Preliminary participants to be included in AV Comparatives 2011

Hello, here is the list of product to be tested by AV Comparatives for 2011.

avast!
AVG
AVIRA
BitDefender
eScan
ESET
F-Secure
G DATA
K7
Kaspersky
McAfee
Microsoft
Panda
PC Tools
Qihoo - 360 (New Vendor)
Quickheal (New Vendor)
Sophos
Symantec
Trend Micro
TrustPort
Webroot (New Vendor)

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Regards

 

and STILL no Vipre or Comodo... (yet at least)

 

And where the Comodo?

 

Hmm..., I think that Comodo will be tested as a separate product.

http://forums.comodo.com/news-annou...nd-certification-report-2010q4-t68638.90.html

So no Viper and Emisoft also.

 

I wonder if the Prevx will be tested as Webroot since their acquisition.

 

I guess the first on-demand test will be public in the end of February?

So Comodo will be tested in a Single Product Test against the same samples as the main tests, could this apply to VIPRE and Emsisoft also? That would be really nice to see.

It is nice to see Quickheal, which is a really good product as far as I have heard, which a good user interface. Also it is good to see Webroot will be included, so we can see if they are really that good as Prevx tells us. Or will the next version including Prevx technologies be used in the next tests?

Personally I wouldn't mind if eScan, K7, PC Tools and Qihoo - 360 wouldn't be included, as far I can see Norman already stopped taking part in the tests?

My personal favourite set of 18 vendors:

• avast!
• AVG
• Avira
• BitDefender
• Comodo
• Emsisoft
• ESET
• F-Secure
• G Data
• Kaspersky
• McAfee
• Microsoft
• Panda
• Symantec
• Trend Micro
• TrustPort
• VIPRE
• Webroot

 

dont think prevx will ever include itself in AVC (its not really exactly an AV anyways)

 

Good to see Quickheal to be included in the test(Go INDIA..... )

 

And what will be the big change here if every excisting AV will be included in AV Comparatives 2011?
My guess: the same pros and cons as posted here before on Wilders the past few years. Not to speak of never ending discussions.
I am testing samples every day with different results from let's says the top half of the tested AV's. (bad name these days, very few viruses around). Are they bad, good? I don't judge. They all misses every now and then something.

Gerard

 

why no bullguard !

 

because im pretty sure bullguard simply uses the bitdefender engine.

 

Im looking forward for Webroot tests. Its cheap and has a nice interface IMO. But I dont know how to trust its detection.

 

I think Malwarebytes should be included at least in dynamic tests and PUP test - I am sure it will beat them all

 

If they integrate Prevx correctly into Webroot they are going to have a very nice product.

 

Nice selection of new participants. Webroot will be interesting, I am curious how close its detect is to Sophos since they use the same engine.

 

Comodo is so full of itself. They constantly complain, yet they are still waiting for god knows what to happen for them to subit their software for testing.
I don't get it, what makes them so damn better that standards accepted by other major vendors aren't good enough for them. Makes you wonder how quality their products really are if they don't have abolutely no confindence in their stuff. Synthetic tests or not, it doesn't matter.

 

I share your valid opinion to the fullest.

 

And Vipre is #1 in advertising.

 

Hmmm... now what does he mean with that

 

This means exactly nothing in this case.

 

Not a guess but an accurate observation. Look at all this worthless blather for AVC's preliminary list. Imagine the ad nausea the REAL one will evoke.

 

Hahahaha, people always ask for proof, here is the proof, everyone knows AV's will miss threats every now and then.

But also, everybody needs something/someone to benchmark their effectiveness.

 

No return for F-Prot or Dr Web

 

That was sarcasm. Intended to mean that I see their adds everywhere including the local online newspapers but they hide from testing like some bully is looking to steal their lunch money.