical for him to do? You pitch your product to everyone and let them make up their own minds.

MOST average users will use the Windows firewall with or without their router's own firewall meaning that this extra protection module will not be a vital addition to their setup. Experienced users will stay with their present firewall setup be it hardware or software.

You are forgetting a simple truth... most people have a security suite that they've settled down to over the years, but everyone is always looking for something more efficient and comprehensive. I wasn't trying any new security software when I ran across DefenseWall. But I snatched it up and registered it, having recognized it as something that could take me to a higher level. The addition of the firewall feature just takes that product to an even higher level. I run my Windows XP firewall just because it is there. But I can tell you that the new DW will be a welcome software companion to my Smoothwall.

Therefore, I see the new version adding bloat to the program if not even more CPU time/usage.

Is that such a bad thing? If it had no overhead or load on the system, what possible usefulness could it offer? If my XP system was Ram starved, the first services I would turn off would be disk indexing and system restore. But as these are beneficial applications, the overhead, compared to other services, is worth it to me. DW is like that... there is a little bit of lag in the browser starting up and connecting, but that is a function of the measure of protection that is worth it to me. If I went to another PRG I would feel less protected. BTW: I'm not experiencing the high CPU usage that some here have reported.

My own view is that Ilya should concentrate on his original plan; to produce a lightweight, security program which involves virtually no user intervention.

I may be speaking out of turn here, but I suspect that Ilya's original plan was , and is, to produce a security program which involves virtually no weaknesses, gaps, or anything else exploitable. DefenseWall is written the correct way from the ground up. You get what you pay for- and sometimes, as in the case of DW, you don't have to pay a lot - for what you get.

Okay now let's see if I've got this quoting feature as figured out as I think I do...

[Scoobs]

The ironic thing is that we're all probably not the best people to be answering this question! Ilya is trying to attract new users based on developing DW with further enhancements.

The question in my mind is does DW need new features to sell more? The answer is probably yes if you're targeting the same market sector that us current users occupy. If you're targeting a new market sector however, the answer in my mind might be 'no'. i.e. is the issue one of product functionality or is it about reaching the target market? If, for example, DW appears as a 30 day trial on the free DVD on the front of your well known computer magazines, does it need to have firewall functionality to get people to try it? Or is it just all down to the marketing and branding?

In some respects, if you pitch DW as a firewall, then all those users that already have a firewall are going to need to uninstall their current firewall (which may be part of a security suite) in order to try DW out. I'm not sure this is the best approach.

Fundamentally, for me DW is about supplementing my AV, because AVs will not catch everything, and you need to appeal to people that understand that their AV is not going to give them 100% protection.

Perhaps the marketing message should be "ever caught a virus despite having an AV? If so, you need Defensewall".

Very complex issue. You need to segment the market accurately, decide which segment you want to sell to, then market your product effectively to that segment with the right branding and the right route to market.

[Buddel]

In some respects, if you pitch DW as a firewall, then all those users that already have a firewall are going to need to uninstall their current firewall (which may be part of a security suite) in order to try DW out. I'm not sure this is the best approach.

I agree. I would never ever uninstall my current firewall. Consequently, I would have to uninstall DW, which would be a pity because I like this program very much as it is.

Fundamentally, for me DW is about supplementing my AV, ...

Absolutely correct, I don't want or need an anti-everything program. DW is about HIPS, and this should not be changed. I can do without another firewall, and I can do without bloat as well.

[Mercurybird]

In some respects, if you pitch DW as a firewall, then all those users that already have a firewall are going to need to uninstall their current firewall (which may be part of a security suite) in order to try DW out. I'm not sure this is the best approach.

I have never had to uninstall a software firewall to tryout another one. They work quite nice side by side.

I have always uninstalled antivirus programs to try another one. They don't play nice together. I no longer run an AV, I use ThreatFire. As you know it's better to run a multi-layer regime- but I like to rule out redundancy. So DW HIPS/Firewall is a welcome combination.

Fundamentally, for me DW is about supplementing my AV, because AVs will not catch everything, and you need to appeal to people that understand that their AV is not going to give them 100% protection.

Does anything? Give you 100% I mean? How would you know that? How would you verify or prove that? If you use good sense, good taste, and discretion in your surfing, you'll not get anything. But again, how would you know? How could Ilya in good conscience claim such a broad claim or make such promises? The proof, as always, is in your own mileage.

The thing that sets DW apart from its peers is the way it is designed and programmed. That makes it THE replacement for just about any comparable scheme. So I would tout it to everyone as exactly that. If I've built a better, foolproof, mousetrap- and I want the world to beat a path to my door- I'm going to have to talk about, and demonstrate, why that is so. And I would make that case to the widest possible audience.

Ilya is a humble man who never claims to be anything but a savvy programmer. But he is much more than that. It seems to me that he doesn't have to talk about himself, his DW does that for him. But to the extent he can make his case as to the robust and professional efficacy of his software, I would do that. After all, everyone markets... but no one can explain why DW stands head and shoulders above its peers. Ilya can explain that. And that, I think, is the selling point of all selling points.

[Scoobs]

Fundamentally, for me DW is about supplementing my AV, because AVs will not catch everything, and you need to appeal to people that understand that their AV is not going to give them 100% protection.

Does anything? Give you 100% I mean? How would you know that? How would you verify or prove that? If you use good sense, good taste, and discretion in your surfing, you'll not get anything. But again, how would you know? How could Ilya in good conscience claim such a broad claim or make such promises? The proof, as always, is in your own mileage.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying DW will give 100% protection, I'm saying your AV won't give you 100% protection.

Ilya, what's your aim here? Are you trying to sell more product to the sort of people who hang out at Wilders, or are you trying to sell to people like my wife who hang out at Facebook and wouldn't go near Wilders if you paid her. Both approaches might need a different strategy.

[demoneye]

i don't use AV for more than 2 years , zero infection ,i use only all kinda HIPS , believe me or not there are the future

[hawkwind]

I could be wrong but maybe Ilya is having to name Defensewall as a firewall to make his product more noticable to the general public.
AV and FW are installed on many computers and much more discussion takes place on forums etc about a firewall than is ever likely to be discussed about a Hips product.

Adding a firewall will make Defensewall stand out a lot much in the world wideweb.

[Ilya Rabinovich]

In some respects, if you pitch DW as a firewall, then all those users that already have a firewall are going to need to uninstall their current firewall (which may be part of a security suite) in order to try DW out. I'm not sure this is the best approach.

NEGATIVE!!!!! There will be no reasons to uninstall anything to try DW. I'm going to make it the way you can use ANY third-party firewall with it, as right now you can use any HIPS solution alongside with DW with no problems.

[Ilya Rabinovich]

Ilya, what's your aim here? Are you trying to sell more product to the sort of people who hang out at Wilders, or are you trying to sell to people like my wife who hang out at Facebook and wouldn't go near Wilders if you paid her.

My aim is simple (in fact, it's the aim of any startup/bootstrap business)- provide innovations to a market. I already made this with HIPS, so, I have some ideas about how to innovate firewall products. So, with this initiative, I'm going to have a strong innovative HIPS solution (I'm not going to drop it) and a strong innovative personal firewall one. Two different products are always better as they are running with diferent marketing channels. So, I'm going to cover both Wilders and your "Facebooked" wife (sorry if I said something wrong with it, I still don't feel English as much as I want) with different products, marketing channels and, naturally, innovations.

[Ilya Rabinovich]

I could be wrong but maybe Ilya is having to name Defensewall as a firewall to make his product more noticable to the general public.

Yeah, you are wrong here. DefenseWall was originally implemented as a innovative HIPS solution I could use on everyday basics. If you find my early posts about outbound filtering, I was quite negative about this. But the things are changes, people changes too (sometimes ).

[Scoobs]

In some respects, if you pitch DW as a firewall, then all those users that already have a firewall are going to need to uninstall their current firewall (which may be part of a security suite) in order to try DW out. I'm not sure this is the best approach.

NEGATIVE!!!!! There will be no reasons to uninstall anything to try DW. I'm going to make it the way you can use ANY third-party firewall with it, as right now you can use any HIPS solution alongside with DW with no problems.

ok, sounds like my misunderstanding. I had thought that there were issues in running two firewalls alongside each other but that doesn't appear to be the case.