optikl said:
My comment is based on my observation and experience that companies that
go the Suite route usually wind up going outside of their core
competencies. The result of that is a Suite product that is inferior to
best of brand stand alone products. Is that what we want to see from NOD?
No. Not at all. My comment is based on what I have seen in the
industry lately. I am new to this game ... before WinXP, I didn't need
to know any of this stuff.
As you probably know, I use KAV, but I wouldn't hesitate to recommend
NOD32 to anyone. But let's face it, AVG, Avast! and AntiVir keep
everybody else on their toes. If their detection rates were not at
least decent enough to have a following, we wouldn't be having this
discussion. As Martha might say, it's a good thing that Kaspersky Labs
and Eset understand that. I mean if it weren't for PBR and Old
Milwaukee, would there even be a Samuel Adams?
Here is my point. Start with the PFW end of the issue. Around here,
Kerio (at least 2.1.5), Sygate, Outpost and earlier versions of Zone
Alarm were highly touted. Zone Alarm is the only one left ... the
others have been gobbled up. And Zone Alarm is getting into the AV game.
Next, look at the AV end of things. You are absolutely right about
many top-notch AV apps going downhill after going the Suite route, but
has that been due to the AV side losing engineering resources or the
marketing bozos taking over? Let's hope that doesn't happen to KAV or
NOD32.
Now look at the state of the AV industry in general. If the average
dipshit MS OS user has his system compromised, it is most likely due
to a spamming, spoofing, phishing, spyware and/or adware exploit. In
any event, the average dipshit user will obviously blame his security
setup, aka his AV app. The AV vendors have no choice. They will have
to address all of these problems, or partner with those who can.
As far as resources devoted to Suite development goes, let's hope that
Eset and Kaspersky Labs do it right. Whether stealth and outgoing
protection are bullshit or not, suffice it to say that NO software FW
is going to prevent some dipshit from screwing up his system. The
resources and emphasis needs to remain on the AV side of things which,
of course, includes trojans, worms, spyware and even adware.
I have often heard the argument that one would not expect a vendor of
the best AV to be the vendor of the best PFW. But this presumes that
they are of equal importance, and that working together is of no
importance. This may or may not be the case. The best
anti-spam/trojan/spyware/adware apps to use with the best AV
protection (engine and database) may indeed be those that were
developed along side each other, i.e., a Suite. Only time will tell.
And so finally, ISTM that Kaspersky and Eset have to go the Suite
route. What is important is how they do that. If they screw this up,
we will be stuck with Symantec, McAfee or Windows Defender. No offense
to the users of any of those products, but I know that I don't want to
end up with only those three choices. Yeah, I know, let's not start a
*nix flame.
Ron
