More info about MBAM?

Thanks. I would suppose that, though i haven't run a quick scan yet.

Nevertheless, it's good to know that you can achieve this rate of effectiveness with the quick mode too (hopefully).

 

Computerworld Article

 

MBAM= more effective, less resources, faster updates, cleaner interface etc etc etc....

 

can you show me any objective evidence of this? I mean something published - a comparative test we can all see?

MZ

 

well here we go again...

 

It's a perfectly reasonable question followed by your complete waste of a reply.

 

If you don't understand what firzen771 is referring to, visit the thread that was sent to the time-out room.

 

Max, may I ask you something?

People come around here and ask one or more questions about MBAM.
Somewhere in those threads all of a sudden Max chimes in with a remark.
No problem so far.
However, why is it your remarks are mostly negative when it comes down to MBAM?

Can you explain us why that is or what problem you have with MBAM?

I have followed the threads regarding MBAM and where you replied I have to say you sometimes have a point. But other members do have a point too.

So what is your problem with MBAM?

 

My issue is not primarily with MBAM, but more the fact that some members keep putting it forward as the best AM scanner. Often, a new or inexperienced member will come here and ask which is the best AM to complement their AV - and 9 times out of 10, the answer will be MBAM.

I believe that MBAM is probably great at REMOVING some hard to remove malware - BUT, I do not believe it can compare overall with most AVs or the larger AMs (AVs and AMs are blurred now)

MBAM is one of those apps which is in vogue here at Wilders and is given an almost God like status. Many of the members here who promote it may well spend their time removing malware from customers PCs - which have usually had inadequate protection in the first place to allow the infection - and so see it as the most useful tool - but it is wrong to suggest it is better than other AMs for protection as its database is tiny.

Whenever there is a discussion as to MBAMs abilities compared to other AMs, its followers don’t want to recognise that it can’t possibly offer as much protection as other AMs due to the fact it does not detect as much. Moreover, it seems to me that the whole thing is clouded further by using vague terms and misusing terminology which misleads people as to its detection capabilities.

For instance, here, the vendor states that MBAM has fewer than 70K fingerprints, but that this accounts for only 25% of detection - so reasonable to assume it will detect 280K individual nasties.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1382984&postcount=72

Here, the vendor is now implying that MBAM has 280K fingerprints in the database! This deceit is further compounded by stating this is the equivalent of millions of fingerprints in other AMs databases as MBAMs fingerprints have some unique property which allows one print to detect a whole malware - implicit within this is the implication that other AMs will need loads of fingerprints to detect just one malware.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1383558&postcount=116

It is untrue that MBAMs fingerprints are more efficient than others - see below to see that A2 has 2.7 Million fingerprints and detects 2.7 Million nasties.

http://forum.emsisoft.com/Default.aspx?g=posts&t=4286

This proves that MBAM has 1/24th the number of fingerprints of A2. Even if you believe that it can detect four times as many nasties as it has fingerprints, it would find 1/10th of the malware detected by A2.

Given this fact, I can still guarantee that the MBAM followers will continue to try to pretend all the tests which show MBAM detects a fraction of the malware detected by other AMs are biased etc as they have an irrational emotional investment in the product and don’t want to face the truth.

In essence, MBAM is a malware removal tool and I don’t believe it should be considered as a full antimalware.

PS - I won’t be making any more comment on this subject - nor replying to the personal attacks against me which will undoubtedly follow!

MZ

 

Max, thank you very much for replying and clearing up some things. Appreciated.

 

for the first bolded text, NOBODY here said MBAM is the best, they have said its ONE of the best...

for the 2nd bolded text, im pretty sure the vendor would know just a LITTTLE bit more about his own product than you would...

and to add on, MBAM is used as an add-on to current security setup, nobody here is advising using it alone anyways, and MBAM IS advertised to catch what ur current AV's miss, yet again which is why its meant to be used as an ADDITION, or as a 2nd opinion.

and another thing, y do u constantly insist on making this an A vs B thread, in all ur posts u compare it to A2, this thread is about MBAM, talk about MBAM or get out. plus if u havent noticed, A2 is an AV+AS combo, which is NOT what MBAM is, all thos tests u see aren't just looking at the A2 portion of its detection, its the whole app, which means Ikarus and A2 database.

 

I do not understand why people here respond to just another SSUpdater fanboy!

 

You're done bashing MBAM? I don't believe it.