SiteAdvisor used to be my main means of protection in terms of web surfing, but when it was taken over by McAfee, it sort of changed.
First of all, I hated the new design. The images took too long too load, and so did the ratings. I had to wait longer before I clicked on the desired link. In short, it made my browser sluggish.
And not all of the sites are rated. Don't get me wrong, but no one can rate EVERYTHING in the Internet. It's just that SiteAdvisor's way of rating sites is too lengthy --- on the other hand, it's pretty reliable.
I'm perfectly happy with WOT, even though not everything is reliable. It's a faster and easier way to stay safe. :)
This site is WOTs competition in the website-rating business, and while I still consider it to have some use, the SiteAdvisor system contains weaknesses that limits its reliability and makes it inferior to WOT.
Its basiclly the same thing as WOT but however WOT has a lot more features and a way better rating system. Siteadvisor only has 3 basic ratings green, yellow, and red. WOT has much more than that and is much more accurate than Mcafee. WOT also stops you from visiting harmful websites while siteadvisor doesnt block you from them. so in the end WOT is a lot better. I just use it for a backup in case wot isnt working or something like that.
Run by McAfee, rates websites based on safety. One thing that bothers me, though, is just how frequently websites that are malicious, fraudulent, engaged in phishing, or spam sites are erroneously given a green rating. Even worse is when sites that are rightfully given a bad rating have their ratings changed to safe. Despite these flaws, SiteAdvisor is run by good people, and their purpose is to protect computer users.