SAS alternative

I apologize if I have offended you Nick. If you know me from this forum I rarely troll and bash a product. I'm always optimistic about products getting better. I absolutely loved SAS because it was actually MBAM which followed SAS's footsteps. But now look where SAS has remained. I have tried to use SAS in recent times and have been installing and uninstalling. I just cannot make myself like it anymore. It just won't improve enough at the pace it had in its golden times.

I'm still hopeful though that SAS will improve and finally get to its full glory. I got a license you see. Yes SAS has been improving a lot lately. But it's far away from top notch line. And the current SAS is not good(this is the least fair word I can use to express my frustration). I'm tired of waiting for you guys to offer a top notch product.

I understand no single product can protect nowadays and we have to rely on layered security approach. I follow this approach myself. What I'm saying is SAS is just not the top notch product to use or fit it in a layered security setup. It's like using next to nothing. So I'm sorry if I've 'bashed' your product but it was never intentional. I'm just really frustrated and sad. There was a time when MBAM was catching up to SAS and I would happily use both in my pc. But now I don't find any reason to use SAS when I have MBAM.

 

What is not top-notch? You are not providing specific examples - are you saying we catching nothing? That's certainly not true.

 

Sorry to be slightly off topic here but can the SAS core service be disabled at all please.?
Thanks.

 

There is no reason to disable it - it uses little to no memory in compared to the amount of memory systems have today and it doesn't use CPU except when SUPERAntiSpyware needs it - there is no practical reason to disable it - it won't speed up your system by disabling the service.

 

Well I'm just an ordinary user. I go through forums to learn. I am not techie. I just do not get the same experience using SAS and MBAM or even HitmanPro. I got infected with trojan horses(or whatever they are called) and adwares that SAS realtime protection could not protect me against. Nor could it remove them. MBAM saved the day. This was of course after my av failed to prevent the malware. Although that was a single incident it matters because I do not get infected everyday now do I. Those random unlucky days matter. Then there comes the performance issues. Many have been fixed like faster scans and faster update speed. But things like huge memory usage as compared to MBAM and lack of incremental updates still persists. SAS eats up big memory for being a antispyware. I mean even light avs like avast eat much less memory. And MBAM has introduced incremental updates for quite some time now.

There are many more issues I am sure tech savvier members here in this forum can line out more correctly.

 

Nik, it's you who seems to troll around these threads and bash those who point out the weakness in the product.

SAS has become pretty lame.

PCMag gives the free version 2/5.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392877,00.asp

PCMag gives the paid version an even worse rating and calls the product "dismal."
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392919,00.asp


SAS was among the worst products tested by MRG back in 2010.
http://www.mrg-effitas.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/MRG-Effitas-Flash-Tests-2010.pdf

Unfortunately, things didn't get better in 2011 nor 2012.

http://www.blog.mrg-effitas.com/

That's actually shockingly bad.

Check this out while you can still see it cached.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...te:.mrg-effitas.com/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Instead of bickering with testers and users, why don't you make your product better Nick?



.

 

Shockingly bad indeed, no wonder he's so fired up trying to save what can be saved.

One could wonder why he is more active here and other places instead of answering post in SAS's own forum where only the few posts glorifying SAS's performance is commented instead of simply using the time to improve SAS.

 

I am not bashing anyone, simply providing an opinion for others so that people see "both sides" - people that simply don't like SUPERAntiSpyware aren't the authority for all users - so people need to make their own assessments - I am providing another side so people can understand the reality of this business.

Yes, PCMag who also gave MBAM a 3-star rating, and we all know MBAM is far above a 3-star:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2391274,00.asp

CNET Download.com gave SUPERAntiSpyware.com a 5-star rating:
http://download.cnet.com/SuperAntiSpyware-Free-Edition/3000-8022_4-10523889.html?tag=mncol;1

Isn't it clear that these reviews vary widely for the same product - how could that be if the tests are all accurate? How could two people test the same product and find different results - that's the deal with this industry and our types of products - meaning - on a given day, the day of testing a product could do stellar or do horrible - a product may not do well at a certain class/family of threats, but excel at others. Again driving home the point that a single solution is not enough - SUPERAntiSpyware+MBAM+AntiVirus is going to give you better protection than just MBAM, just AV or just SUPERAntiSpyware.

We detect, remove and process a huge amount of threats - we continue to update definitions every single day (5-8 times per day in fact) so we do catch current threats, and many times threats others miss.

We are always open to improving our product, but comments like "it just has to be better" don't offer anything to improve upon as one person's "better" is another persons "this doesn't work".

We are open to constructive comments and always open to hearing what our users have to say and ways to improve our product. The group that doesn't like SUPERAntiSpyware simply stating the same things over and over doesn't improve the product as there is no way to satisfy that group.

Our product is downloaded millions of times per year, that's literally tens of thousands of downloads per day, every day, 365 days a year - if the product was of no value or didn't work for anyone, it wouldn't be downloaded at that rate.

 

Ok, let's put the full PCMag record out there. There is a substantial difference.

PCMag ratings:

SAS "Fair"
SAS Pro "Dismal"

MBAM "Excellent"
MBAM Pro "Good"

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392919,00.asp
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392877,00.asp
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2391151,00.asp
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2391274,00.asp

As you know, # of downloads is essentially meaningless. A quick look shows that the most downloaded products are ones that are free -- which clearly does not mean that they are better.

But if you insist on that criteria, your near-peer competitor (MBAM) is downloaded 184% more than SAS at CNET. Really --- 184% (thank you to pintas for the math correction)
http://download.cnet.com/windows/security-software/most-popular/3101-2023_4-0.html

Based on this, do you admit that MBAM is 184% better?

Since SAS has started testing so poorly, your argument has changed and evolved over time. It's made for "real world" threats.... "no one product gets everything".... "it's downloaded a lot and finds things"... "you need more than one product.."

Your argument has essentially evolved to, "..it's better than nothing along with whatever else you have."

But in this forum, we are all looking for the top tier products. Not products that consistently perform poorly with lots of excuses from the product rep.

And if you want to talk about the absurdity of 'hitching your boat' to a rating at CNET, we can do that too. You know that's weak.

Yes, much of the negative comments about SAS relate to its detection and thus protection abilities. That's how users want you to improve the product.

You absolutely can satisfy that group.

Improve the detection and protection of the product.

Here is another test:

http://www.2-spyware.com/anti-spyware-filter-s

SAS - 75 (Scores 1 - 100)
Windows Defender - 80
Spybot S&D - 84
MBAM - 91


And Nick, I'm not an SAS hater. I own a license. If you look in the bowels of Wilders -- I was an active proponent of SAS years ago.

The product just got lame. Maybe that is more the fault of support.com (who purchased SAS). I don't know.

But SAS in the vast majority of legitimate and rigorous tests for years has done poorly. That's just the way it is.

You can keep presenting "the other side."

But we all see through it.


.

 

The problem is that you have built a reputation of never admitting you are wrong about anything. You sold you abandoned SuperAdblocker for years and consistently promised updates were coming soon. Those updates never came. Anyone can do a search of this site and see your promises about those updates. I do not expect you to ever admit you were wrong about any of that so I will not even attempt to get that from you. Secondly you sold your SAS with the $9.99 today only special, which was a misrepresentation. That went on for years. I do not expect you to ever state that advertising was a misrepresentation. Your credibility for truthfulness has taken a serious hit because of the years of broken promises and misrepresentation. I suppose you want everyone to suddenly think that all is fine now and forget all the past? I doubt that is going to happen for those that have kept up with your posts here on Wilders over the last several years.

 

Well... to some extent i have to agree with the pervert (lol), although the math is a 'tad' wrong, still if we compare the number of downloads to the quality of the product, Comodo's not even listed in CNet LOL, so it's probably sh*t.

 

LOL... ya, math was never my thing. I complained while struggling through math classes that I'd never use it in real life... and I was right.

Except for right now...

From the online calculator:

Answer:

Calculate percentage difference
between V1 = 97 and V2 = 4

( | V1 - V2 | / ((V1 + V2)/2) ) * 100

= ( | 97 - 4 | / ((97 + 4)/2) ) * 100
= ( | 93 | / (101/2) ) * 100
= ( 93 / 50.5 ) * 100
= 1.841584 * 100

= 184.1584% difference (is that right, it seems too low..?)


Damn, I really shortchanged SAS.

MBAM is only 184% 'better.'

My bad.


.

 

I use Avira free, mbam Pro, and sas free. I use Norton Dns to block malware. Avira, mbam Pro, and Norton DNS block malware.

I don't have any in infections.

With all this blocking it is hard to get in infected.

Most av's, if not all, block malware.

My point is that I can't tell who is or isn't defending my system. Now days our computers are better protected for free.

 

SUPERAntiSpyware is not a "lame" product, nor is it ineffective. Why do I keep bringing up the fact that a single solution isn't enough - because that's the facts. If I was "wrong" about something, I am more than happy to admit it, but the fact that SUPERAntiSpyware detects millions of threats, is downloaded millions of times per year isn't "wrong" - we are still an effective product and a great tool to be used in the fight against Malware/Spyware, etc.

We have never done well on tests - yet we have been rolling in business for over 8 years and are still effective - you don't stay in business 8+ years, have over 40 million downloads if it was a "lame" product, or "ineffective".

Do you realize that after the acquisition by Support.com that we over doubled our research and malware processing team? Look how many definitions we put out per day:
http://www.superantispyware.com/definitionupdatehistory.html

Do you think all those are ineffective? We may not be getting the same samples that are on the tests, but I am ok with that because we are detecting and removing real threats on real machines. Don't believe me, look at the real-time threat map that shows threats we detected and removed:
http://www.superantispyware.com/threatmap.html

That data is real-time data, happening at the moment - so we are being effective on people's machines and we are helping in the fight against Malware.

I am not saying we are the "best" product - in my opinion no one is because the landscape changes daily. There are many great products out there such as AVG, MBAM, Avira, Avast, Comodo, Hitman, etc. etc. they too miss threats, we all do - and SUPERAntiSpyware is a great companion to those products as a 2nd line of defense.

We will be working with MRG to better detect the threats that they test against, so I assume once we do great on those tests suddenly everyone's opinion here on the forum will change? Doubt it.

The bottom line is we work hard year round to protect our users and will continue to do so no matter how many times people put us down, say we do bad in tests, etc.

It's been the same for 8 years, but we keep pushing forward and doing our jobs!

 

I do feel people are being very unfair to SAS here to be honest.I use SAS as a second opinion scanner myself along with MBAM.
Given the choice i would sooner have SAS on my system than not.
We need to give the developer a break here and let him improve the product and this is not going to happen overnight.
Just my thought anyway.

 

i think if Superantispyware develops a behabiour blocker or hips engine will be the best and what ever it misses the proactive engine will catch it ,stop it and block it but that is my opinion,anyway keep up the good work nick

 

Yes, your product is lame. And it is ineffective.

Question: What is the purpose of AV/AS/AM testing?
Answer: To evaluate the effectiveness of a product.

Much as you want to get around that, you cannot.
I say again: Tests are the basis of judgment of evaluation of products.

To be blunt, the tests indicate that SAS sucks. And I mean serious sucktitude.

The paid product was "DISMAL" according to PCMag.

It was the WORST product tested by MRG.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392919,00.asp
http://www.blog.mrg-effitas.com/

Just a whole lot of logical fallacy and misdirection.

It matters not if you spend tons of money and put tons of people on a project if the output is still deficient.

Is a movie great because of the money spent to make it?

But of course you know this.

Nice to hear that you are working with MRG -- a good organization. 'Cause a few days ago you were doing your BS routine with them too. They had to publicly spank you.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...te:.mrg-effitas.com/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

...and years ago you fought with AV-Comparatives... you've probably fought with all of them.

..and you constantly come and bicker here in Wilders.

Here is a thread from just a few days ago. In this thread, 55% here believe your product "is a complete piece of junk."

In this thread, a fellow vendor actually chastises you for your BS.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=332319


*


That is all.


Hava good day.

 

In all fairness, it is very likely that the developers of quite a lot of these applications have built around the samples used in these tests. That does not guarantee their functionality in dealing with infections in a real-world setting. If your testing against the sample independently then your test results are skewed. A good part of social engineering for those seeking to infect others is in the delivery (packaging). Hence why sites with online scanners like Virus-totals are used to test detectability before hand. Especially if your goal is to infect by email or download.

 

As for MRG, they pulled the blog and Chris, Sveta and team there and I have a good working relationship.

The tests are based on an instance in time, here is a blog I wrote on testing methodology some years back - same holds true today:
http://www.superantispyware.com/blog/2006/10/

What you don't understand is that I am not bickering - people here try and make statements of fact, when they are not fact - if I don't share the other side of the story people believe them as fact - so that's not something I will allow and is actually not right.

You have an opinion, that's all - again, we have been downloaded over 40 million times and have a 5-star review from CNET, you simply gloss over those facts. We also have lots of other very positive reviews.
http://download.cnet.com/SuperAntiSpyware-Free-Edition/3000-8022_4-10523889.html?tag=mncol;1

As for PCMag, I think Bill Mullins sums it up quite well here:
http://billmullins.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/antimalware-application-reviews-who-can-you-trust/

What you are missing the point on is that I am not saying we, or anyone, is the "best" - there IS NO BEST - every product catches things that others miss.

The bottom line is we are working hard to fight Malware and protect our users, we offer a 100% free product and it works. Will it catch everything? No, nothing will. Will it help in the fight against Malware and help clean your machine - yes it will, and that is an irrefutable fact - we catch threats.

 

for those that complains just remember the generosity of the developer to give a free product to clean our systems,ofcourse the program is not perfect but with the help of other tools you can clean a system and be satisfydont forget a layer aproach also i bet if i run SuperAntiSpyware alone i will not get infected yes i will not get infected,i have been running only hitman pro in my own machine for long time ondemand scaner only and not a single infection that will depend how you educate your self and comon sense and also for sure the 1806 browser trick and other tweaks now give this program a chance and run it in real time it is very light and stable with almost no bugs that i know very stable,look around other software very buggy just read in the antivirus sectiongo ahead we need a layer aproach not a single product will do the job by its own

 

Nick is the free portable version on your site a true portable app? Can I put it on a USB stick and run it from the stick without install on the host computer?

 

i like SAS but the topic you raise has really 'ercked' me, they damn well know that it is not portable but they still advertise it as so. if you actually want the portable one then you need to buy the technician's licence.

now the SAS spokesman will say that the free version is portable because it has the latest definitions built into it.

a product is not 'portable' if you have to install it, latest definitions or not.

 

Well correct me if im wrong but even a "portable" app needs to be "installed" somewhere surely?

Even if on a flash drive or USB stick it is still essentially being installed on to those devices.

 

so in your eyes every single app in the world is non-portable?

so when you move a picture file to a USB you are 'installing' it? if not then its the file format which determines if a file is portable in which case the answer to the first question i asked you should be 'yes'. now think about that, its not right is it?

edit- let me put it another way to you;

program A= download setup file, double click, press next, press next, press next etc. now navigate to start menu and use program.
program B= download exe, double click, use program.

now how can product A be portable, if it is then so is every windows program ever made.
i class product B as portable and so would most of the people on this forum.

so if you think moving a file to a USB is 'installing' it then surely you would agree with me that labeling product A as portable is false advertising?

so you think this website should change their domain to installableapps.com?

hey dont take my opinion, take Wikipedia's opinion


double edit- lets not get off-topic, we both agree that SAS portable (free version) is not a portable app so lets wait for SAS to respond to this. if you want to start a new thread about how moving a file to a USB drive makes it an non-portable app then please do so .

 

Please give a definition of the term "portable"
Pre-installed on a flash drive or USB maybe but installation still has to occur.