Broadband Tech > Security > Security > Anti Spyware software comparisons

Anti Spyware software comparisons

Disappointing that they did not include Spybot S&D...although the context of the study was probably "commercial" products.

said by anthrorules:

---

Disappointing that they did not include Spybot S&D...although the context of the study was probably "commercial" products.

---

reply to John2g
Pest Patrol is not there either.........

reply to John2g
They rate Ad-Aware's support as being very low, but why is there no mention of the Lavasoft Forum?? Doesn't that count as "support?"

quote:

---

Help/Support:
There is an excellent FAQs page on the website. There is also an in-depth Help file, complete with graphics that will explain some of the product's features. If all else fails there is an email support option.

Our experience with technical support, however, has been less than desirable. In fact, we've reviewed hundreds of products in all categories and this is about the worst support we have seen. We've either been ignored or the answers to questions took much longer than they should have.

---

said by Sparrow:

---

They rate Ad-Aware's support as being very low, but why is there no mention of the Lavasoft Forum?? Doesn't that count as "support?"

---

reply to John2g
Um, I had a bit of a "tussle" with the author of those reviews at another board after he spammed the board promoting his site and then stated that he didn't review Spybot Search and Destroy because a) it was an inferior product, b) the author of SSD had "stolen" it from InfoWorks' SpyRemover and SSD was a just a rip off (he was unaware that SpyRemover is a licensed version of SSD) and c) he didn't review ripped products (although he did review BPS' product and apparently was unaware of its history and the allegations made against it by both Patrick Kolla and Lavasoft).

Anyway, the reviewer did not seem to be particularly well informed about the antispyware field and community although at the other site he presented himself as an "expert" reviewer on the subject. (Which may or may not account for his not including Lavasoft's forum as part of the product's support structure. Perhaps he simply didn't check out the forum or didn't consider that an appropriate form of product support. Or perhaps Lavasoft simply doesn't pay enough for better placement in the reviews, if one were to be really cynical about that site.)

It also may or may not be relevant to mention that his site is associated with a marketing/advertising outfit whose marketing tactics might include some of those utilized by some of the "rogue" antispyware apps he reviewed such as Enigma's SpyHunter. (See eTechnology for example »www.ecatapult.com/services2.htm#eCommerce ) And that the site is an affiliate of the commercial products featured there, although that in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. He said that neither was a factor and did not influence his reviews or choices for top picks.

I can't add much more info since the discussion with the author on the other board was subsequently "disappeared." Whether it was due to something I may have said, I don't know. Perhaps.

reply to John2g
Wonder how spyhunter got such a good rating? $$$$ perhaps?

I do not have any faith in their comparisons.

reply to anthrorules
Well, they did include a program that stole code from Spybot though (along with code from an earlier version of Adaware), BPS Spyware Remover.
--
TheJoker

reply to sig
sig:

Can't say I'm surprised to hear that. That outfit advertises regularly on "spyware"-related words through Google.

Best,

Eric L. Howes

Eric, as I said, the thread was "disappeared" by the site mods. Although it might have been retained by the system and still may be able to be resurrected should there be a need to do so...I'm not sure but if you are still interested in pursuing that IM me.

What was particularly curious to me was why was this alleged "expert" spamming various existing threads on a message board and then acting as if he didn't know spamming a board was universally considered a loathsome practice? He claimed to want input from a "general audience" regarding his site and what products people wanted him to add for review by a team of illustrious "experts" (such as himself?).

I'm a suspicious sort so I suspect he was targeting the kind of discussion site where perhaps some not so internet savvy folks would hang out and he could at least generate traffic to his site and at least a few more sales. One poster claimed that he got one of those noxious "you are infected!" popups when visiting the site. My ad/popup blockers of course blocked whatever may have been associated with the site.

I don't think he was necessarily highlighting the antispyware section of the site, I think the discussion went there because of another poster's inquiries.

Anyway, these sorts of review sites should be regarded as another form of marketing and people should be aware that this site for example is a "division" of a maketing/advertising company. As to why this fellow trashed a well known freeware app in such a fashion, one might well wonder if it was truly ignorance or....

Ah, edited because I caught Eric's edit.