Comments on: Eset NOD32 Anti Virus Vs. Norton Anti Virus 2009

By: Tape Backup

Tape Backup — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 09:21:44 +0000

Norton Internet Security 2009 the fastest virus, spyware and internet protection you can buy

By: Brian Blair

Brian Blair — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 08:04:30 +0000

Also

Norton’s system Requiments are

MAC OS X

* Mac OS X 10.4.11 or higher (includes 10.5.x support)
* Macintosh system with PowerPC or Intel Core processor
* 256 MB of RAM (512 MB Recommended)
* 150 MB of available hard disk space
* Internet connection required for LiveUpdate
* CD-ROM/DVD-ROM Drive

Support instant messaging clients for Confidential data filtering includes:

* iChat 4.x
* Microsoft Messenger 7.0.1 for Mac
* Yahoo! Instant Messenger 3.0 for Mac
* AIM for Mac beta 2 for Mac

Must meet minimum Mac OS X operating system requirements

For people with older cpu’s and windows 2000 are shut out.

here is Eset

System Requirements

Processors supported: Intel or AMD x86/x64
Operating Systems: Microsoft Windows 2000, Microsoft Windows XP (32- and 64-bit editions). Microsoft Windows Vista (32- and 64-bit editions)
Memory: 48 MB
Disk Space (download): 32 MB
Disk Space (installation): 46 MB

This is fact. with symantec your punished for having a older pc they will not help you. So If there so great why would they not want to help my grandparents just because there pc was bought in 2002?

The example of these system requirements proves which product uses less resources. and im not lying its a fact you can look it up.

I use a cpu I built myself with AMD Dual-Core Opteron 2.8 GHz but I still use mcafee corporate they are alot like Eset but I have always used mcafee corporate and I am a man that won’t change a good horse.

But I recommend Eset over Norton It will use less system resources and remove the same malware or more. And they care about people with older pc’s. One that cares is one to use. All symantec has cared about and lets face it money. Pc mag will talk of how great symantec is too. But if they paid me money I will be honest I will say anything too.

By: Brian Blair

Brian Blair — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:39:00 +0000

ESET’s NOD32 has been by far the overall favorite by most people in the world mostly due to it’s low use of system resources. However, not too many people have checked up on what actually matters, protection. If you look at ESET’s products ratings from AV testers you will see it is far from perfect.
????? are you serious? Nod32 has won 100% virus detection awards the last 5 years or more look it up. I am not a Nod32 fan I have used mcafee corporate since 2001. But don’t lie about a product if your going to review a product test it for yourself along with reading the reviews don’t just be a robot for a company like norton and lie man be honest. Norton is pretty good but there not the best. I personally like protection to be rated good and to be as light as possible on my system. Love you man but be honest and people will listen to you more ok.

By: Ron

Ron — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:55:57 +0000

Thanks for the good article
We have been using ESET Smart Security (NOD32)after researching the options and figuring it looked the best. Last week I got a Google page hijack and decided to try various malware programes to see if they found anything that ESET hadn’t. Eventually I tried the kaspersky online scanner and found 7 viruses in 138 places and 600 suspuicious objects that ESET didn’t find. Many in Eudora mailboxes – deleting them wont be an option for us. So we have a major mess to clean up – apparently the default ESET install wasn’t scanning mailboxes and hasn’t been on 7 computers for 6 months. We had checked with the support people previously and they had told us the setup was fine. The setup is complicated. Now that they have fixed the setup, everything hangs. I also ran AVG which found a different 3. We will need to change to something else and may try Nortons again even though it seems to miss things too. If you want see what different scanners pick up – submit a file to virustotal.com – that will scare you!

By: Manuela Arcuri

Manuela Arcuri — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:44:04 +0000

i definitely say you this time symantec has improve much and much on memory usage. I also try this on vista and the good news is the installation was done within 5 min instead of last version which takes 15 min and memory usage was also excellent. Really great job done symantec but still i prefer with kaspersky. This antivirus is out of control on selling almost i also sell 500 license within 2 month.

By: Moti Glaser

Moti Glaser — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:38:48 +0000

I steered clear of Norton because I had tried it on ever PC / Mac I have had since a Mac Performa (I’ve had the Perfoma, PowerMac 9600, PowerMac 8500 with MacOS from 6 – 10 (hacked); PC’s with Windows 3.1/95/98/2000/2003/XP/Vista – from 486 to dual core – from desktop to laptop; home versions and pro versions…). In every instance except for Norton 360, which was on my Vista Dual Core laptop, Norton had destroyed my entire system beyond recovery. Norton was okay until they went to Symantec – that’s when everything fell down. But I have to admit that Norton 360 performed the way I always dreamed Norton should perform. It was non-intrusive, fast and used low resources. Unfortunately the cracks are bad and my trial ran out – so it’s out the door. But at least in that configuration I can tell they made some inroads.

Still, it’s not enough to give up my NOD32 / Comodo combination…

By: Tahir ul Qadri

Tahir ul Qadri — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:35:25 +0000

Norton 2009 is good. I used a trial version and uninstalled after trial period was over. And without any surprise, uninstallation is mess. It left behind lot of crap which i had to manually delete. Beside this, performance has definitely improved

By: Aung Myo Min

Aung Myo Min — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:31:56 +0000

I’ve been using Nod32 for more than 6 months. At first, very pleased with its super low memory usage and fast startup speeds. Then I noticed one thing over time. It doesn’t detect much at all! I went and used my thumb drive at my school computers and got back some scary batch files as well as some nasty things like kavo.exe on it when I removed them. I knew they are there so I just tested if Nod32 can detect them by letting it scan my thumb drive. And the result was horrible. It says my thumbdrive is clean! One final thing that forced me to look for other antivirus solution was while my friend was testing out the Ardamax Keylogger. I put the keylogger in a picture file and let eset scan it. Good game. It flagged it clean. Not very satisfied, I went and ran that file on my XP I used for testing. No warnings at all. It just ran and sent me screenshots of the system every 1 hr. Horrified.

Once again, I try to run it on Windows Seven. Exactly after I clicked the file, Windows Defender popped up and warned me that it was a keylogger and asked me if I wanted to allow it to run or not. This made my completely lose trust in Eset. It can’t even detect a keylogger which Windows Defender can detect.

I go look around the net for some alternatives and saw norton’s advert on 1 min install. Very interested, i go and find it on warez-bb, and installed it on windows seven for testing. Very satisfied with it. I can bear with the nag screen. It runs almost as light as eset. It goes and removes all the nasty executables on my thumbdrive. It even fixed my vista being hacked by some virus which prohibits it from showing operating system files.

Overall, I’d recommend the new Norton to all ppl. It’s totally different from the past versions – they are in fact nightmares to use. No longer bloated and resource hungry, I think I’ll just stick to Norton for the time being. Kaspersky seems ok to use but i’ve only seen versions that need to constantly update the serial numbers after they get blocked. Norton 2009 is really recommended people!

By: Sophie Pinder

Sophie Pinder — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:19:42 +0000

oh man, i use NOD32 for years, its so light and secured…

so many reviews like these make AV choosing getting harder…

how bout makin vote? hahaha…

still confused between NOD32, Norton, or Bit Defender….

By: Rahul Dravid

Rahul Dravid — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:13:53 +0000

Heh I keep telling to people Norton 2009 is pretty good but NOOO they don’t listen.

It’s like this basically with memory usage. Avira and Norton is almost the same in resource usage. Also according to tests those two currently hold the highest in detections. Avira @ 99.6 and Norton @ 99.0 according to Av-comparatives.org

Avira = Norton Norton > * In detection

Btw that new Gaming Edition’s interface is uber crap compared to the regular one lol.

One more thing you forgot to include. It’s about how well Norton disinfects and removes viruses compared to NOD32. NOD32 most of the time can detect stuff but if it’s anything more than a simple trojan it will just say access denied or something. Norton is very good at cleaning viruses.