Discussion re AV Comparatives

Perhaps I'm getting over worked up here but in some ways I'm a bit weary on AV Comparatives testing and again how does AV Comparative compare to that of Virus Bulletin.

Here's my question. Why did AV-Comp give Softwin the makers of Bitdfender 79.5% and went more points or percentage went to F-Prot, F-secure, McAfee, and wow Symentec the makers of the famous Nortons. I mean Nortons even scored better than KAV and NOD32 (wow I scratch my head on that one ) Also really arent the three top AV out there NOD32, KAV and BD. Perhaps even adding F-Secure and also Dr Web as well.

If we were to conduct these test with VB I'm most certainly sure that NOD32 will come out on top if not KAV and BD will come very close, but I'm sure Nortons and many others wont even come close.

Perhaps I'm reading the AV Comparatives lists wrong perhaps not, but your feedback and constructive criticism would be appreciated.

Heres the link:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2006_02.php

 

link only directly to the main site... not to other subpages...

 

Definitly. You are looking on the category 'detection of polymorphic viruses' and not the full results. I suggest you to read the PDF report, as it will be easier to read .

 

I read this a few months ago about VB and have concluded that their tests and rankings are worthless IMO.And please correct me if i'm wrong.
I read that products that fail this test are given the results and are allowed to make the necessary corrections and 'PAY' to test again.If the result is another failure, they are allowed to 'PAY again and retest and 'PAY' again and 'AGAIN' until they pass.If this is correct, i'm sorry but can't accept anything coming from 'VB'.

 

No, it is not VB.
I think you are thinking about Checkmark (PDF).

 

If i was wrong about 'VB' then i do apologize.Does anyone know their testing procedures and if any 'monies' are involved?.Do companies get to retest until they pass?.Are any members of AV companies associated with 'VB'?.Thanks.

 

No, VB is independed testing institution. They give retesting option just in rare cases where it was their error or some other issue not directly caused by AV vendor. But if you fail, you fail.

 

Is there a copyright on that site that forbids even linking? If so, why is that site on the public internet, not even requiring a password, I wonder?

Just asking.

 

For AV-Comparatives, it is recommended to only link to the main page rather than the individual pages, because of thr risk of bandwidth leeching. If too much bandwidth goes, the site will be down. And we don't want Andreas Clementi's site down, or else we won't have AV-Comparatives results anymore.

So please, it is recommended to only link to the main AV-comparatives page, and not to individual sub-pages.

 

Well, what takes more bandwidth, direct link to desiret subject or on main page and you have to browse on your own to the desired test? I think the second one is more bandwidth demanding. Bandwidth stealing would be hotlinking of AV-Comparatives images without any other content from his page.

 

one other reason of which i now know is that with hotlinking there is no ad money (even if just some few 0.03 cent) that could be used for paying the bandwith. I think you can imagine that quite much bandwith has to be paid each year.... (if 102GB bandwith at month are reached the website goes down).
Of course I could password protect the site and ask for a membership fee in order to get the money and cover expenses fully, but I hardly believe that this would be in the interests of the community, so please just respect a bit the site rules.
Other thing: the deeplinking is especially not wanted to the table results, as many that will click on that deeplinks will just get an error page: this is because those that read only the results tables read the results wrong or misinterpret them, and than ask me things that are already explained on the mainsite or in the other pages they would read if the deeplinks were not set.

 

My problem was that some folks, as in the earlier post here, issue commands or else make it sound like some sort of a law is being broken when one direct links. I am HAPPY to support AV-Comp, now that I understand. I would gladly donate or pay fees, if ever Av-Comp site decides to provide a means for me to do so.

 

about law: seems that in some countries that law does not apply. a lawyer told me yes, but some ppls say no.