Prev: Antivirus xp 2008 system defender PCPrivacyCleaner
Next: OpenTablet 7 is iPad alternative, Specs, Reviews and Prices
From: Bill on 18 Feb 2010 09:24

In article <4aiqn5pgikp4hm5qumkj7vs2r030rfgp1q(a)4ax.com>, Bad Boy Charlie says...

>I was surprised he cannot verify the integrity of the various testing agencies
>>to his own personal satisfaction himself. Here is another recognized AV
>testing >agency.
>
>www.icsalabs.com/ Let the flames and mindless barbs begin.

Well, one would think so, but I haven't had a Windows installation in years. I
just recently installed Windows 7 on a machine. Thanks for the additional link.

From: Bad Boy Charlie on 18 Feb 2010 11:23
On 17 Feb 2010 21:51:36 -0800, Bill <wsblevins(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>X-No-Archive: Yes
>
>In article <nejpn5992qo3qepqacb701l6gbglio1qgp(a)4ax.com>, Bad Boy Charlie says...
>
>>http://www.av-comparatives.org/
>
>Who are they and are they qualified to perform such tests? The reason I ask is
>that the only source I am aware of is the Virus Bulletin and their findings
>differ quite a bit from the source you mention.
Bill I have no vested interest in the site I mentioned. Ultimately it is
going to have to be a personal decision you are comfortable with. Why
not email a-v comparatives (or any other AV testing agency) or browse
the site to learn what methodology they use and their qualifications? It
is sometimes too easy to just post back asking 'me' or 'others' to
qualify their posts and recommendations. You might find it more
rewarding and satisfying to do some legwork yourself. The AV product
scene has many product selections.

I will however summarize several facts I have observed over the past 30
yrs I have been home computing (I'm 60 yrs old) and that is from
month-to-month some AV products will outscore (and 'dethrone') others
and vice-versa. Long term test scores history can be a useful way to
evaluate any AV product's consistency. Moreover AV product 'A' may well
detect a virus that AV product 'B' has missed regardless of test scores
and popularity. This has held true to this day. Lastly there are trial
versions available for all the major AV products and since 99.9% of the
well-known AV products offer adequate detection,cleaning, etc it can and
usually comes down to a matter of personal preference relating to GUI,
the performance impact on -your- PC and sometimes cost.

The choice is yours...
From: RayLopez99 on 18 Feb 2010 13:59
On Feb 18, 2:53 pm, Nomen Nescio <nob...(a)dizum.com> wrote:

> In the 1980's and 1990's Rodzilla was the most reliable and honest source..
> The shitheads took over when he quit. 2000's anti-virus test reviews are
> snake oil, paid for with consulting fees and kickbacks. The more you pay,
> the higher you rate. Trust no-one.


Despite that, you notice in the report (http://www.av-comparatives.org/
images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report22.pdf) the commercial products
score less than 50% overall. I would say that if you catch less than
50% of bad stuff you're not doing well at all, but apparently that's
par for the course.

RL

From: FromTheRafters on 18 Feb 2010 15:30
"RayLopez99" <raylopez88(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1e197f11-f6a5-4766-82ce-26c3485f2d9f(a)e1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 18, 2:53 pm, Nomen Nescio <nob...(a)dizum.com> wrote:

> In the 1980's and 1990's Rodzilla was the most reliable and honest
> source.
> The shitheads took over when he quit. 2000's anti-virus test reviews
> are
> snake oil, paid for with consulting fees and kickbacks. The more you
> pay,
> the higher you rate. Trust no-one.

Despite that, you notice in the report (http://www.av-comparatives.org/
images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report22.pdf) the commercial products
score less than 50% overall. I would say that if you catch less than
50% of bad stuff you're not doing well at all, but apparently that's
par for the course.

***
I wouldn't expect very high rates against "bad stuff" but ITW viruses
should be a high scoring category. I don't care much if some don't
bother with zoo samples either, as long as they retain the technology to
be able to detect them if they get onto the wild list.
***


From: PajaP on 18 Feb 2010 16:54
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:30:52 -0800, ASCII <me2(a)privacy.net> wrote:

>PajaP wrote:
>>Mainly because they give an unbiased
>>'opinion'.
>
>No such thing!
>Anyone's "opinion" is merely the results of an evaluation
>of something against their own biases,

That's your opinion. ha. I disagree.

>question should be;
>do their biases coincide with yours?

His do not. Maybe because I do not have a vested interest in any av
company.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Antivirus xp 2008 system defender PCPrivacyCleaner
Next: OpenTablet 7 is iPad alternative, Specs, Reviews and Prices