Vista Firewall is worse than independent Firewall or not?

I used to use ZoneAlarm, but found it source-consuming in Vista. I am
wondering if the Vista firewall is worse than independent firewall, such as
Zone Alarm or not? I don't see any reports from vista firewall, and I am
suspicious of its strenth against the attack from internet.

Any opinions?

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 03:30:04 +0800, "john" <no> wrote:

> I used to use ZoneAlarm, but found it source-consuming in Vista. I am
> wondering if the Vista firewall is worse than independent firewall, such as
> Zone Alarm or not? I don't see any reports from vista firewall, and I am
> suspicious of its strenth against the attack from internet.
>
> Any opinions?


As far I'm concerned, the built-in Windows firewall is just as good as
any third-party firewall.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

john wrote:
> I used to use ZoneAlarm, but found it source-consuming in Vista. I am
> wondering if the Vista firewall is worse than independent firewall, such
> as Zone Alarm or not? I don't see any reports from vista firewall, and I
> am suspicious of its strenth against the attack from internet.
>
> Any opinions?


As it is, Vista's built-in firewall solution is more than
adequate for most consumers' needs. While it's not quite up to the
ease-of-use standards of Kerio or ZoneAlarm, it has been noticeably
improved over WinXP's version.

There are two interfaces for Vistas built-in firewall:

1) A simplified one accessed through the Control Panel that is the only
one most people see. To further supplement this view, Sphinx's Vista
Firewall Control http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/) is a piece of freeware
that makes the Vista Firewall much more useful to the average user.

2) And the more advanced "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security
(WF.msc), accessed via the Start Menu's Administrative Tools folder, for
the experienced user who wants more granular control.

Having said that, it's important to remember that firewalls and
anti-virus applications, which should always be used and should always
be running, while important components of "safe hex," cannot, and should
not be expected to, protect the computer user from him/herself.
Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and every computer user to learn
how to secure his/her own computer, and how to safely briwse the Internet.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

"john" <no> wrote in message
news:...
>I used to use ZoneAlarm, but found it source-consuming in Vista. I am
>wondering if the Vista firewall is worse than independent firewall,
>such as Zone Alarm or not? I don't see any reports from vista firewall,
>and I am suspicious of its strenth against the attack from internet.
>
> Any opinions?

It depends on what you expect of a firewall application.

The native firewall protects during boot, I'm not sure if others do, but
they do other things that you might believe are good firewall features -
where the native firewall doesn't bother with such fluff.