I have to ask: How's Beta 2 and those new features coming?

I'm awfully anxious to see the next beta and its features (especially realtime exclusion - this iTunes performance issue is killing me).

Marcos / AG, any idea when we might see that?

 

I would be interested as well.

 

When it's cooked and ready to serve.

 

No more half baked releases then?

Seriously, I think ESET should try to keep the users here updated with official schedule / status announcements - maybe every 1-2 weeks. Otherwise it is easy to become pessimistic about the final release date.

 

There are still plenty of users that can't run the current Beta version. These issues will have to be resolved before new features can be added. Additionally, Eset has to keep track of current malware. So, they are quite busy.

 

Jep, i think there are many (serious) problems yet to be resolved, especially with the firewall.

About current malware, couldn't agree more, they should keep track. Latest results from AV-Test.org are alarming, to say the least. I'm switching to my Avira license in the meantime ... hoop Eset gets back on the track soon.

 

Ooh, that's dirty.

 

I wouldn't be too upset about the results of this test. I have serious doubts about its accuracy as I have stated in this thread:
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=175408

 

I see your point and of course you can question the results and its accuracy. But how high does the error margin have to be to bring Nod32 closer to acceptable regions? As I read that the samples were carefully selected and had to be seen during the past 12 months. Maybe the test sample of April test was not that good. Anyway, Nod missed 70000 samples of something that anyone of us "could" get in contact with somehow, no matter how likely or dangerous those threats would be. Not very convincing.

 

In regard to the AV-Test results, I have no problem with the results for Avira, Kaspersky, Symantec and other vendors that have demonstrated high results OVER TIME. I DO have problems with the results of Avast, AVG, and NOD32. A gain of 5% in Trojan detection rate for AVG in one month is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. This represents an increase in detection of over 20,000 Trojans in one month!! How is that possible??
That is the last on this for me since the discussion is now off topic.

 

Sorry for being off-topic, but in the case of avast I can say that we're indeed adding Trojan detection in big batches (usually couple of tens of thousands) at once. So, some of the avast virus def udates don't have the regular 10-20KB but rather some 300-400KB.

Chers
Vlk

 

With that comment and after all I read here on Wilders I get to believe that av-test results are pretty much accurate and I think Eset simply has to put more weight on adding new signatures / improving heuristic. The technology is there, Nod is a very mature product, like the inspector himself said in one of the threads here, so please start putting it into actions otherwise you will loose more and more customers. It's not sufficient to be just "light" and stable.

 

Abeltje ,

I just would like to reming you not to trust tests so much . They give you nothing but false sense of security. The fact is that with real world threats NOD32 performs in 100% success , with the best heuristics out there .

I am not sure if you are aware but such tests are made with thousands of samples and not all of them are popular . Some of these samples you personally will never be able to find because we all here have some good surfing habits . Some of the samples are not actually "very" malicious

Known fact is that although some products have higher results , they are not the best . All of the scanners which are number 1 in these tests have scan speed much lower than NOD's or lack heuristic technologies to find new malware . Some have compatibility issues , slows downs or so on ...

Conclusions is that such test will give you false sense of "more security" by detecting more stuff than necessary.

I do hope you got what I mean but I don't want to get off-topic.
Here is the Official ESET policy about adding new malware = add new things on a need to bases (by Mr.Anton Zajac from ESET)

 

HiTech_boy,

An honest question out of plain curiosity: are you a regular user like the rest of us, or an ESET representative?

 

Counterpoint: Nothing is 100%, some people far prefer Antivir/Bitdefender/Kaspersky/Symantec/etc. to Nod32 based on their own observations and trials, and performance with any top-tier antivirus program is likely to do you well.

Don't think that Nod32 is the holy grail of computer security. It's not. It's a very, very good piece of software, but you have options, one or some of which might work for you better than Eset's offerings.

 

Yes , you right . Nothing is 100% .

You probably misunderstood my post , I wanted to say that generally people are looking very close to these tests , you can see how many threads are there in the other AV subforum , all of them talking all the same . In my opinion , these tests show nothing special (false sense of more security ... )

People should consider other factors more important prior to choosing AV!

 

Why shouldn't we be trusting 'good' AV Tests as long as we don't have the ability to do such thing ourselves? How many buyers of AV programs can actually find out if a product is good or bad by just trialing? It takes a lot more to find out how good or bad an AV scanner is and therefore it makes me sick, whenever Nod32 is tested 'lower' than usual, some bigshots here start bashing these tests.........How the hell can one know, that he should ignore the test results and should just buy Nod32 and put his 500% faith into this product? Come off it and stop shouting this complete ignorant BS.

 

I wouldn't say it as drastic as Big_Apple, but in a way I share his opinion. Of course detection is not everything. And HiTech_boy, I try to make careful consideration of what to use, but I am not an expert. I have to draw conclusions on detection rates from several tests as I cannot test myself. Detection of other programs is obviously better unless you doubt the accuracy of the test. Speaking about how "light" Nod is, I tried Avira and Norton now, I cannot say they demand so much more ressources, both in CPU and memory. Stability and compatibility are also criteria of course. Useability another. Reliabilty. And so on. Nod scores well in all those areas, I acknowledge that and that is why I have been a loyal user for some years. But it's not such a sacred issue that I would say I would never drop it just purely out of a false sense of loayalty. After all it's only a software. If it doesn't give me what I want, I switch. It's my right to get a "better" feeling of security due to the fact that my AV finds some thousands of threats more than Nod.

 

Speaking generally about tests, it's important to have the test set verified by the AV vendor. The vendor should get a chance to test the files for functionality and make an objection to including corrupted samples.

 

In other words........Eset has not verified a recent test set, is that what you're saying?
Please tell me.......how many average av users visit any forum to read about all this? How many users really care about what testing is all about? I want to buy an av scanner and want to know which is a good product, so I can feel pretty safe using my computer. I talk to fiends and ask them what they use or what they may prefer and so on. I also may go to a shop and ask about a good av scanner and all I can do, is rely on what I am being told. A more than average user may get a trial of a product and this is his only way to find out if this product feels good, but knows nothing about the real score of this product till he is going to visit some testsites......!!!!!
All I read here, every time again........DON'T GO BY THESE TESTS, AS THE CRITERIA WERE NOT RIGHT, OR WHATEVER!!!!! And most of the time it has to do with Nod32, man oh man........it must be horrible, working for Eset and reading these terrible test results, but what happens when Nod is rising on the ladder? All positive testresults are shown, so everybody should know, that Nod32 is the best!

Eset people and Wilders Nod32 lovers........try to accept some critic words once in a while and try to make a product that will be known by more average users and stop bashing negative Nod32 tests.

 

In what other way can I get to know more about AV products? It's easy for guys like you to write such blunt statements, but what about the average computer user who knows very little about all this?

It seems very hard to convince you 'Biggies', that there live more people on this earth than just Wilders visitors and Nod32 'nuts'.

 

Regardless of whether the tests are 100% valid or not, ESET will lose sales because of their poor showings in them.

They have to know that a large part of their success is due to positive past results and that people make buying decisions based on these tests.

So, it would be in their best interest to ensure that they fare well on these tests, not poorly.

 

why dont you all wait till there new product is out then will see who is king of the anti-virus world

 

I second this. The thread was about beta 2 and new features. I think while developing the suite they should not abandon their virus research lab if they want to keep and attract new customers. Rather have us wait for the suite longer. Take your time. But I don't know about strategic goals of Eset, maybe they are more looking at corporate users who don't care so much about virus tests. Or they just follow their own philosophy, which is nobel, but "could" be foolish if you want to stay in the market.That's all I wanted to say.