Norton vs ESET: Which is Best?

Article by Tolga BALCI (23,398 pts ) , published Sep 4, 2009

It is really hard to decide when you are selecting an antimalware product, especially if they are in the top 3 in the security area. Inside we compare Norton 360 and ESET Smart Security 4 to find out which one is a perfect fit.

Introduction

Both Norton 360 and ESET Smart Security are in the top three security products in the recent years. Both have overall protection, from malware protection to firewalls, including antispam modules. Both have their own pros and cons and we melt everything in one pot for the Bright Hub readers.

If you want to read the reviews of the products, here are the reviews: ESET Smart Security and Norton 360.

Comparison

In terms of basic malware protection features, both products offer the same basic level of security. However, in terms of independent antivirus tests, ESET is one step ahead with the proactive/retrospective scans. In terms of on-demand scans, both programs are the same. This is a big plus for the ESET. But when it comes to the fine-tuned services offered by the programs, Norton 360 is clearly ahead, as you will notice in the following table:

ESET vs Norton

Symantec seems to have done its homework well and offers Website authentication and identity protection features to its product. Both may not be serious issues for you if you are already using a password manager software, which store your passwords and securely inputs them to web forms when you are logging in to a website.

Of course, there is a serious use of instant messaging applications and the users need to be protected against the risks that come with the programs. It is sad to see that such a powerful product, ESET, does not offer protection on instant messaging.

There is one point, which ESET is the clear winner is the load that it puts on the system; both through the scan process and the idle time. The idle memory use comes down to 7 Megabytes total, which makes it an “install and forget” product. And in terms of scan times, ESET is the clear winner: it is fast, really fast.

ESET and Norton offer in-depth configuration options, but ESET's options are for the novice to intermediate users. A novice user has to read the configuration options in detail before he is making changes. But the good thing is, ESET has a detailed help file. Norton's options are more oriented towards the novice users, but the advanced users will also find what they are looking for.

Conclusion

Looking at the table above, it is apparent that Norton 360 is the clear winner; more services offered for the lower price. Plus, Norton offers a 2 Gigabytes of space for online file storage (if you choose Norton 360 Premiere Edition, which comes at USD 99.99 you will have 25 Gigabytes of space). If you are living in the US, Norton offers 7/24 free support for the subscribers, which we do not see for ESET.

Boiling everything into one pot, advanced users who do not need features like parental controls may argue that ESET + password manager + back-up solution = Norton 360, but it is not the case. Even if that is so, ESET is priced USD 30 higher than Norton. This does not mean that ESET is a bad product, but it means that ESET has to add more features; a password and identity protection, instant messaging protection does not seem to be too hard to add to an existing product. ESET is very promising and the chances are good that we may see it topping the list in the coming years.

Comment

Nov 12, 2009 12:52 PM
Tom Jones
Norton vs ESET: Which is Best?
OK, I can appreciate your perspective of the stark differences in the two anti-virus. But frankly, as in most capitalistic societies, you can not use Best Price as the reason for something as important as security.

There are vulnerabilities that exist within both McAfee and Norton (all flavors) that HISTORICALLY have been attacked. This, in and of itself, makes these security softwares a waste of time and a true threat.

Currently, I am using a P4 2GB XP Pro system and waiting for Norton AV 2009 to scan the files system.
It has taken 2.5hrs to get through 190,000 files, and there are another 240,000 files left. Why should ANYONE use an experienced software vendor that forces the computer user to wait for four to six hours for a FULL computer scan?
Additionally, while features within Norton are terrific, the enduser gives up performance and computing time, just to allow the security suite to run properly.
Every year, Norton was trying to increase the features of the program, without concern for performance and speed on the machine it protected.
Additionally, many attacks on computersfocus, FIRST on disabling both Norton and McAfee as a first step. They are able to do this by tossing a wrench into the scanner update engine, LiveUpdate. Once this is crippled, then it installs a virus into an administrator account.
Eset has a completely different update engine, and a completely different means of keeping a machine updated.
Eset, while more expensive, does AntiVirus and Trojan protection exceptionally well. Additionally, as you see from your comparison chart, it uses less than HALF the resources of Norton. Meaning it does not slow the machine down.
Norton AntiVirus, Norton 360, Norton Internet Security ALL compromise the computer and slow it down significantly more than Nod32.
Nod32, BitDefender, Kaspersky and AntiVer are all less vulnerable, and of those, Nod32 is the fastest.
 
Subscribe to Computer Security
RSS
Get free weekly updates, directly to your inbox.
Browse Computer Security