SUPERAntiSpyware Gizmo/TechSupportAlert Review Response and Analysis

[SUPERAntiSpy]

I was asked to officially respond to the "Gizmo" review from TechSupportAlert(dot)com. Here is the link to the response for those that were interested:
http://forums.superantispyware.com/viewtopic.php?t=779

[Jadda]

Great Nick!

[HAN]

An interesting read! :) I agree with your assessment of Defender too. It's not worthless but it's cleanup capabilities are weak at best...

[muf]

Good write up Nick. Tbh, i've never trusted any of Gizmo's reviews. He has some strange mixes of application's in group tests. He seems to not know the difference between a HIPS app and a Sandbox app and ends up grouping an app or two in the wrong category. Couple that with his ability to test apps against methods they are clearly not designed to protect against and Gizmo loses any credibility he hoped to gain. I trust pc magazine reviews more than his and i don't trust pc magazine reviews. Says it all really.

muf

[acr1965]

Well that is certainly an interesting article. Could you explain this quote in a bit more detail? -

"Gizmo himself states “SAS has developed an excellent reputation for the removal of an existing spyware infection. I have not tested this aspect myself…” Thus although he clearly indicates that he has knowledge of our “excellent reputation”, and why we have the excellent reputation, but fails to test that aspect of the product. Clearly, that speaks volumes about the validity of the testing and the methodology and motives behind the review.."

Especially the "motives behind the review part".

[SUPERAntiSpy]

-{ Quote: "Well that is certainly an interesting article. Could you explain this quote in a bit more detail? -

"Gizmo himself states “SAS has developed an excellent reputation for the removal of an existing spyware infection. I have not tested this aspect myself…” Thus although he clearly indicates that he has knowledge of our “excellent reputation”, and why we have the excellent reputation, but fails to test that aspect of the product. Clearly, that speaks volumes about the validity of the testing and the methodology and motives behind the review.."

Especially the "motives behind the review part"." }-

Meaning - he knows what we are "good" at, and what our reputation is, but he doesn't bother testing against actual live infections - which is where our reputation comes from, not passing abstract HIPS/Bahavorial tests.

It doesn't appear to (me) that Gizmo really was reviewing the product in proper context, which really is a disservice to his readers/viewers.

[yankinNcrankin]

-{ Quote: "I was asked to officially respond to the "Gizmo" review from TechSupportAlert(dot)com. Here is the link to the response for those that were interested:
http://forums.superantispyware.com/viewtopic.php?t=779" }-

ThankYou ! Very well put. :thumb: :)

[acr1965]

-{ Quote: "Meaning - he knows what we are "good" at, and what our reputation is, but he doesn't bother testing against actual live infections - which is where our reputation comes from, not passing abstract HIPS/Bahavorial tests.

It doesn't appear to (me) that Gizmo really was reviewing the product in proper context, which really is a disservice to his readers/viewers." }-


OK. I was somehow reading that you were implying there may be a personal animosity behind his review in regard to your company/product...like there was a bad review purposely made in response to some prior relationship with SAS.

[the Tester]

Thanks for the detailed response.
A test/review should be in context to the particular program.

[bellgamin]

I place zero credibility in so-called "tests" by gizmo. To me they are on a par with articles in the National Enquirer. IMO it is demeaning to respond to them -- for much the same reasons that I endorse the old saying: "Don't feed the trolls."

[LoneWolf]

-{ Quote: "I place zero credibility in so-called "tests" by gizmo. To me they are on a par with articles in the National Enquirer" }-

Agreed.;D

[lucas1985]

Very good writeup Nick :)
I agree with all of the points you made.

[LUSHER]

I trust Gimzo's review, as much as a i trust a typical post by a typical poster here.

In other words, not a lot.

[Huupi]

Mostly i like people who stand up against the majority in order to voice a new sound [jesus and buddha remember]but in general most off these people end up in mental health care centres or commit suicide,and they used to call them fools like Hitler and friends.Still worser are these people who use underhanded means[seemingly objective testresults] to voice their personal feelings against someone,this is degradation to no end.

[Bio-Hazard]

-{ Quote: "I was asked to officially respond to the "Gizmo" review from TechSupportAlert(dot)com. Here is the link to the response for those that were interested:
http://forums.superantispyware.com/viewtopic.php?t=779" }-

Thank you Nick. Very detailed response. I totally agree!!

[ccsito]

-{ Quote: "Still worser are these people who use underhanded means[seemingly objective testresults] to voice their personal feelings against someone,this is degradation to no end." }-

Who is being underhanded? :-\

[rdsu]

Well done, Nick! ;)

[Huupi]

-{ Quote: "Who is being underhanded? :-\" }-

if you read posts i gues you understand .