Prev: What is happening to WinClam?
Next: hotfixq0306270.exe
From: * * Chas on 5 Sep 2005 15:57

"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
news:Zd%Se.13936$QN4.8127(a)trnddc02...
| From: "Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid>
|
| | Check here for some interesting results:
| | http://www.av-comparatives.org/
| |
| | It seems that in the Feb and Aug 05 On-demand comparative, Norton
Anti-Virus is
| | second in detection, just behind Kaspersky.
| | Those who use the others, and swear by them, should also check out
that site.
| | How the heck did Norton get up so high?
| | One answer is their latest engine is better. AFAIK, Norton's
2002,3,and 4's
| | engines don't do as well.
| | Any other ideas?
| |
|
| One must remember "comparitive tests" are only based upon statistical
analysis and the test
| process. Both can be biased either intentionally or accidentally.
|
| There are; lies, damn lies, statistcs and benchmarks.

Figures don't lie but liars figure!

Chas.


From: David H. Lipman on 5 Sep 2005 15:59
From: "* * Chas" <dnafutz(a)aol.spam.com>


|
| Figures don't lie but liars figure!
|
| Chas.
|

I know a liar and she has a fantastic figure !!

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm


From: Art on 5 Sep 2005 16:29
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 13:13:14 -0700, "* * Chas" <dnafutz(a)aol.spam.com>
wrote:

>No AV product is ever going to be 100% full proof and detect every virus
>all of the time. Malware is developed faster than protective measures.
>The most realistic solution is to practice Safe Hex, pick a product or
>products that you have FAITH in and hope for the best.

I say never put any faith in any av. Those who do will take hits.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
From: Morgan Ohlson on 5 Sep 2005 18:07
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 17:25:31 -0400, kurt wismer wrote:

> Buffalo wrote:
>> Check here for some interesting results:
>> http://www.av-comparatives.org/
>>
>> It seems that in the Feb and Aug 05 On-demand comparative, Norton Anti-Virus is
>> second in detection, just behind Kaspersky.
>> Those who use the others, and swear by them, should also check out that site.
>> How the heck did Norton get up so high?
>
> i've been saying it for quite some time - the mainstream products are
> all close enough to each other that their relative ranks can easily
> change from one month to the next...

For the paying conumer that is not really acceptable. The antivirus is an
assurance to have a working pc... reaching the internet for news, debate and
as a essential office tool.

A future virus-scanner must... constantly identify almost all existing
virus. Only a free scanner can be accepted to perform less then "close to
perfect".


Morgan O.
From: David H. Lipman on 5 Sep 2005 18:09
From: "Morgan Ohlson" <morgan.ohlson(a)comhem.se>


|
| For the paying conumer that is not really acceptable. The antivirus is an
| assurance to have a working pc... reaching the internet for news, debate and
| as a essential office tool.
|
| A future virus-scanner must... constantly identify almost all existing
| virus. Only a free scanner can be accepted to perform less then "close to
| perfect".
|
| Morgan O.

No !

You put too much emphasis on the software. The most effective and powertool is the user !

One *must* practice Safe Hex and not just rely on software.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: What is happening to WinClam?
Next: hotfixq0306270.exe