Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Triple Helix, Jun 6, 2014.
After going through all this most people would never call and open a ticket again..lmao
I don't see the issue with that reply. Its like when you go to your mechanic with your car. He asks you what the issues/symptoms are as it can help him immensely. You don't just throw the car at him and tell him to fix it. The questions are all in plain English and don't require any tech knowledge. If you don't want to answer them its OK we can work around it.
Hi Roy most don't understand that Webroot Customer Support is second to none but I have seen it in action many times during Beta Testing very early 2011 and I give you guys 2 thumbs up!
I have never had a single issue with Webroot support.I would expect any a/v company to ask myself the aforementioned questions.I have nothing but raves for their quick response and attention to detail.I have yet to deal with an a/v company who's support team will go all out to ensure their customer is happy as Webroot does.I own licenses to many solutions,but i trust the combo of ESET/WSA on my main machine which I use 99% of the time.I keep an eye on a few dozen installations myself and have not had a single malware issue with any system I have worked on.I make it a point to educate the people I deal with about the the threat landscape,PUP's PUA's,best practices etc.I very rarely get emails or calls with any questions.I have been using WSA since the beginning and have yet to see something get by it.My wife is a happy clicker as well and Webroot kept her machine clean.I am due for renewal soon and fully intend on renewing my sub when that time comes.
Clickers rarely notify you. If I didn't happen to be at my father in-laws, he'd of never known other than it 'seemed slower'.. That's the nature of these things. If you ran second or third opinion scans I bet the majority of those systems would have 'stuff' on them. Just a bet of course. To each his own.
Webroot support on tickets are like superman they answer super fast like they were waiting on your ticket. Do they work 24\7 365 Days a year?
I used to use online scanners every few months to get second and third opinion if I was clean. But as they never once found an infection, I eventually gave up. Note from my previous posts here that prior to changing to Prevx->Webroot, I definitely did get infected.
Hey go play in another thread with Norton!
What an odd response. Everything discussed was topical to WSA. Is the propaganda more important than the facts?
Anyway... I'm guessing you Webroot boys will not like the 3.5 Star review at Tom's.
The "facts" were hardly facts...more like unsubstantiated tripe (my own opinion BTW)...but expected of the person espousing them.
But we do like Neil Rubenking's 4.5 star (& an Editor's Choice Award to boot) review at PCMag.com...
Just goes to show, doesn't it...
Actually, at the time that reply was made, there were several posts above it that were purely about Norton. Some were deleted by the member's who originally posted them and a couple removed by moderators after getting reported. So, what's left behind makes that reply look out of place.
Not sure who you are talking about... but if it's who I think you are, I disagree. Seemed to me that he went out of his way to present concrete info.
Yep, I do think WSA is a rising product, a product with a few rough edges and areas for improvement -- but one to watch.
Makes sense now. Thanks.
Some reviews and this is a Review are Good and some are bad so do I agree with Jill Scharr's Review no, again the Reviewer doesn't know the full functions of WSA such as the Monitoring, Rollback and Remediation feature, like if you look at a reviewer there is something wrong when a Reviewer doesn't know anything about the product and only reading what's said on the Webroot's site maybe they should look at the many web pages if they are just going to read what's said as this is a very good web page http://www.brightcloud.com/platform/webroot-intelligence-network.php It's like Movie Review is that going to stop you from seeing your favorite movie because the reviewer doesn't know anything about the story? Well it wouldn't stop me!
I don't think it's a bad review or a bad score either. There's always some variability in results depending on the testing methodology, malware sample set, etc, plus there's always some subjectivity. For instance the reviewer felt the WSA UI was very busy. Well, so what? As long as I can find the options I'm looking for I don't think the UI matters much; it's mostly set and forget. With security software I'm more interested in the tray notification icon presenting good real time feedback since that's where the initial interaction occurs when there are warnings, etc. Regaring the review note also that it states AV-TEST didn't use the latest version of WSA.
Fair response. For those who dismiss every test that does not promote their product -- that is problematic.
Testing is THE basis for the evaluation of products. And overall, WSA is moving up in testing -- so that is good.
Testing is in its prehistory and the amount of kool aid drinkers here at Wilders that believe the "Your Favourite Antivirus' Detection Reaches 99.98%" BS is just-plain-simply embarrassing. The only way to know what works and what doesn't is to ask as many IT managers as possible. They monitor hundreds, some of them thousands of iOS, Android, Mac, and PC devices and can't be fooled.
I really like how Microsoft commissioned AV-Comparatives to show them how it should be done:
Emisoft, Bitdefender, etc: 99.5% 'detection', but four times more infected computers than Microsoft that only scores 90%
I'm an MSP co-manager, we have around 34K machines monitored. The cleanest companies have a NGFW (usually Fortigate) with AV Settings Maxed w/Proxy Scanning, and URL+IPS. Then 'whatever' AV they decide to run works just fine, and we see only a very small differential between 'brands' except for MSE/WindowsDefender, those companies are almost always compromised even with an NGFW on the gateway. Once the NGFW is deployed, choosing between Symantec, Trend, or whatever isn't a complex endeavor as they will all push detections up to the top when stacked on to the NGFW.
Take away the NGFW, and then you will see big problems AND big variances between products - assuming every AV was deployed with best practices.
So the "everyone detects 99% with the right click scan alone" is Alice In Wonderland Revisited.
Absolutely not.. If you need me to explain better, I will.. I'd never believe a right click would yield 99% detections, that was my point.
I recommended Webroot to our solutions team today for a very specific situation.. We are deploying a fairly large firm as one of our new MSP clients over the next few weeks. 15% of their machines are Dual Core 1.9Ghz machines with 1-2GB of ram. That won't cut it for all of our AV solutions we are licensed to deploy so we need to think out of the box. In this case, I think WSA is really our best choice. Let's see where solutions goes with it. I'd be curious monitoring 400 machines with WSA on it over the long term.
BTW, all of my preliminary logs indicate they are almost all infected. They were running MSE/Defender as their sole security solution. We're getting them a Fortigate, and proper AV solutions over the next weeks.
I assume WSA will run on old, slow dual cores with 1-2GB of ram on Windows 7?
It can run on a pentium 4 with 512 mb, dont worry.
Well that's a relief. I sent the recommendation up to solution design, so the wheels are turning.
Get ready to receive many calls about FPs and not being able to acces legit sites that they usually did but yes it's light, that's the only good thing about it to be honest
Hmm, I've been running WSAC since it first rolled out. I've only seen about 3 or 4 false positives.
Separate names with a comma.