Nod32 web site

[volvic]

On the Nod32 web site they compare NOD32 to various av's, but why not Avira?

Also, on the prevx.com web site, under "Threats missed by other security vendors", NOD32 seems to have missed the most threats!

Have I just wasted my money on NOD32?

Originally Posted by volvic

On the Nod32 web site they compare NOD32 to various av's, but why not Avira?

Also, on the prevx.com web site, under "Threats missed by other security vendors", NOD32 seems to have missed the most threats!

Have I just wasted my money on NOD32?

If these statistics bother you why did you spend your money on it to begin with?
Why didn't you get Avira and/or Prevx instead?

[Marcos]

Regarding Prevx, you probably overlooked the explanation below the chart:

Security Vendor Chart

The Security Vendor chart displayed above shows, in simple terms, a total count of malicious programs found yesterday by Prevx products on PCs protected by security products supplied by each of the vendors shown.

You should expect to see a higher number against the more popular security vendors because we see more of these users and consequently a higher number of malware infections.

These statistics are provided to show that all vendors miss threats and cannot be interpreted to compare the effectiveness of one product to another.

Further to this, the statistics don't take into account if the AV programs were fully up to date or if all protection modules were enabled. We've already discussed Prevx in the past and we will not do it again. You should find the previous discussion by searching ESET's forums.

[Zyrtec]

Originally Posted by volvic

On the Nod32 web site they compare NOD32 to various av's, but why not Avira?

Also, on the prevx.com web site, under "Threats missed by other security vendors", NOD32 seems to have missed the most threats!

Have I just wasted my money on NOD32?

Hello,

Don't believe everything you read. Just take things with a grain of salt and sit back, relax and analyze the meaning of what you just read with factual facts at hand.

Regards,

Carlos

[volvic]

Originally Posted by JohnnyDollar

If these statistics bother you why did you spend your money on it to begin with?
Why didn't you get Avira and/or Prevx instead?

That is a silly question. Why don't you ask them, why are they marketing the product?

Originally Posted by volvic

That is a silly question. Why don't you ask them, why are they marketing the product?

How is it a silly question? It sounds like to me that you didn't do your homework before you paid for the product, and now your complaining after the fact. Instead of looking at statistics from Eset's website or rival products websites, how about looking at independent 3rd party testing from organizations that aren't marketing their product? Any organization that markets it's product is going to present statistics in a way that is in their favor. To think otherwise is being a little naive.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

http://www.av-test.org/

http://www.virusbtn.com/index

[GAN]

Originally Posted by volvic

On the Nod32 web site they compare NOD32 to various av's, but why not Avira?
Also, on the prevx.com web site, under "Threats missed by other security vendors", NOD32 seems to have missed the most threats!
Have I just wasted my money on NOD32?

You didn't waste your money. If you check with Symantec you will find their AV on top and the same for all other AV software out there. Also if you want to compare AV software you should check with some independent sites and you might want to check more then one since the result vary. It's hard to test antivirus and create a accurate ranking. There are many criteria's to look at and hard to measure them. Nod32 at last place at the prevx website i wouldn't really worry about. JohnnyDollar gave you some links to look at.

[trjam]

also Prevx has stated several times that the figures are based on the number of users using that software. So in easy terms Eset may be higher because of the high number of users of that product compared to say Webroot. So in my view it only says a lot of folks use Eset for a good reason. And I disagree with Prevx on the fact that all of their detections could also not be FPs. With all due respect their largest thread is titled, " False Positives and missing detections." Does that not say something.