Nod32 version 7 cannot be used with Outpost firewall

[Ron 0]

Swex

 

Thanks for the reply; it's clear you feel as positive and loyal towards Nod as I used to.

 

It's common in security software forums for people to suggest "Don't use X, switch to Y" and then go off topic for pages of what amount to no more than consumer loyalty. I don't plan to do that here.

 

What I would say is that as someone who works in software, the suggestion to 'stop using X' isn't helpful and is not a solution. We have a quality assurance team who's job it is to test our software to destruction in all worst case hardware AND software scenarios. They work in conjunction with R&D to ensure our products work on as many different machines as smoothly as possible. With PCs it's impossible to guarantee 100% smooth-running due to each invidivdual having an almost unique combination of OS, upgrades, drivers, services, registry etc. What you try to do is grade reported bugs so that you can fix them according to how critical they are AND how many users report them.

 

In security software there aren't too many players (around 30 AV/firewall solutions in total), so this is a relatively small testing scenario but is made complex by the fact that they're all in competition, so are less likely to get under the hood regarding tech issues than they might with, say, Microsoft.

 

I've been using security software since 1991 and in all that time I have not seen a satisfactory security suite. They all suffer from 1 or more of:

 

1. Being strong in one aspect (say, AV) and weak in another (say, firewall).

2. Unecessarily bloated in resource use.

3. Damaging the user's software environment in unusual circumstances (false positives particularly with respect to startup components). Single suites have too much control over everything and users are totally dependent on the software. I know this isn't a direct comparison but look at the recent MBAM disaster. Single suites also tend to fail more at clean uninstallation. I have had to help a number of folk with manual uninstallation of suites.

4. Different suites offer different useful tools but rarely all the ones you want.

 

For me the better solution is always to get the best of both fields. This also allows me to shop for features. So I've always gone for standalones.

 

Outpost for me has always been a solid firewall. Not only does it do the job but it's Web Content blocker is a simple and powerful tool for protection AND privacy. E.g. it blocks cookie returns and it stops java, active X etc. from running. You can configure it to allow whatever you want to run on a per-site basis. Nod32 by comparison lets everything run but decides whether or not it's safe to do so.

 

You suggest Nod has been a problem only when I use Outpost. Re-read my message, I've been running them side by side for years without a hitch. Only with Nod 6 (startup freeze) and Nod7 (can't use internet) has there been a problem.

 

I have a lifetime licence for Outpost and am unlikely to give that up short of Outpost taking a dive in quality. In addition to which, I think Outpost is a fine product. It's architecture has been mostly the same for the last few years. It's Nod that has changed and with each change there has been stability issues that Eset have not solved to my satisfaction. The suggestion, then, that I should uninstall Outpost and hand over all security of my PC to Eset's suite is simply unacceptable.

 

When I first subscribed to nod it was very much the 'industry-insider's' choice but over the years -- either because of changing staff, OS changes or changes in malware design -- Eset have lost ground. I don't dismiss comparatives when both comparative sites and security bloggers are able to explain how Nod32 is not as robust as it used to be and is positively blind in areas of malware and malware removal. And I think this has been Nod32's downfall. It was the leader in 'pure' virus detection and removal. Since then the malware word has become a lot more tricky and it's in its behavioural module design that Nod32 is now causing the kind of problems I'm experiencing.

 

I will definitely not be uninstalling outpost but, come renewal time, will see either that Eset and Agnitum have got this fixed or will be shopping for another AV -- though it's getting increasingly hard to ignore all the positive sounds people are making about Avast free despite its similarly weak performance in some AV comparisons.

 

Thanks for taking the time to post.

Very well said longtimeuser

[SweX 871]

@longtimeuser. 

 

Instead of quoting your whole post i'll answer bit for bit. Clearly we see different on this issue and there's most likely nothing I can say to make you think any different about it.

 

Yes there are 30 or so free and paid firewalls around, but expecting ESET or any other vendor to test their product against the majority of them is IMO asking too much, I believe ESET is busy developing their own product and keep up with the threat landscape as it is.

 

Even if ESET or Outpost would fix this soon, 6 months later an update (improvement) to either product can start to cause problems. And you will be in the same situation again.

 

Yes the V6 lineup of ESET may have worked better to not say perfect with Outpost, but ESET can't stop developing and adding essential layers to their product only to stay compatible with Outpost or any other product.

 

Of course ESET has changed, it's the one of the two that needs to change and be improved constantly while software firewalls works more or less the same and basically only needs to be updated to stay compatible with the OS. So if you think it's a bad thing that ESET keeps developing their software I don't understand.

 

Again, what stability problems have you had with ESET, why I am wondering is because you are the first to mention that you've had stability problems with ESET. Compatibility issues is one thing and stability problems another.

 

If "test" results are important then yes there are other AV's out there waiting for you, but for me knowing that the AV I use runs so perfect and don't cause any issues for me and I don't have to worry about that the vendor may add cra* to the product is more important than any "test" result in the world. In other words, good test results is far from the only thing that matters.

 

Personally I don't care if the cookies are block at arrival or not, a quicky with CCleaner solves that easily and cookies are important on some websites or else they may not function properly, so I rather let them in first and show them the door when I am done. 

 

But if you think that the firewall is more important, then yes perhaps you should change AV to see if you will be more happy elsewhere.

 

You mention Avast, now I never speak cra* about other vendors product since I recommend several of them if someone looks for a free AV.

 

But what Avast are thinking when they add things like....

 

Avast: SavePrice -- we added a new function to the browser plugins that helps you save money when you are shopping online. It finds better prices for items you are searching for. At the moment, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari are supported. Internet Explorer should be supported in the near future.

 

....Is something I will never understand, Avast is a good product but this addition goes under the category... "add a feature just for the sake of adding something new". It have no place in a security product at all. If ESET starts adding cra* like that then I will follow your route to a new product.

 

At the moment I could not be more happy with ESET. 

 

The choice is yours of course

But I would also contact Outpost to see what they have to say.

Edited June 7, 2014 by SweX

[longtimeuser 2]

Just to let you know that after over ten years using Nod32 AV I did not renew this year and chose an alternative product.

 

I won't repeat all my previous comments but Nod32 just isn't the cutting edge leader it used to be. Moreover, Eset's development process seems blinkered and possibly under-resourced.

 

I know it's not directly related (so don't get worked up over this) but last night's forum breach just felt like icing on the cake.

 

But I would like to thank Eset for Nod32's many years of total reliability.

[Peter Randziak 1,130]

Hello Longtimeuser,

 

we are really sorry for your negative experience, but we can't guarantee compatibility with every 3.rd party software, if you have any issues directly related to our products we will be more that happy to assist you.

Have you considered switching to ESET Smart Security with a firewall built-in? 

[SweX 871]

Thanks and good luck longtimeuser.

 

If you have found a product that you think is better then I can only say congratulations.

 

Personally I feel the opposite about the product development, they are moving forward slowly but steady like ESET always has been as you probably know if you have used it for over ten years. I prefer that compared to products with fast developed features and rapid release cycles wich tend to be less stable on the system, own experience.

Edited June 20, 2014 by SweX