Softpedia review of Eset Smart

Discussion in 'ESET Smart Security' started by deanmartin, Nov 17, 2007.

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

    deanmartin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Posts:
    231
    Location:
    USA/KY
  2. s4u

    s4u Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Posts:
    441
    This sounds better than the PCmag review
     
  3. SteveBlanchard

    SteveBlanchard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2007
    Posts:
    312
    Location:
    ENGLAND
    Good review!
     
  4. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    Just an explanation to the only bad point: "Leaving all the cleaning to the application will cause a drop in its efficiency. I could not find a way to view non-eliminated files that have been detected by the application (quarantine stores deleted elements and log file shows cleaned items)."

    I assume the reviewer must have used 19.5% of viruses in the test. In such case, ESS/EAV leaves the decision to the user because quarantining infected files might have adverse effect on the system functionality.
     
  5. breadseed

    breadseed Guest

    It claims to be a review of ESS but only reviews the NOD32 features. Where's the review of the firewall and the anti-spam features?

    There is a link at the bottom of the review to "Firewall and anti-spam" but it doesn't lead to anything. I wonder if they'll add this later?
     
  6. feniks

    feniks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Posts:
    130
    You can find them from here:

    http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/windows/index.shtml
     
  7. stueycaster

    stueycaster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    293
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    I gotta say it. At some point ESS will be the finest security suite on the market. It's awesome in it's beginning stages.
     
  8. Katril

    Katril Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Posts:
    21
    Well honestly, I would like to see some cookie management to compliment the antispyware.


    Most reviews including the pcmag review tends to see cookie management as being a part of the antispyware attack.


    Which explains detection rates because the nod32 antispyware doesnt detect data miners\tracking cookies which is why I feel it gets low reviews in some cases.


    The firewall itself I have mixed feelings about it, one IM used to a more technical firewall which gives me more control.

    I mean they have a few things to work out on what it does on default, but Im a set it myself type of guy so my first instinct was to go in and check the settings.


    As far as cleaning, again it seems that the Nod32 staff have commented on that. I tend to like their approach on that, being that I want to be involved in what a program does and doesnt delete on my system.


    Im not a set it and forget it type of person, but Im not most people and most people want a preset system that does everything for them so they dont have to participate. I find security systems like that to be the weakest of the all.


    And I find that most reviews tend to evaluate on the preset do it for you so you dont have to participate guidlines.
     
  9. nodyforever

    nodyforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    PT / Lisbon


    Good review :):D, but the Eset still has very much to improve his new products and can do it if he wants it and it will have disposed to face this reality.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.