ESS comparison chart

Okay...I just got to get some feedback here. But it seems I tend to see ESS not do well in comparative ratings but I've been a supporter for some time now. NIS always come out on top the last three years or so and I can get it for free from my ISP. Just looking for feedback from people at this end.

Current link: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2369749,00.asp

 

That's what I call a fantastic amount of BS in one place! Don't trust PCMag reviews.

 

Not that I'm terribly surprised but where does one find "unbiased" comparisons or results to see how ESS stands up to others?

Also, any thoughts on NIS 2012/2013 in comparison to ESS?

 

There is no way that anyone in their right mind can rate McAfee above Eset!

At work we used to have NOD32 on our PCs, but the idiots in our IT department decided to replace it with McAfee.

It is so heavy on system resources that it has really slowed down our computers, especially during disk intensive operations such as compiling and linking the software that we have written.
In comparison the real time scanner on NOD32 had very little impact on performance.

McAfee has also not detected a few viruses that NOD32 and even Microsoft Security Essentials detected.

 

What about Kaspersky Internet Security compared with Eset Smart Security?

 

I wouldn't trust a 'technology magazine' for starters; these are targeted at the enthusiast, not a technology professional.

Seek out third-party consulting companies like Gartner; they do (mostly) un-biased reviews and they work in the security field so have some credibility. Also, depending on where you live, have a look at the government approved products.

I'm from Australia and there is a department dedicated to this kind of thing, as they heavily test and scrutinise products:

http://www.dsd.gov.au/infosec/epl/index.php

For the link on the OP, you'll notice that they rate Norton highly, but take a look at their sponsored ads.... A dead give-away of unethical "journalism".

 

Those kind of comparisons are against the TOS for this site.

 

Sorry, forgot about the question of NIS...

I'd stick with Eset ESS personally. It may be due to me working in IT, but I wouldn't touch Symantec products, even though we have some of the Enterprise products at my work.

Quite simply, I find them lacking in what they offer. The 'Home' product range are too in-your-face with green/red icons, attempting to give the empty feeling of true security whilst bloating the system down to an un-usable state.

The 'Business' product range is better, but I find the management of multiple computers very poor indeed. I run ESS buiness edition and have a few different profiles configured depending on how/what computer I'm using.

Not to be a poster-person for Eset, but it's the best I've found at least on the home protection side.

 

Hi,

I believe if we still compare some basic AV/Features like detecting-rate/resource-consuming ... it is not fair. Today we have a whole LOT of need that ESET doesn't cover period. If you are a home user maybe... and I would choose Microsoft'AV like a very good alternative (I mean free).

But if your are an enterprise user... thats a diferent history... really.

Not really. For you to know McAfee is the ONLY vendor that have ALL pieces covered... I mean... they have Endpoint, firewall, web, McAfee Secure, Encription... etc... I believe they have failed to run all this pacefully.

Idiots? It depends what need/proble they are trying to solve. For example, a simple issue like Encryption will never be solve by ESET (it doesn't provide encryption). If you still believe that a fast AV-engine is the solution... then you'r in trouble.

I have heard there's some way to tweak it.... (e.g uninstalling? jejejejejejeje... I'm just kidding).

This is funny! Every AV vendors have fail to detect not only one AV but a whole lot .....

My recomendation is:

Today almost all AV have a very good detection-rate... what matters is what else that AV bring me... e.g. Encryption, Appz Control, NAC, Web Filtering, Firewall, Data Control (DLP)... you got it? But the most important is "how integrated is it".... thats will make my life (as Admin) as whole lot easier.

So please stop talking about which AV has better detection-rate... cuz almost all AV engine catch/miss the same... period!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Best regards,
xTiNcTion

 

Hmmm....the more the merrier, eh? Just give me something that is like a swiss army knife and I'll be happy. It doesn't matter that the scissors are too tiny to do anything useful, it's there, and so is a toothpick! Golly, my users will be so happy that I've loaded all this junk on their machines, they won't notice that the performance is awful. I'm sure they won't disable any important protection!

 

False Norton is a s**t

 

With out a doubt.PC Magazine Norton Fan Boys.$$$$$ cha ching

 

PC Mag is one of the worse for reviews. I much prefer PC Advisor and PC Authority as they love Eset as much as I do.

I've been with all the security suites over the years and the one I keep coming back to with my tail between my legs is Eset.
Kaspersky used to be very good but is now buggy bloatware. Norton's sonar tech is laughable and the less said about that Mcafee crap the better.

Eset simply does the job well and without making your i7 rig run like a core 2 duo E4700.

 

I'm glad you recognized the dripping sarcasm mixed in with a heaping dose of reality.

 

Wow! I don't know about this review. It's saying that McAfee is better than ESET. McAfee has been horrible at preventing and removing viruses when I used it.

 

Don't trust all the reviews people made untill you test it by yourself