Challenge to Symantec from Comodo CEO!

Seems that unfounded attacks of Symantec to the free security software finally have gotten their reply

http://forums.comodo.com/general-di...-comodo-ceo-t62041.0.html;msg437288#msg437288

 

Well there is a head to head test on U-tube (pretty good actually). It runs to 4 videos of about 12 minutes each. First one is here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/geraner#p/u/10/ftzvWcW1OiY

BTW, I'm currently using Comodo and love it.

 

This shouldn't be only about Comodo every single free security software should say something about this attacks (is not the first time) from Symantec to their products.

 

I think that guy is nuts. He's treating a massive Corporation like Symantec as if it's 1 person that would come and post on his forum.

 

The flea wishes to do combat with the dog? Ho ho ho.

 

Is in the blog of Melih, and then in the forum.

This is quite normal on internet, a lot of car companys do the same, here you have some examples:
http://motorcrave.com/mini-vs-porsche-becomes-a-threesome-hyudai-wants-a-piece/8271/
http://www.bmwblog.com/2009/04/13/billboards-war-bmw-vs-audi/
http://7pmix.com/2010/06/29/excelente-spot-bmw-vs-audi/

 

Regardless of the company bickering:

Avast 5/MSE + Comodo FW w D+ = killer powerful setup for free.
Norton IS 2011 = excellent security suite.

It's normal that a high figure of x company will say that his products are superior to a rival's. Even more when the rival's are free.
It's also normal that a smaller competitor will wear the mantle of the underdog and claim to be David beating Goliath.

This is a publicity stunt. Many other companies have done/do the same thing.
It changes nothing on the quality of any product from them.

The best you can do is not pay attention to either of them.

 

I hope they take the challenge. AV Comparatives tests show that several of the freebies are better than most paid. In the 2010 on demand test Avast was only 1.3 % behind Symantec. Avira Premium was better than Symantec, and I suspect the free might have the same percentage. The 2009 Retro test showed Avast with a higher detection rate than Symantec.

The Dyanmic tests showed that Avast was only 3% behind Symantic.

Although I am using Norton, it is nonsense to indicate that one does not get excellent security with a free AV. Tests clearly show otherwise.

Regards,
Jerry

 

Anyway Symantec is going to ignore this, they dont have nothing to win.

 

Every company thinks their product is the best,if they don't they need to improve it!

 

Isn't this the same CEO who raved
"Is the AntiVirus biggest fraud in the security world?" from the safety of his own website? Anything to try and get attention. And shouldn't he dispute this issue with PC Magazine who pointed out how poorly Comodo performed compared to Symantec in independent testing? This is where the public gets their information, not at his website or press releases. I think the post comparing Melih to a used car salesman is a good analogy.

 

Add ThreatFire to any free antivirus and it will be neck to neck with Symantec easily if not even better. For exactly 0€.

The fact is, Melih might have been saying that even though they have the antivirus part integrated into CIS. I think what he was trying to do is show the importance of the D+ part in their suite and how big role is playing in it.
Not to bash the stuff they are also developing. Because that alone would be stupid of course.

 

Why can't/doesn't he contact Symantec directly?

 

Since Comodo's DNS has been improved this should be quite the interesting test.

 

because that wouldnt give him the publicity

 

What good would it be to contact Symantec directly? They made the stuff about free antiviruses public as well so why not backfire at them in a public way as well.
Maybe it would be better if even more vendors join in. The list is not all that short... avast!, AVG, AVIRA, MSE, Rising, Comodo, PC Tools, Immunet, ClamAV, Panda Cloud. Now some aren't on the exactly same level, but if you still pay nothing and get even 75% of the Symantec's detection, it's a good deal imo. But most provide faaaaaaaar more than that.

 

Must I remind you that Threatfire is a Symantec product now.

Thanks.

 

PCTools is a Symantec company. As such Symantec is offering free products as well. Had Symantec wanted to discontinue the free pricing model at PCTools they would have done so. Beside whether we like it or not they do offer Norton Power Eraser, Norton DNS, as well as Norton SafeWeb Lite all for free.

To me the quality of these products are unsurpassed. Melih is just blowing hot air and that is all he can do. There is always some drama going on at Comodo. Major bugs are everywhere never getting them fixed entirely. They just release another buggy product under a different version sticker. With Symantec I know for sure I'm getting a quality product that is extremely intelligent and able to make decisions on its own accurately. Not like the "allow" or "block" of D+.

Question: Is there any of one of you guys who believes that most computer users around the world would be able to answer correctly D+ confusing prompts, then raise your hands? Not literally of course. .

 

Technically PCTools is part of Symantec, but practicaly, they are not. None of the tech from Symantec is used in it, they have completelly separated tech support and everything. It's just not the same as for example avast! Software offering free and payable and then share everything related between these two in the same place. Symantec doesn't do that.

 

Actually I remember reading some old posts that PC Tools Antivirus had some Norton Files if you looked around the files it installed.

Also why challenge Norton right now, it's clear right now Norton has a strong file insight network that would push it to the top. If I had a product and I were challenging Norton it would be a on-demand scan test so insight/file rep do not come into play.

Comodo could make a good challenger due to it's sandbox and I have a feeling that is what the comodo staff are placing their hope in if they challenge Norton.

 

Because that wouldn't spark controversy, see posts above.
Meh. Both Comodo FW and NIS are good products IMHO (not including Comodo AV, since I haven't tested it enough and I don't need it on my free setup).
I wish people focused more on their quality rather on what their figureheads say to drive sales and entice followers.

 

Is it just me or does the CEO of Comodo sound like a 4 year old that just had his candy stolen every time he posts.. He always sounds like a kid crying instead of a CEO of a company.. It's really quite sad.

The only thing Symantec would get out of this is a chuckle. When ever someone screws up the new expression around the office will be, you pulled a Comodo.

 

this is a great point. most users wouldn't fare too well if you installed CIS on their machine and just left them to it. it's far too confusing for john q. stupiduser to handle allowing/denying traffic or execution, OR to know intrinsically that they need to set a learning mode on D+ and the firewall to keep from blocking legitimate applications.

i don't really care one way or another about comodo products and looking at the thread in the original post was the first time i've visited their forums, but that's about the impression i got of the guy...lol

 

That's how most who aren't Comodo fanboys or moderators at their forum see the guy.

 

Hope dies last , Jerry

Yep , most paid. When it comes to pure detection , may be . However , free versions of company's products (except Avast) are cut versions which offer less features , less support ways , e.g. poor update servers , etc... Detection is ones of the very important things in an antivirus products but not the only one.

1.3% behind in on-demand test where they are tested against millions of samples ? This is about 13 000 missed malware . Wow , I bet this would crash any computer , steal any data.

Let's compare the latest AVC public available on-demand comparative . Norton did 1.3% better than Avast . Norton caught 15921 more samples . WOW ! Only 1.3% but 15921 more samples !!! And this is just on-demand without reality or on-execution for Insight,SONAR,SafeWeb and other measure may detect much more.

I am pointhing this product because you write about it.

Again paid products did better than free ones - Kaspersky , Symantec both better .

My point is that free products may be good for some but not the best choice for everyone and pure on-demand detection is not the only one . I pay for more , don't want less even though it may be free.