Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:10 pm

Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Post by fitch » Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:30 pm

Why should I use WOT instead of Siteadvisor? (

Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 5:11 pm


Post by Timo » Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:30 pm

Here are some points you might want to consider:

WOT knows more websites.

WOT's reputations are up-to-date. Reputations are calculated every half an hour when new information is available.

With WOT you can share your knowledge with others and your opinions really count.

You can also use WOT for protecting children.

Posts: 1097
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:40 am

Siteadvisor vs wot

Post by wehaveitall » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:52 pm

I am a wot user and after seeing your post, decided to try site advisor and compare it. Now before I continue, I want everyone to know I'm not trying to purposly make site advisor look bad, I'm just judging what I thought of my web experience with it compared to wot.

Wot advantages:

First of all, siteadvisor cant work with wot as well unless u get wot, get site advisor, uninstall wot, and install wot again, which already shows a major flaw. =/.

Second, site advisor causes conflicts with many add ons including callingidlinkadvisor

Third, site advisor when on a site doesnt show u the details, like wot does. It only shows u details in google search results, and not many even at that.

Wot highlights the safe and unsafe results in green yellow and red depending on how safe

Wot has much more preferences

ikf mcafee doesnt have it, they likely neverwill. WIth wot, if a user or several users awho are trusted enough by the wot team, they can judge whether or not a site is safe, and let others know as well.

Wot reputation data shows up in links in emails without pictures. Site advisor doesnt

Wot doesnt try to get u to pay for a better version of the ad on

With the right configuration, any user can let wot work with any search engine in the world. With site advisor u cant.

Doesn't cover up the thing at the top of google search results alerting u of how many results it retrieved which site advisor sometimes does

Mcafee isnt the best company when t comes to a lot of their products...

Site advisor advantages:

Sitea dvisor tells u the number of emails a site sends each week, therefor letting u know that it may send u spam even tho its not necessarily dangerous

Site advisor works with internet explorer

Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:51 am

re:Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Post by BMENON » Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:44 am

-Finjan,the firefox addon is also a security advisor (see ) similar to WOT and Siteadvisor. Finjan does not show the reputation of the url we type in the address-bar.; but shows the reputation of all sites of search-results well.When an untrustworthy site jumps into the address-bar without our permission(this happens when you go to some music/video/antivirus sites) WOT will immediately put a transparent curtain and warns us.This is a very good service and WOT is more dependable than any others, in my experience.

Jared Gray
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 5:14 pm

I havent used other add-ons etc...

Post by Jared Gray » Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:14 pm

To my knowledge Site-advisor is web based? I don't own or pay for the mcaffee suite so Id have no clue... I use WOT as a final barrier (OpenDNS>HostsMan>WOT) You could include anything or as little as you want.. I find the above apps\services "essential"... If site-advisor is simply web-based it wouldn't really benefit... Just my opinion...Thx..

Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 5:06 am

re:Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Post by PikadudeNo1 » Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:08 pm

I used to use SiteAdvisor. These are my reasons for preferring WOT:

- WOT can tell you whether a site is family-safe. It seems that neither SiteAdvisor nor Finjan offer that.

- WOT can report on the reputation of a site linked to from a Gmail message, without you having to click the link. SiteAdvisor can do this, but it costs money.

- In the same manner, WOT can also check external links on Wikipedia pages. SiteAdvisor can't do that at all.

- WOT works perfectly fine on older Windows systems (Win9X, WinME). SiteAdvisor tends to be crash Firefox on such systems.

To Yatti420: SiteAdvisor can be accessed with both the Web and a browser add-on.

Posts: 1097
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:40 am

re:Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Post by wehaveitall » Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:57 pm

Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:43 pm

re:Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Post by fdepierre » Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:43 pm

I currently evaluated these three Firefox add-on and agree with the previous comments. But I can't find anything about Against Intuition Inc. Where is the company address, who is behind and so on....

- Also, I would like to know if this company has planned to internationalise this firefox extension.

Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:43 am

re:Siteadvisor vs. WOT

Post by Sami » Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:35 am

We are just in the middle of moving to new offices in Helsinki. We'll be sure to update the "About us" page next week. In the mean while, if you have any questions, feel free to contact us via email.

Yes, we have plans to translate the add-on to other languages.

Posts: 1097
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:40 am

TRanslating to finnish

Post by wehaveitall » Sat Sep 08, 2007 5:47 pm

If you translate wot to finish i bet my brother would try it, cuz he is learning finish and loves anything having to do with it so if you can make an option to translate wot into finnish that'd be great.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests