AV-Comparatives: Whole Product Dynamic Test (2010)

Surely a product which just works and does not ask the user for interaction is a better product for the "average" user in terms of usability and so should be given more points than a product asking for interaction.

Asking for user intervention is better for the techies only.

I've set my AV to prompt for all interactions, even starting of the program. That works for me, but I'd never set it like that on someone else's computer. All actions automatic and decided for non-techies. Only a prompt so users know if something is detected/removed.

You're daughter's example sounds more like a FP, and thats what the FP test results are for.

 

FP or not if a product asks any user,even a non-techie,then for something like my daughters case:-which is a util only used by students at her uni so would prob be flagged by any av worth its salt,the user can "tell" the av not to delete it,it wouldn't have been such a problem if it was put in to quarantine,it wasn't it was just deleted,without any real warning until after the action had taken place,it may be just me but I hate any piece of software that removes any user interaction and doesn't allow the user final say

 

Yes, my point exactly.
Techie users don't mind user interactions or even prefer user interaction. Non-techie users (the majority of users) DO mind user interaction and prefer the AV to just do its job, so an AV which automatically deletes the malware should receive more credit for that removal than the AV which says its not sure and asks the user for action. Of course, saying a malicious file is suspicious and asking for the user what to do is good, but not as good as automatically taking the correct action.

Regarding the AV not quarantining it or informing the user of its action is a bug or functional spec failure on its end.