SUPERAntiSpyware review at PCMag

Link

 

Looks like SAS has some room for improvement. Although a test population of 24 samples is fairly small, I would still call this review relevant.

Hopefully, it might get Nick to think about adding commercial keyloggers to his list of nasties to remove. For me perosnally, if anyone in my household has installed a keystroke logger on my PC, I darn sure want to know about it.

 

I will be posting my official comments in my blog regarding this review. I will update this thread once it's posted.

 

Interesting that it got a 7.0 in removal of malware when it detected 0 of the keyloggers and was up against anti-virus and security suites. Seems like it did a damn fine job at what it IS good at.

 

It would be interesting to see a list of the malware it prevented/removed as well as the ones that it did not. You make a very good point that it would be interesting to know how SAS would rate if it did detect keystroke loggers.

NOTE: The report does contain an error in that SAS does NOT cost the same as the competition. The SAS license is a lifetime license as the others are annual. So SAS is a bargain in comparison.

 

In addition to the fact we have a 100% Free Edition that scans and removes the same as the Professional, but simply does not have the real-time and first chance prevention.

 

Is yoiur blog up and running? I see a lot of suggested topics in it, but I don't see the actual articles that you plan to write about.

Is the blog still a "work in progress"?

Also, did you email Rubenking about his review to get the specifics as to the malware that SAS misssed?

 

Our blog is located here:
http://superantispyware.blogspot.com

I have not had a chance to prepare a response to the review, but will in the near future. Neil does not reveal, nor release the samples used.

 

Seriously, how hard is it to get unbiased and competent reviews nowadays? Why did the PCMag reviewer compare it to suites? To top it off he only used 24 samples that were probably cherry picked. Let's see how the others do against some rustocks or spambots. Even then it doesn't really matter since most of us in this business already know what's best anyhow. The sad thing is there are a lot of end users that read PCMag, PCWorld, etc. and base their purchasing decisions off of those reviews. SAS is supposed to compliment an AV, not replace one, and Nick has already said on several occasions that it would take even more time and resources to add keylogger detection.

 

So where can we get unbiased reviews of antispyware products?

I am not "in the business", and I don't have the technical ability to test these products myself. So when I read a review by Gizmo, PC Magazine, CNET, etc, I usually put some stock in them.

Now, I already own SAS Pro because I believe it to be a good product and want to support Nick's cause. I like "the little guy". Small companies tend to provide the best service and Nick definitely does.

But if I didn't read this forum, how would I know that SAS is any good? And how do you know when "people in the business" are just supporting one of their buddies versus giving you their real unbiased opinion? I would say that people in this forum have the ability to be biased, just like the biased reviews on the websites. I am not pointing fingers at all, just stating that the possibility exists.

So where can someone like myself, that doesn't have the ability to truly test the product out, get thorough reviews that have used unbiased testing methods?

 

When you read THEIR review....you get one opinion. When you ask here....you get dozens, if not hundreds of opinions. And it's from people NOT getting paid for their opinion, but from people that actually use(&trust) the product. I'll take experience over sponsorship any day!!!

 

Oh, I definitely value the input and advice I have received from this forum. The only thing is you you don't know if you are getting an opinoon from someone like myself, who is an avid user of security products but not technical, or if you are getting an opinion from a real expert.

For AV products we have AV Comparatives and VB 100. I just wish the antispyware field had something comparable.

 

All I can say is I think SAS is a very fine program and it does not bog my system down like many other apps do. It also behaves well with all my other security applications. Nick, you and your crew have a done a fine job delivering us a great program and I like it so much I bought the lifetime subscription. Please keep up the great work and do keep participating in these forums as this is where I go to learn about security and security applications all the time as I trust real world users and developers far more than paid reviewers. I gave up on magazines like PCMag and Consumer Reports (not related I know) long ago.

p.s. I big round of thanks to all here at Wilder's who participate and make this one of the best places on the web to read and learn from.

Best regards to all

Weezur

 

Hello,

Well, considering that:

- Spyware Doctor is a piece of FP crap that you must pay to remove alleged threats - sounds like rogue doesn't it
- Spy Sweeper going that way
- To say nothing of the super bloat they introduce
- No free version for either of these two
- No ability in removing real spyware like fancy rootkits and such

My conclusion is:

SAS is several quantum leaps ahead of these two - and whoever wrote that article suckles on the MS-Norton-whatever teat...

Mrk

 

Hi, folks: In the business world of any kind, it is always easy to discredit the new comer, especially that kid is chipping away bit by bit of some self-proclaimed ESTABLISHMENTS, in AS world, such as SpySweeper and Spyware Doctor. When these two grant a media, such as the one noted, a huge ad contract. Would any human being (w/ an average IQ) return a favour in a BIG way? No doubt about that, especially when I read the reviewer's final sentence; I can't recommend it. I know right away he/she is on some wealthy dad's leash. I just wonder how long has he/she had SAS in his/her box, and has had any painful encounter w/ the other two. I certainly can give this person an earful of what I have had. I am glad that I am not on this person's leash, I do have my own freedom to make decent choice. That review, IMO, is a tea time material, read it , laugh it and shred it. No traces will be left behind.

 

OK.

Of course. Who cares about rootkits anyway? Cookies man, cookies. That and some money.

 

Another baffling PC Mag review. I used SAS recently to clean a rig and it found literally dozens of rogue entries the likes of Spybot, Ad-aware and AVG missed. I like it and will continue to use it when needed.

 

Good point. You'll get biased opinions from all of us. But, it's very different than the bias due to big checks paid to the mags. At Wilders, you have above-average users, malware hunters, security experts, developers, etc.

 

I have found Spyware Warrior to be a valuable resource for evaluating anti-spyware programs. While the comparison and testing are somewhat dated, they can still be used to get some perspective on the various programs. Last I heard from Eric he was planning on doing another comprehensive comparison in the near future when he gets some more time.

http://spywarewarrior.com/

 

Hi, folks: I totally agree at your assessment. Eric's views are very impartial, not commerically driven. If he can put more efforts towards it, his reports will be a big plus to us. I believe his association w/ another AS product will not hinder his position at all.

 

Perman & TypicallyOffbeat:

Thanks for the kind words and for your confidence in my independence and testing abilities. Unfortunately, my association with Sunbelt Software does preclude me from doing any further testing such as I did back in the Fall of 2004.

No matter what the results, the test would be dismissed by many as biased and unreliable. I do hold out hope, though, that some organization or group will finally step up and start doing significant, meaningful, and methodologically sound anti-spyware testing, as the user community is in great need of it.

Best,

Eric L. Howes
Sunbelt Software

 

A lot of new PC users know diddly squat about security programs and rely on reviews that they get from other users, magazines, websites, and other information media. So when an article or comment shows up that denigrates a particular program, I think it introduces a cloud of doubt to the novice users. It is the same when you read something in the paper, textbook, or get from someone else. You can accept it, reject it, or ponder over it.

 

Been a little over a month Nick. I checked blog but haven't seen anything. Am I missing it or still not there yet? I think PCMag is probably a little biased too, as others have said. Looking forward to your response.

Thanks,

Chris

 

I have them scheduled for June, so they will be available shortly.