Battle ESET Internet Security VS Norton Internet Security for better protection?

[KonradPL]

Hello

Guys what will be better option for protection for family devices like laptop`s and mobile phones(android)?
(In Eset i`ll set hips and firewall rules for anti ransomware protection)


thanks for yours help

 

[beavisviruses]

Your comments are just your biased opinion, facts are looking different to me...
The truth is that only one who has not a clue about ESET will claiming that it's unable to protect home-users

It is rare that in every test I see that Eset performs fail. It's not a good antivirus

 

[Burrito]

in zero day yes is poor,

I do not think I need to show more evidence about it?

I think you've made your point.

It's all good

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

in zero day yes is poor,

I do not think I need to show more evidence about it?

And when did zero day become the only metric to base a product on? Your basing your point of view on a metric that will typically never affect home users to begin with. The only evidence you have shown thus far is YouTube tests, which are not 100% reliable to begin with. Your ignoring every other test that Eset has done well in, so in essence all you are doing it cherry picking tests to prove your biased point of view. Furthermore, to expand on your comment on your previous post, anyone who know anything about computers and security knows what not to do to get infected, thus will be infection free no matter which product they are using.

It's one thing to not like a product, we all have products we don't like for various reasons, but unfortunately your just stating an opinion, not facts and your sources aren't 100% reliable to begin with. If you want a counter argument, just look at the test results from the HUB that @devjit2018 has been doing, they seem to be painting a far different picture than what you are saying.

 

[marcopaone]

Eset is a good product in general but has a poor protection against zero day.
Norton imo is a TOP product like Kaspersky.

 

[beavisviruses]

And when did zero day become the only metric to base a product on? Your basing your point of view on a metric that will typically never affect home users to begin with. The only evidence you have shown thus far is YouTube tests, which are not 100% reliable to begin with. Your ignoring every other test that Eset has done well in, so in essence all you are doing it cherry picking tests to prove your biased point of view. Furthermore, to expand on your comment on your previous post, anyone who know anything about computers and security knows what not to do to get infected, thus will be infection free no matter which product they are using.

It's one thing to not like a product, we all have products we don't like for various reasons, but unfortunately your just stating an opinion, not facts and your sources that aren't 100% reliable to begin with. If you want a counter argument, just look at the test results from the HUB that @devjit2018 has been doing, they seem to be painting a far different picture than what you are saying.

552/5000



I mean according to your only laboratory tests is the one that you have to trust? you are super wrong, the tests of youtubers are the ones that most resemble reality. There are no excuses, the product is bad detecting unknown threats, it is not the only metric to measure an antivirus but it is one of the most important. A person who knows computer science can not be infected? Obviously if you can get infected, nobody is free of infections, it's like you tell me I'll never have a car accident because I'm 10 and that's a lie.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

552/5000



I mean according to your only laboratory tests is the one that you have to trust? you are super wrong, the tests of youtubers are the ones that most resemble reality.

Unfortunately this is where you are wrong. Youtube tests are FAR from reality. No one disables their real-time protection, then runs a right click scan, than run missed samples with real-time back on. Reality would be to download samples from the internet than run them. For the record Eset has one of the best web scanners out there and chances are it would be stopped before it even hits the system.

 

[Cortex]

552/5000



I mean according to your only laboratory tests is the one that you have to trust? you are super wrong, the tests of youtubers are the ones that most resemble reality. There are no excuses, the product is bad detecting unknown threats, it is not the only metric to measure an antivirus but it is one of the most important. A person who knows computer science can not be infected? Obviously if you can get infected, nobody is free of infections, it's like you tell me I'll never have a car accident because I'm 10 and that's a lie.

Actually personally I have had 3 car accidents & one was my fault but I've never had anything of any consequence as in infections at large on any PC other than a worm, quite a few blocked of course, until the last three or four years I used F-Prot or ESET usually with Mbam or similar that's in 24 years. Am I doing something wrong here. The PC's have been on the internet every day unless I'm away. That is real life testing at at least for me.

Though as I recall I have never beamed over a thousand malware samples on my desk with all AV protection off & not arriving via a protected browser then executed them all, often not allowing the AV to restart etc? And that's the real world? I think that's the mistake I've made

 

[L0ckJaw]

in zero day yes is poor,

I do not think I need to show more evidence about it?

So some wannabe testers on Youtube are right ? Maybe you should take some "Computer Science" instead !
@beavisviruses this thread you shared your professional experience in has become a flamewar thread. Lets stick to the topic starters real question and not on your " hate " against Eset.

 

[[correlate]]

According to the experiences I passed, Norton Internet Security the best.

 

[Cortex]

So some wannabe testers on Youtube are right ? Maybe you should take some "Computer Science" instead !
@beavisviruses this thread you shared your professional experience in has become a flamewar thread. Lets stick to the topic starters real question and not on your " hate " against Eset.

You are right !

I use ESET & Norton depending on the PC & licences for KAV/Emssoft too All are good ~

 

[uduoix]

To be fair, bad user can make every AV look bad

 

[bribon77]

All Avs have their shortcomings there is nothing 100%. Eset seems to me a good antivirus if it knows how to adjust like all AVs.

 

[L0ckJaw]

I have never said the opposite. I'm just saying that there are much better solutions than Eset and it is not top as the "most naive people believe.

Lets stay on topic, so stop this useless bashing of ESET.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

I have never said the opposite. I'm just saying that there are much better solutions than Eset and it is not top as the "most naive people believe.

I think part of this whole thing is very much a mis-understanding. I don't think anyone here including myself ever said that Eset is the best solution EVER and no product can match it. The whole point of these type of threads is to list pros and cons for each product that the OP is inquiring about. Eset like Norton, Kaspersky, Bitdefender etc.. all have their pros and cons, as nothing is ever perfect. Quite frankly, the frustration that has been presented towards you is not really about Eset not being labelled as perfect, it's that you are only using one metric and one metric only to base this whole decision on. Fact is there is far more to a product that just looking at one metric. In the case of Eset, I would say that compared to Norton, it's lighter, their overall customer support is better, better at detecting PUPs, it's web protection is far superior and if one wants to it's capabilities far surpass what Norton can offer. Now that doesn't mean that Norton sucks, it's a really good product, but it may not be for everyone, same with Eset. Eset may be a little weaker against zero day malware, but as I've said, most home users will never run across a real zero day piece of malware, so I think there's too much focus on this aspect than it really requires. Furthermore, as it has already been pointed out, if one wants to Eset can be tweaked to a point where you can significantly reduce your chances of getting infected, including zero day malware.

I always preach that people should take advantage of the trial periods for each product they are interested in and make the decision based on that. Picking the product that gets the most "votes" in an a vs b thread on a security forum, really isn't the best way to go about it IMHO. It's not that people here don't offer good advice, it's just that what works for me, may not work for someone else. That's why it's important to weigh all the pros/cons, try it out for yourself before making a decision and possibly putting any money down.

In all honesty, Eset is more than capable of protecting users, looking at all tests as a whole, it reinforces this point. As I've said, YouTube tests are fun and all, but they aren't 100% reliable and do not represent real world usage I'm afraid. All tests, especially YouTube tests should be taken with a huge grain of salt any ways.

 

[Nevi]

Eset is trash, only someone who has no idea of computer science would use Eset to protect

Heheh this one is rich.

 

[L0ckJaw]

Heheh this one is rich.

I think i drop my Microsoft certificates and go for the Computer Science certification instead now

 

[Wraith]

if a malware is not detected by the signatures, your antivirus must respond with the behavior blocker

I'm giving you a proof of ESET BB and so please stop spamming this thread. The OP has already chosen what AV he will use and your constant bashing of ESET will not contribute anything in this thread. ESET has always been a reliable suite and I'm not gonna base my judgement on a YouTube video. The tests at MT prove otherwise and myself test ESET here. I've described in detail the pros and cons of ESET to the OP and he is wise enough to choose his preferred AV based on facts.

 

[Wraith]

Eset is trash, only someone who has no idea of computer science would use Eset to protect,

Finally, the time has come for me to throw away or burn all my Microsoft and Cisco Certificates. Life is so harsh guys. :emoji_sob:

@KonradPL Here's the latest test of ESET IS from the MT test hub. You can also check out all the other tests to see how ESET fares.

https://malwaretips.com/threads/malware-samples-13-22-07-2019.93886/#post-825614

 

[SeriousHoax]

Here's another example:
This is a recent malware that's not detected by Eset's signature yet. But as soon as I execute the file, Eset is able to detect and remove the malware.

 

[ForgottenSeer 72227]

A request to all those who are genuinely involved in this thread. Please don't bother replying to beavisviruses. He's just a troll who comes in this forum to bash certain products like ESET, AVG, Avast. No much how much proof you show to him he'll not accept coz he fixes computers and so he knows better than all. So it's best to stick to the original thread the OP has posted and just ignore the unnecessary comments.

I agree!

Back to the main topic.