First impression Final 3.0.551.0

[Big Apple]

First impression so far: openeningspeed webpages ok, graphics loading ok, mailtagging still a problem. It feels good, light etc. I'm happy, so far.

[Big Apple]

Have to redraw my first statement. Now there are the same things happening again, slow opening of some webpages and the red crosses are appearing again. Too bad.....and I don't like fiddling around as much as I have done with the betas, so I have decided to uninstall Nod for the time being, as I am not happy with a final release with all these hickups. After what I have been reading here today.......my feeling is: should this 551 really be a final?
I expected a far more stable Nod32.

[GAN]

I have to agree. I tried nod32 3.0.551 for a couple of days, but found version 2.7 to work much better so i also ended up with a uninstall of version 3.

I really like nod32 so hopefully this problems will be solved pretty fast. What i find a bit worrying is that some users here said they reported some problems in beta 1, 2 and rc1 and still not fixed in the final release. Since it seems like fixing bugs sometimes take a very long time it would be nice with some more information from eset. If they fixed bugs very fast the information wouldn't be that important, but feel like a lot of people are waiting and have no idea how long they have to wait for bugs to be fixed.

Even if this is the official eset support forum it doesn't always feel that way since replies from eset is very rare. I do however believe that some eset employees in this forum try to do their best, but often don't have the answer either.

[poutine]

Hi Big Apple/GAN,
I was also amazed to see that the version i reported serious glitches in became the first final release . I guess deadlines had to be met !! Seems a shame they didnt release a pre-release to some chosen few to play with for a few days prior to launch.
I found the RC1 was much more stable, so i have no idea what happened.
I have been a registered NOD32 user for 3 years and never EVER had cause to complain before, reading some of my comments on here you might think i was having a pop at eset but that isnt the case and i have been helping the tech guys with all the info they requested from me, i am just a bit disappointed thats all.
Still, they emailed me to say that they are working hard to fix everything reported as quickly as possible, and i bet within a few weeks we'll be looking at a much improved app. ;)

[JimGoo]

I really like (most of) the new layout. But for some reason the program seems more "jittery" when I access the Internet (same old, boring sites I read every day) ;D

NOD 2.7 was "smoother," IMO. Then again, a few "jitterbugs" in this first official program release does not hinder me one bit from using/recommending the program.

Thanks again, ESET, for giving us a viable option in the world of commercial, big-company AV programs. :thumb:

[TJP]

I'm having zero issues with version 3.0.551.0 - I'm guesssing I am one of the lucky few based on some of the threads.

I really like the new interface, it is quite easy to navigate around. I'm sure those daunted by the previous version will like this interface. I liked the "ugly" 2.7 interface too.

One ommision I'd like to see included in a future release/update is the program remembering when I've entered my password to change key settings. I dislike having to enter my password twice to change a scheduled task. I much prefer the way the Kaspersky products handles this aspect.

Would also be nice if ram usage can be reduced, its not really a big deal for most users but I have a feeling that some will equate additional ram usage as "bloat factor".

[deanmartin]

I like it, no problems and same speed or better. :D

[wat0114]

Terrible. Unstable (jittery as someone else mentioned) and a resource pig of the highest order. I've gone back to 2.7.

[nodHead]

I haven't gone back to 2.7, if NOD32 Version 3 gets that bad I'll just go back to Kaspersky V7.

Funny think here, a lot of fellow NodHeads like to make fun of Kaspersky and call it Kaspershit and the like but with NOD32 Version 3 and it's shakiness - do I get to call it Nodshit? As a paying customer I am quite honestly pissed at what ESET has released. :dry:

[ronjor]

Some may be having problems but not all.

At any rate, clean up the language and feel free to report any posts on these forums and in this forum that are bashing type posts.

[stratoc]

back to 2.7 here too, as i bought nod for it's leaness, which seems to have vanished in v3, and apart from the gui i cant see any difference.

[spamyou]

I just installed newly released 3.0 as well. Outlook express + dropmyrights does not work with nod 3.0 on my computer. I uninstalled dropmyrights, then it would work, kinda, but outlook express hangs when i try to close it and dings that error message at me, then crashes.

Did not even bother trying with browsing. back to 2.7 for me it works fine.

[djmorgan]

Just upgrade, loaded over the top, ran a scan set up a schedule having no problems at all.

The Oz site sent an email saying I could try ESS free for the rest of my licence but that does not seem to be the case as I can't down load ESS with my keys!

[nodHead]

{QUOTE-> Some may be having problems but not all.

At any rate, clean up the language and feel free to report any posts on these forums and in this forum that are bashing type posts. <-QUOTE}

Just saying that $64 AUD a year should buy something a bit more polished and capable than what NOD32 Version 3 is, clearly flawed. :o

[Ngwana]

{QUOTE-> First impression so far: openeningspeed webpages ok, graphics loading ok, mailtagging still a problem. It feels good, light etc. I'm happy, so far. <-QUOTE}

The 64-bit version of NOD 32 working smooth with 64-bit Vista so far. I have not checked scan times but I am highly impressed. Outlook 2007 seems to be fine. ;D

[Brian N]

Far too buggy for my taste, firewall is still acting weird (ess).
Think I'll wait a year or two before I use it, some day the firewall will just die leaving my system completely open. No thanks.

[QS]

Installed overtop of 2.7 without a hitch. Hate the new ui really looks kiddie to me... and above all the most annoying thing I have seen is that you have to jump through more steps to disable to RTS. I dunno doesn't seem glitchy at all but definately wish they had opted to give a "classic" feel to this v3 line... Ohh well as long as detection remains exceptional I guess I can live with this joke of a UI...

[nodyforever]

{QUOTE-> I'm having zero issues with version 3.0.551.0 - I'm guesssing I am one of the lucky few based on some of the threads.

I really like the new interface, it is quite easy to navigate around. I'm sure those daunted by the previous version will like this interface. I liked the "ugly" 2.7 interface too.

One ommision I'd like to see included in a future release/update is the program remembering when I've entered my password to change key settings. I dislike having to enter my password twice to change a scheduled task. I much prefer the way the Kaspersky products handles this aspect.

Would also be nice if ram usage can be reduced, its not really a big deal for most users but I have a feeling that some will equate additional ram usage as "bloat factor".
<-QUOTE}

you can confirm in the imagen down:

[Ngwana]

{QUOTE-> ...Just saying that $64 AUD a year should buy something a bit more polished and capable than what NOD32 Version 3 is, clearly flawed. :o <-QUOTE}

Lets hope NOD 32 v3 will be fixed for your case and others. I have tried to test every feature and most reported 'jitters' but it seems I am one of the lucky one: it seems flawless on Vista 64-bit, scan times faster than v2.7, Outlook 2007 tags fine, Exclusions not giving an error and no issues with websites. Hmmmn! I will keep an eye on this thread. 8)

[twl845]

I'll wait to hear some more +/- reviews before I upgrade. From the above comments, it appears that your results might depend slightly on your setup from what I've read.:)

[Eagle Creek]

There is no "non-suite" version available, is there?
I mean: I like NOD but I don't have the need for a firewall, antispam or anispyware.
It's nice to have an all-in-one available, but Antivirus is all I need from NOD :-[ .

[Thiggy]

{QUOTE-> There is no "non-suite" version available, is there?
I mean: I like NOD but I don't have the need for a firewall, antispam or anispyware.
It's nice to have an all-in-one available, but Antivirus is all I need from NOD :-[ . <-QUOTE}

There is both; your choice. Either is now available at www.eset.com in the download area. :)

[twl845]

{QUOTE-> Lets hope NOD 32 v3 will be fixed for your case and others. I have tried to test every feature and most reported 'jitters' but it seems I am one of the lucky one: it seems flawless on Vista 64-bit, scan times faster than v2.7, Outlook 2007 tags fine, Exclusions not giving an error and no issues with websites. Hmmmn! I will keep an eye on this thread. 8) <-QUOTE}
Can you define what "jitters" are?:)

[Windd]

I'm back on v2.7 too. To much resources eating from v3.0.

And I don't like the new GUI (Vista style:ouch: ) + tray icon doesn't feel "right" too.

[Ngwana]

{QUOTE-> Can you define what "jitters" are?:) <-QUOTE}

Check post #5. it seems some experience less or no 'smooth' performance compared to v 2.7. In my case for now things run smooth. Let us keep an eye as more impressions are posted. 8)

[Arpeggione]

Hello,

I have no mark of scan in my mails but I have putted 'put a mark in all scanned mails' ???

Do you have this problem ? Thanks.

[Thankful]

Running smoothly on Windows XP Home. The only issue I have is that email tag appears on only about 80% of incoming email. Not sure if same issue occurred with Version 2.7.

[De Hollander]

For me, this version is a disappointment on my system :thumbd: Perhaps in the future...who nose :dry:

[Shelty]

I ran it for a few days when it was in beta and I was a skeptic but I reinstalled yesterday and haven't had any problems that I know of. I use Thunderbird for e-mail and all my mail has the tag at the bottom of it.

The only thing that I think is odd is that it says, "The message has been checked by Nod32 antivirus system." It sounded better when it said, "This message has been checked by Nod32 antivirus system."

[JCorliss]

Not trying to rain on the parade, and I realize a lot of this stuff is subjective, but I have two questions: is version 3 any lighter than 2? I've heard it can be "as light". Also, is the detection any better? I suppose that's what it all amounts to, along with cleaning, and lightness. Big question: any benefit over version 2?

EDIT: Typo.

[dNor]

{QUOTE-> Not trying to rain on the parade, and I realize a lot of this stuff is objective, but I have two questions: is version 3 any lighter than 2? I've heard it can be "as light". Also, is the detection any better? I suppose that's what it all amounts to, along with cleaning, lightness and detection. Big question: any benefit over version 2? <-QUOTE}

v3 used some more resources than v2.7, but nothing astounding. It was noticable, though. v3's detection is the same, although cleaning is suppose to be superior to v2.7's, but I'm not certain if it is or not.

[cupez80]

AFAIK ver. 3.x only include registry cleaning. The other still the same with ver. 2.x

[Pfipps]

{QUOTE-> Far too buggy for my taste, firewall is still acting weird (ess).
Think I'll wait a year or two before I use it, some day the firewall will just die leaving my system completely open. No thanks. <-QUOTE}

How will the firewall "die"? I have tested it on GRC and pcflank, and it came up all stealth. The only way it could die if a piece of malware slipped pass the AV and attempted to turn off the firewall. Even though the chance is slim, you could add a HIPS or behavior blocker to minimize that slim chance.

[NodboN]

Improvements Of NOD32 (3.0.5551.0):-
1) All suspected and infected files are quarantined by default.
2) Seems to be more potent - my NOD32 (3.0.5551.0) found THREE infections from the restore folder which my (2.70.39) had failed to, in 4 months of its existence.
3) On-demand-scans are comparable if not quicker than (2.70.39)
4) Exclusions at every level (file extensions, website adresses, ports, applications, browsers & email clients) work like a charm.
5) Signature updates are frequent, small and unobtrusive.
6) Mates well with Outlook 2007 and MailWasher Pro (6.0)
7) 'Real-time File System Protection' is of the highest order.
8) 'Email Protection' with Outlook 2007 has been good (have not checked out tagging.)
9) The new 'Import and export settings' option is good news for Noobies - advanced users worked around earlier with registry keys.

Drawbacks Of NOD32 (3.0.5551.0):-
1) Consumes more CPU resources (just try clicking on the radio button 'OK' within the NOD32 GUI to check this)
2) Http filtering is quite aggressive and wastes a lot of time in scanning the web pages, images and some of which fail to load completely unless I keep refreshing the page. Seems to disagree with Firefox (2.0.0.9) more often than with Internet Explorer (Internet Explorer 7.0.5730.13) in this area.
3) On rare occasions, the tray icon inexplicably goes into hiding (good news = it's working in the background, bad news = needs to be reworked in the 'looks' department, preferably an animated one would add value.)
4) User name and password fail once in a while (giving me a little scare.)
5) The window warning one of infection was better in the (2.70.39) interface - the (3.0.5551.0) needs to be made to look more scary with perhaps red graphics and a bigger window with more options on offer.
6) It's irritating to find the NOD32 window open on each reboot (another little license scare.)
7) It also disagrees with Internet Download Manager's (IDM 5.11 Build 8) browser integration (my remedy = added IEMonitor.exe to Web Browsers with a red X.) Works for other applications adopting third layer integration, too.
8) Found it faster to add exclusion list of file extensions through the registry than through the application GUI (good news = the excluded file extensions sort themselves alphabetically.)
9) On-demand scanning has one major irritant - it STOPS scanning when it comes across some infection, waiting for user intervention (man, I say get on with the scanning because I run manual scans only when I need to sleep - will take necessary actions but only towards the end after waking up, so don't stop.)

Data:-
Platform = WinXP Pro
RAM = 512 MBs
Net Connection = DSL @ 2 MB/s behind a router with hardware firewall turned on
Browsers = 1) Firefox (2.0.0.9) with addons NoScript (1.1.7.7) and Adblock Plus (0.7.5.3)
2) Internet Explorer (7.0.5730.13) with addon - IE7 Pro (1.2.0.3)
Anti Spyware = Webroot Spy Sweeper (5.5.7.103)
Software Firewall = ZoneAlarm Pro (7.0.408.000)
Email Client = Outlook 2007
SPAM Blocker = MailWasher Pro (6.0)

The above impression is subjective and definitely does not apply to others. IMHO, this release is at a nascent stage and there are no mind-blowing advantages over the previous version, at the moment. However, it looks to be quite promising - largely due to the Operators out here for their patient but prompt replies. A little bow of respect to all you guys for a commendable job.

[cd_nod]

I've had no technical problems with RC1 or the final version, but man, what happened to the GUI and the systray icon. This looks like kiddie stuff. I thought everything looked fine on RC1. Will the "Business Edition" look any different? If not, I may leave all of our 500 users on 2.7 as long as possible. Please ESET, do more work on the graphics, especially on the systray icon.

[twl845]

{QUOTE-> I've had no technical problems with RC1 or the final version, but man, what happened to the GUI and the systray icon. This looks like kiddie stuff. I thought everything looked fine on RC1. Will the "Business Edition" look any different? If not, I may leave all of our 500 users on 2.7 as long as possible. Please ESET, do more work on the graphics, especially on the systray icon. <-QUOTE}
I think the GUI is nice. It's like alot of other apps. The icon is a little flat and would look better with a little 3D or two colors, but it's only an icon.:)

[rogervernon]

Running nicely with XP and COMODO Firewall Pro., release candidate1.

[Eagle Creek]

{QUOTE-> 5) The window warning one of infection was better in the (2.70.39) interface - the (3.0.5551.0) needs to be made to look more scary with perhaps red graphics and a bigger window with more options on offer. <-QUOTE}

Does someone a have screenshot of this screen?

[Prof. Yaffle]

I've had to go back to v2.7 for now. I had v3 on for 24 hours and repeatedly it seems to kill anything internet related. Web pages just stopped loading in Firefox or Internet Explorer. It seemed to stop Firefox responding when a page was trying to load. Email timed out and gradually the PC got less and less responsive. Back to V2.7 and all's good again.

[Sunshine803]

Disappointed that version 3 would not allow me to log into my lycos email account and into my favourite photo-forum. The user-id and password boxes go blank without any error/action message. Probably wrong handling of cookies. No user options/settings for cookies.

Another disappointment (although purely cosmetic) is the replacement of that lovely blue eye by that sick constipated looking robot!... Whatever got into ESET to change their 'maskot'. The system tray icon is just as bad, I can't make out what it is supposed to be...

[NodboN]

{QUOTE-> Another disappointment (although purely cosmetic) is the replacement of that lovely blue eye by that sick constipated looking robot! <-QUOTE}

I second that, Sunshine803 (check my Avatar.) ;D

[sarfa]

{QUOTE-> I've had to go back to v2.7 for now. I had v3 on for 24 hours and repeatedly it seems to kill anything internet related. Web pages just stopped loading in Firefox or Internet Explorer. It seemed to stop Firefox responding when a page was trying to load. Email timed out and gradually the PC got less and less responsive. Back to V2.7 and all's good again. <-QUOTE}

I have the same problem. I use firefox and all pages were taking at least twice as long to load as v2.7. What I did was go into setup and I decided to try unchecking 'web access protection' for firefox and the internet pages started to load at least twice as fast! My question is whether its safe to leave this option turned off in NOD? Am I exposing myself to a lot more risk? I do also run a seperate firewall and spyware software in addition to NOD antivirus. Thanks for any advice!

[NodboN]

{QUOTE-> Can someone post a screenshot of this? <-QUOTE}

The first one is the recent version (3.0.551.0)
Second one is the previous version (2.70.39)
(check out the graphics and number of options.)

[Eagle Creek]

Thanks!
I'm using 2.7 myself and I think it looks more "scary".
It shouldn't make people crazy of fear, but afterall, it's a virus and that's something that needs your attention.
Then there's the different set of options although I don't know what will happen if you click "show advanced options" on the left.

Too bad to hear that the internetfilter slows down so much people's browsers :(.

[NodboN]

{QUOTE->
Then there's the different set of options although I don't know what will happen if you click "show advanced options" on the left.
:(. <-QUOTE}

This is how it looks after one clicks the "show advanced options" on the left. This I feel should've been designed to remain open by default as it's not eye-catching - most users would overlook it unless they were as observant as you (I noticed it only on my third threat found.). I do miss the 'rename' option from the 2.70.39 which was very helpful when one is not sure on the action to be taken - renaming a .exe file would ensure protection against self-execution of the unknown.

[Atomas31]

{QUOTE-> This is how it looks after one clicks the "show advanced options" on the left. This I feel should've been designed to remain open by default as it's not eye-catching - most users would overlook it unless they were as observant as you (I noticed it only on my third threat found.). I do miss the 'rename' option from the 2.70.39 which was very helpful when one is not sure on the action to be taken - renaming a .exe file would ensure protection against self-execution of the unknown. <-QUOTE}


Hi NodboN,

Thanks for the screenshots!

Is there no way, from the configuration, to get the option "rename" into the warning box? I will also miss that option :'(

[NodboN]

{QUOTE-> Hi NodboN,

Thanks for the screenshots!

Is there no way, from the configuration, to get the option "rename" into the warning box? I will also miss that option :'( <-QUOTE}

You're welcome, Atomas31 - am unsure of the possibility of getting the 'rename' option onto the warning box (looks to be hard-coded into the architecture.) But, will give it a shot and report back if I succeed.