General discussion

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

-Finjan,the firefox addon is also a security advisor (see https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/489... ) 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.

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.

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.

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.

I tried Siteadvisor and it was too complicated and boring and also its system is outdated I think which shows all wrong reputation so just after sometime I tried and stopped using it.

About their Rating and Comment system well its useless somehow as few people say something else with their rating and it seems confusing.

Therefore final verdict is that WOT is the best web rating system of all.

Best regards,
Anand N.