I wouldn't read into the marketing hype. All types have their own swing on that, we especially should be used to it by now. On the EEK, I keep a folder with it now (been a long time using EMSI) and as long as it keeps updating recent sigs within a reasonable time frame it's a worthy addition IMHO. And there's no bias either. Only nostalgia from A2 Square days
It's not "marketing hype" per se--just about every product is getting shrill since WannaCry et al, so what? I subscribe to Emsisoft Internet Security for two years. Just for conversation's sake, the forum, the personnel, the products, everything is a class act. The implicit remark about a connected product is out of character and therefore noteworthy. Plus, since when does an on-demand scanner detect your installed security product and then make a comment about it? Since now? Kind of baffling. Add: I ran EEK from Minimalist's most recent download link. Just got the "phew" window, no remark about Windows Defender.
Hmm, I'd wondered who Emsi had in mind with the "mediocre" reference. Can't deny zapjb's screenshot, right? Maybe a falling out somewhere? Bitdefender scores so consistently highly in the comparatives. lol. a2, strong medicine. I remember stopping just short of getting Online Armor right before Emsi took it over.
Did you answer to it YES? Maybe @Fabian Wosar could weigh in on those concerns if they really are which some seem to consider as much.
I got the same message for Panda Global Protection, so it's not just targeting Bitdefender. It's not a big deal to me. I'm not going to change to Emsisoft. Last time I tried it, it make my system slow to a crawl, making it barely usable. I do realise this is not normal behaviour, and most people find it light. But, that was my experience. Edit: If you click on the "Get Emsisoft protection now!" it downloads it. It was expecting it to open their website.
@roger_m On which system did it identify your Panda installation? I tested it on Windows 8.1 and it couldn't find my Panda Endpoint Protection Plus install.
We detect the software based on the Action Center registration. If something is registered there, we will use that name. Reason being that the vast majority of all EEK users use it to clean their system, even though the vast majority of Wilders users will probably use it more as a second opinion scanner. I feel asking a user if they were let down by their installed security software and offering to install ours is hardly an offensive thing to do under those circumstances. However, if you feel you have a better idea for how such a popup should be worded or presented, feel free to let us know.
Thank you for your reply, @Fabian Wosar I guess you're right about EEK mostly being second opinion scanner for members here, on this forum. Personally I wouldn't mind this wording if EEK found something that other real-time AV missed. If nothing was found, the wording IMO is not supported by results. I don't know how in this case it "should" be worded. Just my 0.02.
Yeah. Maybe, if nothing was found or cleaned, an info message that the same technology used in EEK is available in real-time as well as part of EAM instead of the current one?
Whoops, I was off there. Since you asked, the blanket statement about mediocre security solutions letting you down assumes too much and can irk people who may have spent good money for their main security, particularly if EEK didn't find anything. I think it's too aggressive a promotion of Emsisoft at the expense of other products. Why not just matter-of-factly state what product EEK detects and the download for your product--without the pseudo-folksy arrogance? Who you calling "mediocre"? plat
If EEK found what your security software missed. Get Emsisoft real-time protection for Real-Time Threats HERE.
ok yah but I too running W7P64 with KIS_2017 and EEK20170.6 suggested KIS was mediocre. KIS much better than mediocre here but I like emsi too, and don't think this is a good marketing tool for them.
I see this dialog causes a lot of confusion that was not intended at all. I guess it depends on how you read the text. The first line is basically just a legit question to reflect if your current AV let you down (as EEK found something that the installed AV didn't block). The second block of text was intended to be read as a separate statement. It's a general advise that using mediocre security software is a risk, independently of the above mentioned one. But I understand that reading those 2 lines in a row may make it look like the recommendation belongs directly to the AV above. We'll change that wording asap. Thanks for all your input!
If anyone is been on windows for any length of time from say XP on you think it's well known by now that it's only a simple attention getter for end users to take a closer look at the product or at the very least encourage a comparison. Emsi is been one of those time honored names that goes way back and wouldn't be where they are today if they depended on tactics? Probably just intended as a little rub to let users know other alternatives (EMSI's ) might be worth another look for them sometime?
Thanks. MalwareBytes isn't listed anywhere, nor is there something like a Spyware protection section.