FWIW: PC Mag Reviews ESET Smart Security V 4

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by hawki, Mar 24, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
  2. patch

    patch Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Posts:
    178
  3. wrathchild

    wrathchild Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Posts:
    170
    Location:
    Neoplantesis
    They always prefered Norton :cool:
     
  4. bodgy

    bodgy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Posts:
    2,387
    Location:
    Qld.
    Perhaps they pay more in advertising revenue!

    At least Eset does NOT take over the COM system like Mr N. does and leave nasty things behind due to it's live update feature.

    It would be interesting to see the reviews by the magazines UK and Aus teams and even competitors magazines, to get a better overal view.

    Colin
     
  5. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    So just what would the review have needed to say for it to be presumed legit.:cautious:
     
  6. GrammatonCleric

    GrammatonCleric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    372
    Have any of you used the Norton 360 V3 or Any new Norton 2009 product?

    if you did then you would see that it is better!

    Better detection.
    Lighter Resource usage.
    Firewall that actually works (heavily tweaked Sygate Engine).
    No 100% CPU spikes when scanning newly created or modified files.
    No "MY INTERNET DOES NOT WORK" or "DOWNLOADS WON'T FINISH" issues.
    No 100MB+ EKRN.exe in addition to 100% CPU spikes.
    No FULL System scan that finds a file and just gets stuck there, churning at CPU and never finishing.
    No need to hunt for files that are incompatible with the AH.
    Updates actually every 3 minutes so no weekend gaps.
    Tech support that actually responds to your service tickets. Instead of an initial canned response followed by 3 week+ "investigating" that never ends.

    So yeah, if any of you could first actually use the other current AV solution and then post your PERSONAL EXPERIENCE and not accuse a magazine of lying do to ad revenue then that would be great!
    I think what PC mag said was all fair, and I would actually score it a lot lower, since for me the V4 is a disaster launch.

    However, I would compare Eset Smart Security 4 to NIS 2009 and Not 360 V3.
     
  7. a3_alin

    a3_alin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    Posts:
    59
    Location:
    Romania
    you have right. eset no longer what it was. results are increasingly weak, and technical support is disastrous. my license is until 2010, but seriously I think I buy another antivirus...
     
  8. Eice

    Eice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,413
    The reviewer claims he received prompt help from ESET tech support. Twice. Don't tell me that doesn't set off any alarm bells warning you that's a whole load of crock. :p
     
  9. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    I don't intend to flame this thread, but, are you saying that Norton is not that good?

    Norton's problem was never detection, rather performance. Not anymore.

    I'm a user of EAV, but I've tested Norton 2009 line, and is very light on resources. And, according to av-comparatives, it went better than EAV.

    I also, during my trial with Norton AV 2009, never had any issue, but one. It depends on DNS Client being enabled, either to start automatically or manually. If DNS Client is disabled, then, it simply will stop functioning.

    The reason why I won't be getting it. The current path Eset is taking EAV, makes me wonder if I want to renew.

    I've address the issue with unfinished downloads on March 11th, and so far, no fix for it. CPU spikes, etc. No sir, thank you.

    Saying that PCMag always preferred Norton over anything else, doesn't prove, by itself, that Norton products line provides bad protection. Does it?
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2009
  10. DarrenDavisLeeSome

    DarrenDavisLeeSome Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Posts:
    315
    Location:
    Riverside, CA U.S.A
    I also payed for a 2 year subscription for ESS 3.0.

    Was a long time loyalist of NAV but when they came out with NAV 2008, which was a total flop, I began looking into other AV/Security Suite packages.

    The issue of NOT using one particular AV/Security Suite for all of your AV, Spyware, Malware, Firewall, Anti-spam, etc..., has been a highly debated subject for a few years. Some will claim that using separate applications is best still others may claim the opposite. I never really had a solemn opinion one way or the other. For years I used Ad-AwareSE Plus (retail...which came with Ad-Watch) and Spybot (which came with Tea Timer) together with NAV. Over the last 2 or 3 years all of the aforementioned apps got more and more heavy on system resources.

    I spent a great deal of time looking into a number of different AV's, Firewalls and other security related apps. Having already been turned off with Norton and the NAV 2008 debacle I was very leary about trying out anything from Symantec. But I did try out both NIS and 360 and had problems with both of them. Tried out McAfee and Kaspersky...both were total junk.

    Finally, I tried out ESET's Smart Security 3. I loved it. My system loved it. It ran virtually flawless (still does). Never had any problems with Customer Support.

    I got some bad feelings about ESS 4.0 though. Some of the new features/tools are either pointless or don't work properly. Furthermore, the annoying popup that keeps showing up from time to time, especially after manually running Updates or leaving the machine running and allowing the updates run automatically. All I can tell is something about ESS 4.0 is messing around with the Dr. Watson (dwwin.exe) program and giving me popups during shutdown.

    I'm still using ESS 3.0 with one of my one OS clone image file. I am waiting to hear back from ESET regarding this popup thing. Even if they help me resolve that issue, I doubt that I will continue using ESS 4.0. What really bugs me is some of the pointless features like SysInspector, Network/Sytem file activity Monitor and System Updates (checks to see if you've got all the Windows Updates installed). I have no need or desire of any of these new features. Heck, if they're gonna offer other utilities or features, how about a Registry Cleaner/Defragger or a Memory Defragger. Still, some of the goofy things with ESS 3.0 have not changed, like having to enter in a password evertime you go to clear log files. Or make changes to the Scheduler. They could have at least made it possible to do all of those things in the Advance Setup and not have to keep having to enter a password to make the smallest of changes.

    ESS 4.0 has the smell of Vista and maybe Windows 7 all over it. After all, ESET and Microsoft are on the threshold of a new partnership, much like it used to be with Symantec and Microsoft. That bothers me. I'm never going to uprade to Vista or Windows 7. Not going to upgrade to Internet Explorer 8 either.
     
  11. nickster_uk

    nickster_uk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Posts:
    190
    Well.....unless ESET get to grips with the various bugs and issues with the next release, i'll definitely be looking elsewhere. I've been a long time advocate of NOD32 and ESET Smart Security but with each new release comes new problems, bugs and annoyances and patience is beginning to wear thin.

    It's shocking that i'm beginning to hear such high praise for Norton products. Several people have commented on the improved efficiency of the program so maybe Symantec are finally taking notice of the criticism and putting things right. I used to swear by Sygate in the good old days and thought it was a huge shame when the Symantec corporate machine put and end to it but if they have improved it, i'll definitely think about giving it a try.

    ESET...the ball is in your court :)
     
  12. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    Curious this thread linking to a review of ESET ESS V4 was moved from the ESET ESS forum to this -- the Other Anti-Malware Software forum where it will less likely be seen by users of and those interested in ESET ESS.

    How Curious Indeed.

    Is there a board rule pertaining to the appropriateness of the posting of and/or the proper forum for a review of a security software program?
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2009
  13. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    ESET's forum is for support only. From what I've seen thus far, all reviews either go into the firewall section, anti-virus section, or anti-malware section.
     
  14. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area

    Thanx for the info :)
     
  15. Football

    Football Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Posts:
    96
    Location:
    Greece
    In this review I read that

    Is this true? If so, is ESET going to change this and adopt Symantec's and Zonealarm's tactic on this issue?
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2009
  16. virtumonde

    virtumonde Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Posts:
    501
    There is nothing wrong with this.Mcafee does the same.
    Btw what is the Norton aproach last i remeber it allowed all programs.What do they mean by monitorring? .Zone alarm it's configurable during installation so they can't tell what is the default setting
     
  17. TrojanHunter

    TrojanHunter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2007
    Posts:
    151
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I disagree, because I remember very well how bad Norton use to be for detection. I think they've improved greatly, but why pay for it though? There's free tools that can do just as good or better Job than Norton.

    I've stopped trusting magazines...most of them are full of bias. I'm not saying Norton 2009 is bad, but PCmag will say good things no matter what. The reason for this could be many thing, they're either Norton fanboys or there's some kind of financial incentive to sing their praise in every review.
     
  18. viruscraft

    viruscraft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Posts:
    114
    He probably means the SONAR(Symantec Online Network for Advanced Response) which integrated with firewall and real-time protection.
     
  19. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    I agree that Norton's detection improved, but, that doesn't mean that it that bad in the past?

    Yes, there are free tools. But, from those free tools, how many provide a great protection, without required that many knowledge from users? And, from those tools, how many aren't crippled? Most users want simple and easy to use solution, requiring it provides solid protection. Norton 2009 product's line does.

    [/quote]

    Tests are what they are. I never trusted magazines, the same way I never trusted any "so-called" independent tests.
    But, if PCMag is, indeed, full of fanboys or financial incentives, then, a very recent article saying bad things about the recent way Symantec provides support, at least (I didn't read the article. I saw it mentioned in some thread here at Wilders.) in what comes to Norton product line, would make them lose some financial incentives, no?
     
  20. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,854
    Massive review hits you for over 9 thousand, KO. Their page layout really isn't kind on those of us with poorer eyes, it appears the actual review is using less than a quarter of the screenspace, the rest is s*** I don't want to see.

    I'll stick to just reading what you guys are saying.
     
  21. nickster_uk

    nickster_uk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Posts:
    190
    I can't believe I would ever consider using any Norton products again but until ESET sort the issues and bugs on ESS, I'm looking elsewhere. My initial reaction to NIS 2009 is that the memory footprint is indeed very impressive...2 processes using a total of about 20mb. The last time I personally used any Norton products, there used to be about 10 running processes. The next positive was the improved GUI layout...easy to find your way around and set up. So far so good from Norton.

    One major drawback is that it has slowed my boot time quite considerably. Also, there is no option to temporarily allow traffic for a process...you only have the option to allow always or block always. The default option is to allow all outgoing traffic which doesn't strike me as being too sensible.

    Although it's definitely a huge improvement on its predecessors, I don't think it's the right program for me.

    Gonna give BitDefender a try now.

    Anyone have any other suggestions please?
     
  22. TrojanHunter

    TrojanHunter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2007
    Posts:
    151
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Avira free doesn't include everything the paid version does, but now that it includes Anti-spyware, it's a good alternative. Avira is easy to use and if recent testing is reliable, good detection rates too. Avast is very well featured and good for a beginner, but I prefer Avira personally. Combine either of these two with threatfire and I'd consider this a good set-up.

    I personally use Sandboxie, PC tools firewall plus in expert mode, Avira free and Threatfire. PC tools firewall can also run in a more user friendly mode for beginners.

    I never said Norton was bad, but I just can't justify the cost IMO.
     
  23. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    ESET NOD32 gives speed without the underhand play of Norton, IMO. Plus my experience with their support has been very plesent. The last time I emailed them, I got a solution in less than 6 hours :thumb:

    The only downer I see (as in review) is the firewall and price tag. In comparison to the completition, it kinda looks bad. If ESET improves on both these fronts, it will be a compleling product across the board.
     
  24. eezdva

    eezdva Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    179
    I still prefer all EES v4 over all suites. Mainly because it does the job and is light. I didn't experience any bugs really.

    Norton 2009 is good too though. I tried it and was pretty impressed . EES V4 is still faster but Norton comes close.

    For detection Norton scores higher in the on-demend scans, but for the pro- active part EES V4 is better. Prevention is actually more important for me. But I have to admit that if a friend or so would have an infected computer I wouldn't use ESET for cleaning up but something else.
    On a clean machine ESET is for me the best.

    I didn't get infected with ESET since V 2.7 but my friends did while using Norton.
     
  25. Baz_kasp

    Baz_kasp Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Posts:
    593
    Location:
    London
    Looks like Mr. Rubenking has been rumbled :D :

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/member.php?u=94851
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.