Thanks Wyatt That was the answer I was looking for, and thanks to everyone else who posted. Now I've got to decide between the old adages "if it ain't broke don't fix it" and "a little effort now may prevent problems in the future" :) Decisions, decisions thanks James ================================= At 05:32 PM 8/15/03 -0500, you wrote: >It has, in all my experiences here, proved to be difficult to get along >with in certain software environments. It doesn't uninstall very well. It >isn't rules based, so it's not very configurable. The logging is pretty >much useless. It makes it d**n hard sometimes to play LAN games and there >are some instances where it literally has to be shut down in order to go to >a site that is otherwise not a great risk. A firewall you need to disable >even once in awhile isn't worth the space on the drive. > >It's good for people who don't want to learn how to set up a firewall, >because it isn't that hard to use. I believe that if it's the only >firewall available, or the only one the user feels comfortable with, then >it's better than nothing. It's also better than XP's built-in. As far as >firewalls go, though, there's lots better at the same price (even if free). To unsub or change your email settings: //www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk To access our Archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/ //www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/ For more info: //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=pctechtalk