File-Detection Test September 2012

Hehe if one doesn't understand how WSA works, then I think it's best to leave it alone instead of repeating the same words (it doesn't this, it doesn't that) about it all over again.....

 

Show some respect to each other.

 

WSA is a mediocre program, in my opinion. Don't know, why its fanboys are so hell bent in proving it otherwise.

 

** Sorry Mods, off-topic rant to follow **

Maybe because they are sick of all the FUD being peddled on Wilders lately.

In my opinion one of the strengths of Wilders is that the members here don't normally engage in the petty squabbling that seems to occur on most internet forums. One can rely on the informed opinions and experiences of others to assist them in reaching their own conclusions.

I hope the current behaviour of a few isn't a sign that Wilders itself is now heading down the slippery slope to mediocrity.

 

Exactly................Just look at the history. ANYTIME a new test comes out and someones favorite av does poorly they whine. Its pathetic. Accept the results and move on.

 

Single-Product-Test Zeobit September 2012

Single-Product-Test Kingsoft AV September 2012

 

Thanks for the updates.

 

good job kingsoft..

99.8% the total detection rate.
and 13 (few) FPs.


btw AV-C goofed after all !!
just look carefully in this pdf (single-product-test kingsoft AV September 2012)

they wrote :

you gotta be kidding me :d how did you test kingsoft 2012 in year 2011


Regards,
Amin

 

I'm a bit confused here. If it detected 99.8%, it means it's good enough to be used as a stand-alone security solution. Why couple it with another program?

And, it has seriously put top dogs like Bitdefender, Kaspersky, F-Secure, G DATA and AVIRA to shame here. If you can really get such top-notch protection for free, then why pay for it?

 

Kingsoft uses the AVIRA engine.

 

What engine does Zeobit use?

 

AFAIK they use Avira's technology.

Regards,
Amin

 

AVIRA But I would choose AVIRA's own products over ZeoBit if I had to pick one.

 

Hahahaha definitely.

 

Maybe because on-deman scan is only a little part of what a good antivirus should do. It only tells you "oooops I screwed it-you are infected, let's see what I can do about it". I wouldn't call that "top-notch protection".

 

Wrong,nobody here is defending... not me for sure because I have some queries to be answered.

Somebody from the testers side can answer this: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=2131119#post2131119

and if avast! is that bad in protection as per the AV-C chart shows...then what is this: http://www.mrg-effitas.com/current-tests/flash-test-results/

Also,dont forget the chart from VB Bulletin.