My opinion of NOD32 vs other antiviruses

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by rtso, May 28, 2005.

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

    rtso Guest

    Since I guess Eset is monitoring this forum, I do have a suggestion. When I was shopping for AV software initially, I didn't even download NOD32 because I saw a screenshot of it and it had that crude-looking Alien interface. I immediately thought to myself, more or less, this software is too gimmicky for me. The NOD32 2 (I believe this is where it changed) interface is great. The Matrix-style graphic on the left is cool and a little playful but also stylish, sophisticated, and professional. If you do change the graphic for version 3 (and it's not totally necessary in my opinion), please keep it sophisticated. Pun intended, you will alienate a lot of your potential buyers if you make it too action-game-like.

    And I think I myself suggested to Eset in an email once that they might consider a two-pronged interface for basic users and advanced users. But when Eset says the interface is going to be "rebuilt from scratch," I hope you keep the positive attributes of it.

    The fact is that Norton is pretty easy to use but the software is out of control. There is no sensible engineer overseeing the whole project, and it's become a sprawling, hacked-together mess of a program. When people switch to NOD32, they are trying to get away from Norton, so I hope Eset keeps NOD32 light and streamlined even if they revise (or even rebuild) the interface/design.

    In case anyone is curious, there are a few other fast and trim AV scanners out there. EZ Antivirus from Computer Associates is lightning fast, although it has nothing on NOD. CA provides zero support, however, and NOD provides more options and probably slightly better detection (and particularly for so-called zoo viruses). Zone Labs also provides a rebranded version of EZ with its new security suite. EZ is a solid scanner but it has nothing to give it an edge over NOD32. F-Prot is another scanner that's fairly easy on resources. It's been around forever and it has decent detection. While fast, though, it's noticeably slower than NOD32 and lacks, for instance, email scanning (at least for the moment). Command Antivirus is another one you hear about from time to time; it uses the F-Prot engine and provides a different interface. F-Prot and Command are both decent alternatives to NOD32 but I would still describe them as a step down.

    Among the colorful, intrusive, in-your-face Norton-style scanners, PC-cillin and Panda are fairly fast though hardly what you would call sleek and trim. (And they are speed demons compared to Norton, but NOD leaves them both in the dust.)

    I believe it IS important to compare different AV programs. And having said that, there is not a program out there that I would recommend more highly than NOD32. It is not perfect, but it is better designed and has more of the right features than anything else I've seen. Combine that with tech support you wouldn't get from Symantec even if your dad was the CEO (I speak from experience both in the PC and Mac world on this one -- well, not the part about my dad being CEO), and NOD32 is a pretty good deal.


    p.s. Is there a description of NOD32 3 somewhere? Are you all planning to include a basic firewall by any chance? I'm not a big fan of throwing everything together like that, but some reviewers like to see a firewall, even a barely functional one. Perhaps if you do include one, you could make it separate. I believe you partner with Kerio at the moment, which is a good call. Perhaps you could partner with them or with someone else to provide a basic firewall-for-dummies with your normal AV just to keep the reviewers happy. (Some free firewalls. Maybe one of these companies would give you a good deal -- InJoy, Look 'N' Stop, Sygate, SoftPerfect, SurfSecret, 8 Signs. A NOD32 + Outpost combo would be extremely nice as well. I don't think those guys have partnered with anyone so far.) And as much as I dislike Outlook Express, I would like to see even more support for it. You support POP3 and MAPI (regular Outlook), and on-demand scanning of Outlook Express databases. I don't use this configuration personally, but some people use Outlook Express to download mail from their Hotmail accounts. Would any of your background scanners deal with such mail? If not, I'd like to see that in version 3. Blame Microsoft for making life more difficult for the rest of the world, as they are sometimes known to do.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 28, 2005
  2. windstrings

    windstrings Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Posts:
    337
    Humm.. nice comments.... even if I don't agree with everything.. I always appreciate comments with lots of thought, passion, and conviction... seems like he knows a bit and not talking all off the cuff!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 28, 2005
  3. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    rtso and windstrings,

    As you can see....I have split off portions of your posts from this thread.... into a thread of it's own. The AV comparison comments\opinion discussion can continue in this thread Please.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2005
  4. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Well rtso Bitdefender scored well in the May retrospective test at Av-Comparatives with a advanced plus rating along with NOD and KAV. Bitdefender also has a simple firewall and anti-spam.
     
  5. Grumble

    Grumble Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Posts:
    185
    Location:
    the sunshine state
    If Nod were to team up with a firewall, NetVeda would be a good choice. I run the two together on an older machine with limited resources and am very pleased that both are quick & light and not even noticeable as to affecting performance.
     
  6. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    I hope NOD never becomes a suite. I also hope they never have an animated icon or skins or any of that half-vast eye candy.
     
  7. Stephanos G.

    Stephanos G. Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Posts:
    720
    Location:
    Cyprus
    Agree with Bellgamin
     
  8. 432453

    432453 Guest

    I think NOD should keep same style but just with easy commands like Panda.

    Update Now, Scan My Computer, Settings and Defaults all. That all we should see on main screen together with version informations...
     
  9. Howard

    Howard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Posts:
    313
    Location:
    Wales, UK
    Better, I think, to be able to switch between an advanced (current) and standard (along the lines you are suggesting) interface, that way those of us who are not intimidated and like the current interface do not need to use a dumbed down or simplified version.
     
  10. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Intimidating, that is a good description of the NOD32 interface. Designed by geeks for geeks. I have a lot of respect for NOD because it has good detection, state of the art heuristics and negligible system slowdown, but why does it have to be so hard to use?
     
  11. dan_maran

    dan_maran Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Posts:
    1,053
    Location:
    Stamford, CT
    The interface is what really turned me off to NOD32, don't get me wrong it is a great AV. But I would like to be able to monitor things from one window not four. Maybe in a tabbed style interface or the like. By Geeks for Geeks is a great description. :)
     
  12. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Check back when version three comes out. It is supposed to have two interfaces. Regular Guy and Geek.
     
  13. BornMember

    BornMember Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Posts:
    75
    Re: NOD32 missed Trojan-Downloader Win32.IstBar.

    Well I am currently trialling F-prot, Nod32 and Bitdefender (with all the Nod fans on this forum I felt obliged to give Nod a go).

    However both Nod32 and F-prot missed 5 trojan downloaders on my PC which escan free toolkit (not surprised, KAV engine what else) and Bitdefender both detected.

    Nod32 and F-prot have both been on my PC for a week and have detected nothing on my PC whilst I only downloaded Bitdefender today. I think both Nod and F-prot need to improve bigtime on their trojan detection.

    In a rush...

    Born
     
  14. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Re: NOD32 missed Trojan-Downloader Win32.IstBar.

    And next week the situation will probably be reversed. The moral of the story is back up your AV with a dedicated AT. A2, Ewido, Trojan Hunter, TDS-3
     
  15. lynchknot

    lynchknot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Posts:
    904
    Location:
    SW WA
    Damn, I must be a geek then. I have no difficulties navigating the interface nor configuring it. With time (not much) comes familiarity - you will come to know it like the "back of your hand".
     
  16. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    I still think that all they really need to do is make the full description of each module more visible, like on the graphic title. The naming of the modules seems to be what confuses most people. If you look at it, though, it's just a plain explorer type view. There's nothing particularly exotic about it, most email programs are organized the same way.
     
  17. BornMember

    BornMember Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Posts:
    75
    Re: NOD32 missed Trojan-Downloader Win32.IstBar.

    Well I have ewido as backup but it too found nothing on the system. I am swaying towards bitdefender and I am also of the opinion that it would be a great backup to KAV. Can't wait for KAV 6 suite.

    Hope the situation is reversed and Nod detects these in the future (the very near future). Sorry Nod fans whilst Kav is better than F-prot in my opinion among the lightweights it still has a way to go before it can challenge the Heavyweights!
     
  18. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Re: NOD32 missed Trojan-Downloader Win32.IstBar.

    I am also eying BitDefender as a NOD replacement if I don't like NOD version three's interface as Bitdefender's HIVE heuristics are improving. But Give NOD a rematch.
     
  19. Patrician

    Patrician Guest

    Ok, I see in almost every post that mentions NOD the above. I do have a NOD license and do use it sometimes as a 3rd opinion (well, really a 5th or 6th opinion after Panda's online scan, Bitdefender's online scan and Trendmicro's Housecall)but the reason that it is so fast at scanning is that it misses out most, if not all, of the archives on your HDD's.

    It cannot handle a multi-part Winrar archive and completely passes over it. Not the action that I want from my AV scanner, either resident or On demand. I want every file checked by the on demand scanner.
     
  20. muf

    muf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    926
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    NOD32 hard to use? Try using KAV 4.5 for two years and you'll discover that NOD32 is a breeze! ;)

    muf
     
  21. gerardwil

    gerardwil Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Posts:
    4,748
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    What does NOD32 catch what the other 4 or 5 opinions don't?
     
  22. Patrician

    Patrician Guest

    Nothing at all. To say it's used as a 5th or 6th opinion wasn't really accurate. To be honest due to NOD's refusal to corrrectly scan inside archives (yes I know the argument that a "nasty" in an archive is safe, and NOD will catch it if the archive is accessed, but I don't want "nasties" to get anywhere near my HDD. I want them detected before they get there), I don't use it really.
     
  23. controler

    controler Guest

    This poor guest should have seen NOD when it had the throbbing heart LOL

    That didn't stop it from doing it's thing. I kinda like the eyeball. It is like the all-seeing eye.




    controler
     
  24. Patrician

    Patrician Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Posts:
    132
    Actually this is my 2nd NOD32 license, my first was before V2 release with the heart etc. I was hoping that Eset had got NOD's archive scanning options to work correctly in this version but alas it was not to be. Shame really, it is only this flaw (well and it's comparatively bad detection of malware) that prevents NOD from taking the AV crown.
     
  25. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Bad detection of malware, you say? Maybe possible for you, if you compare to KAV or McAfee, but http://www.av-comparatives.org does not show NOD32 to be bad at all. :)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.