Product Improvement

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by ngjackie, Aug 16, 2008.

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

    ngjackie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Posts:
    31
    ESET claims its products are good enough, but I think there's still room for improvement. Let's look at the graphs from Kaspersky.

    Rootkit Detection - January 2008
    http://images.kaspersky.com/en/test_results/rootkit_detection_01_2008.gif

    Virus Treatment Capabilities - 19 Apr 2007
    http://images.kaspersky.com/en/draft/wkct06.jpg

    Antivirus Solution Self-protection - 22 Aug 2007
    http://images.kaspersky.com/en/draft/wkct07.jpg

    I'm not criticizing ESET products or trying to persuade others into buying Kaspersky products, and I do not guarantee the accuracy of the graph information provided above. But, since the reports are out, then I think EST should accept the facts, re-study its products to see if it can still improve its products. I'm pasting these graphs to prove I'm talking about them based on the proof and facts, not simply bluffing.

    Some AV products block websites containing malicious programs. I hope this feature is available too in the next release of ESET NOD32.

    I look forward to hearing good news from ESET soon.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2008
  2. xpsunny

    xpsunny Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Posts:
    163
    I am sorry but it's a fact that Kaspersky's testing are biased. Have you noted that they did not include Avira in the testing? Because Avira has higher detection of Rootkits than Kaspersky and a waaaay better heuristics. Moreover NOD32 heuristics are waaay better than Kaspersky.

    Kaspersky labs often post such comparative to paint a ROSY picture of their product.

    For genuine and non-biased comparative always refer:

    http://www.av-comparatives.org
     
  3. ngjackie

    ngjackie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Posts:
    31
    Well, Kaspersky's reports might be biased. It might have deliberately left out Avira in its reports in order to highlight its products.

    Anyway, the 'main subject' is ESET NOD32. It's got poor results for the aspects mentioned above. Are the results for ESET in its reports correct and true? This is the main purpose why I posted this new issue. I hope ESET will give an answer here.

    As a reliable antivirus, Kaspersky should not deliberately cover up the weakness in its products as it deceives customers. Moreover, we, customers have rights to know all those all. Lastly, I don't think ESET did like this as well in order to influence customers to buy its products.

    Thank you.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2008
  4. xpsunny

    xpsunny Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Posts:
    163
    The reports of ESET in the comparative are incorrect and are purely meant to underestimate the detection capability of ESET. You can also get such biased reports at kaspersky fan club. Its kanna unfair marketing policy that Kaspersky follow.

    If you take a look at av-comparatives Microsoft live OneCare outperformed Kaspersky....in scan speed and heuristics detection rate. :D

    Also take a look here for other comparatives, avoid viewing Kaspersky's ROOOOOOSY comparatives:

    http://www.av-comparatives.org/forum/index.php?page=Board&boardID=5&ea1ac63e
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2008
  5. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    It all depends on what rootkits you pick up for the test, I could prove the opposite with my samples where NOD32 is the only one or one of the very few AVs to detect particular rootkits. I'd call picking up deliberately just a few samples biased.
     
  6. ngjackie

    ngjackie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Posts:
    31
    Well, I know it's unfair to trust only one test. Like what AV-Comparatives said, not all the test results are the same. I saw many test reports showing different results. For example, Microsoft live OneCare outperforms Kaspersky or vice versa. So, I no longer want to argue over which antivirus detects malware better. Marcos is right. The results are changeable based on the types of tests.

    I'm posting this thread to inform ESET about these test results. I hope ESET will improve greatly its products, especially in the aspects mentioned above. ESET may say the test results are unfair to it as the type of tests carried out is different. But, we should know other AV companies can also say like this and claim their products are better. So, there's no denying that there's a few weakness in every product.

    I love ESET NOD32 and I just want to help. I look forward to hearing from ESET about good news. I hope more features will be introduced in its next release. For example: blocking unsafe websites.

    Thank you.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2008
  7. Kayracc

    Kayracc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Posts:
    96
    Eset already blocks unsafe websites :)

    atleast a few i've seen be blocked by eset for some rogue av's

    -Brian
     
  8. rothko

    rothko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Posts:
    579
    Location:
    UK
    this is the sort of pointless thread that isn't usually tolerated at Wilders. If there was a thread every time an anti-virus company released a new marketing strategy, then it would make tedious, biased reading.

    kaspersky aren't the only AV company to have a marketing department, and even the most low level product could find enough malware to 'prove' that their product is the best.

    if A vs B threads are banned, then i think this type of thread should be too.
     
  9. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,763
    Location:
    Texas
    Thread is closed per Policy. Specifically, this vs that.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.