AVIRA VS. NOD32, should NOD32 be improved?

It seems that AVIRA has been dominating all AV's including NOD32 in the past few tests. What is happening with NOD32, it use to be the best and now it's slowly falling behind. Please don't say it's not, because I checked some of the big AV Comparative sites and AVIRA has had outstanding detection rates compared to NOD32.

Just a suggestion to the developers of NOD32, NOD32 4.0 better be a big hit otherwise the amount of users using this software will go down in my opinion. I have been to numerous message boards and this seems to be the hot topic.

I am tired of hearing that it's just a couple of tests, and the next ones NOD32 will do better. This is obviously not true, and I expect more from what I believe is the best and lightest on resources AV on the market.

There are major features and simple features such as pausing and starting scans that are still missing. A lot of AV's now a days contain a lot more features then what NOD32 has to offer in it's antivirus (not talking about security suite).

If ESET works on improving features, interface, and overall protector I strongly believe it will become the best AV on the market like it used to be for the past few years.

A lot of people said that ever since 3.0 it has become a downfall, I don't think this is 100% true but it has to be taken into consideration.

Instead of saying it's the "best" or it does not need to be "better" try improving performance, GUI, features and then see what happens when it scores high on tests

Once again, I don't want this to be debated as I strongly believe that this is a fact, and instead of saying everything is fine start working on improving.

I believe in ESET and I want the best for this software.

This is directed to the staff and NOD so please take my advice in to consideration.

 

Theres no such thing as the best or the better 1, every av has its glorious days - where nod32 used to be n1 in tests to get their userbase going, avira's up now - in a while it will be yet another player and ppl will start bashing avira again. Its a neverending cycle.

 

Just a note

This has always been possible - v2.5 , v2.7 and v3.0

 

This is why you shouldn't buy more than a one year license on your security software in case you wish to change it the following year. I am not a big fan of version 3 and hope they either improve this version or put out a much improved version 4. Either way they lost me this year and not b/c their detection isn't always at the very top, but b/c of other issues I had with version 3. If they improve enough by next year I will be happy to go back to Eset.

 

I meant in the tray icon to pause and stop. Also the balloon that comes up is out of date because if your not there you don't know when the scan ended. Just accept that NOD32 needs feature improvements. I am not arguing as I think NOD32 has the potential to be a lot better, but it still needs work. As the old saying goes, there is always room for improvement.

 

Hello, ESET in tests has got standard results. The last on-demand test is little controversial as you can see in graph and discussions at these forums.

 

It also would be great to see the option to disable its active protection and not be turned on in the next reboot. The only work around is to set it's service to start manually.

 

I personally can't accept (just accept) that NOD32 needs further improvements like these because I for one don't want to have option to pause protection (like Kaspersky have) because I don't see the need for this . I also don't see the need to permanenly disable protection even after reboot (keeping scanning off) because I wanted such thing , I would uninstall the whole program to stop the service/drivers , etc.

These are your own preferences but keep in mind that the fact some other products have them , doesn't mean ESET Antivirus/Smart Security lack of something crutial.

IMO the products are great , just need some small touches here and there and voalla .

 

With version 3, if you right click on the tray icon then you have the disable option. As someone else has pointed out, this is only a temporary disable and the service is restarted if you reboot. Some software installers suggest the AV checking be turned of while the software install is in progress. I have never understood why this is necessary.

I don't see the need to permanently disable.

 

@Kosak: the graph you posted is wrong. You took the wrong percentages for the last test. please read the report for details. e.g. eset should have in your graph 96,6%

 

@ALL



"Loosen up" of everything that exists in other products the competition is the best thing we can do and just copy it if necessary or a useful function for the product that we think about innovation of product characteristics of ESET, as it has proven to be in front and with many other functions that nobody had at that time.



MOst Regards,
NF

 

Sorry bud, but when a "FREE" antivirus program such as Avira is beating NOD32 in the past few tests, that is not looking good. Are buyers going to pay for NOD32 that has a lower score in the past few tests or Avira which is totally "FREE" and has been beating NOD32.

 

I'm concerned about this also! I've been a NOD32 user for at least five years. In the past year there have been a lot of grumblings. One thing I read recently was that some of the best staff members are no longer with ESET, working for MS I believe. My subscription runs out in twelve days. Not sure what I'm going to do. I have tried both AVAST and AVIRA free versions on my notebook without any problems. If I can maintain my confidence in NOD though, I'm going to renew with a two computer license. However, this is a big IF right now!

 

It has some popups boring! version "FREE"

Avira - FP is more than NOD32


NOD32 has generally always the same percentage in all tests performed without causing no or hardly any of the FP.


Has its pros and cons as in all products.



MOst Regards,
NF

 

Oh, yes. Inattention sometimes can make a mistake. Graph is repaired.

 

So, if I just want to use eset nod32 as an on-demand scanner, then I got to disable it's service and then create a batch file to start it's service again and load it up? It could be a work around, but why should I have the need for that? Why doesn't eset make that option available for any user who wishes to use the AV just for on-demand scans? Is it too hard to achieve? Is it a lame feature to have in their AV? At least if that option was available, I could turn off eset's active protection and wouldn't have to wait to see nod32's tray icon to quickly disable it's active protection before it goes mad by using 100% of my CPU, everytime the system boots or reboots. Its insane. The only solution, is in fact, to have it disabled, so I apologize to think that such feature would be welcome, specially, if we take in consideration the CPU usage. I don't want to have to disable it's AP everytime the system boots or reboots, or use the damn batch file. It is something that should be available from day 1.

Sure, I can ditch it and use another AV for on-demand scans, but if I still have near a 1 year license, why not make use of it?

But, as you well mentioned, not everyone wants to use it as an on-demand scanner. Fine, they don't have to use it like that. But, I believe that's why it is (or should be) an option to use it or not as real time or on-demand scanner. After all, shouldn't eset costumers who wish to use it like that, have that option?

Then again, this is just how I see it, and my point of view is as valid as any other.

 

No, just don't use NOD32 for that, it's not designed to be used like that. There's ESET Online Antivirus Scan for exactly this purpose.

 

Not designed to be used like that? That's a first. So, in your opinion, if one wants to use eset nod32 AV, them must always use it with it's active protection ON, and never, even just for once, use it as an on-demand scan? That's what I interpret from what you said. Otherwise, I apologize.

And what if I wish to use Eset NOD32 AV on my system without it's active protection enabled, and rather use it as an on-demand scanner, and not make use of the on-line scanner, which by turn, we must be connected to the internet, everytime we wish to make a scan.

Again, I just find it plain stupid an AV or AS or anything else (security related and that offers AP) that does not have that option available. And if I am not mistaken Eset is the only vendor that think such option shouldn't be available (otherwise it would be there since day 1).

So, bottom line, if I get a product that uses AP and no option to fully disable it, then, I either use it's AP, or don't use it at all?

Also, and going a bit off-topic, but just to focus on that matter in other situations, any other app that everyone has and that automatically starts when the system boots, well, then everyone should ditch them? I mean, for example, I have other security apps that when first installed they automatically start when the system boots, but I created a batch file to start them when needed, because they're of no use if I am not connected to the Internet. Taking your words, I could think that I would have to let them automatically start everytime the system boots and slow the boot a little bit more than usual? I mean, after all, they were meant to automatically load each time the system boots. But, I can have them to work just when I need them, but I can't? Of course I can, and some even have an option not to start when the system boots. It makes all sense. What it does not make any sense is the lack of such feature.

It would be insane, though, for an security app, which offers no active protection, to offer the option to turn it's active protection on. Follow?

 

Sigh, there are AVs to be used on-demand or from command-line only. Then there are AVs that install their own drivers and protect your system on kernel level. Such AVs are obviously not meant to be used on-demand only and to be installed along with other realtime AV solutions. That's all.

If you want an on-demand scanner only, use one of the tons of online services by different vendors, or download Dr. Web CureIt!, ClamWin or Norton Security Scan from Google Pack.

 

Precisely, they're not meant to be used just as on-demand, but they can be used as on-demand, if a user wishes so, so why not have that option available in nod32? That's all.

 

Have you read the "install their own drivers" part? You can disable those by uninstalling the product, not on-the-fly.

 

For on-demand scanning, you can use ESET Online Scanner. The product provides maximum protection when all modules are active, on-demand scanning is not sufficient and cannot be used to measure overall detection capabilities either.

 

Just check the AV Poll on this Forum to see how Avira is doing. I had to drop NOD because of system locking up. I still had 9 months on my license but ESET just don't know how to fix it.

 

I didn't say I wanted to use nod32 as an on-demand scanner. I only mentioned that users should be given that option.

But, again, as I mentioned above, if one wants to install nod32 and sometimes disable it's active protection temporarily for what ever reason, it can't be done, and why? Because there is no option. Fine, one could create a batch file to temporarily stop nod32's service, but that would be a work around.

But, it seems that those are the 2 key words for Eset. I mean, there is the 100% CPU usage for a long time and no one knows why. I do know that all I got to do is to disable nod32's active protection when the system boots. And for that I need to disable it right away, when the tray icon appears, otherwise I won't be able to do a damn thing about it.

Maybe that could be the start point to solve the problem, and I mentioned it on the 100% CPU thread, but no reply of what so ever. Perhaps, you guys don't think it is worth to check it out. Who truly knows if you care and if something is being done, at all, 'cos all I see is try this, try that, try something else, try this one now, try that one now, have you tried this yet, etc.

You also know what one uses to say: if you can't get it here, go there. Done deal.

What I do know is that I'm done with NOD32 and to have, on daily basis, to disable it's active protection before the system goes mad and I need to reboot it. Trust me, if NOD32 had the option to disable it's active protection until I could enable it back, would make a difference.

So long eset and best of lucks

Best regards

 

Many people who experienced this problem have already figured out the cause by following my advice and ran Process Monitor to monitor the operations performed by ekrn.exe and thus narrowing it down to the file that needed to be excluded from scanning (ie. a large html file with debug information that were continually being appended).