Well, the review was comparing the smallest ASL version (no SPAM protection, no VirusScanning for SMTP or POP etc...) to an improved version of SmoothWall. Also the ease of instalation and configuration was completly disregarded. I don't think that the it shows the real picture.
i have tested ipcop few weeks ago but it wasnt so easy to configure as what they say in that review. off course there are differences in both system like you have ids in ipcop and for so far i know ipcop can have two wan connections. didnt test that one. ipcop and astaro can learn more from each other. they are both good in there own way. if you tested both systems youll see the differences your self. see also aXs Guard Enterprises.
Well, there's an even more serious glaring error, if not outright lie, in the article. They say,
"The only downside to the Astaro product not mentioned in detail above is that it is not completely free. Home users can get a free license but it does not activate all the functionality of the product. IPCop is a completely free product with constant open source development and upgrades."
What a lie! The only extra charges for home users for the Astaro firewall are for web surf protection and antivirus -- something that IPCop doesn't even provide. It's amazing how reviewers sometimes have their heads in the sand.
if you tested both systems youll see the differences your self. see also aXs Guard Enterprises. 