Review of security product by Chip Magazine

That's for sure.It is all up to us whether we want to ignore to those reviews and test results or not.Anyway,thanks for your replies.Let's stop discussing about this,if not it will slip into off topic.If you want continue our discussion,just PM me.Thanks.

 

What is the obsession with "not rebooting" in this forum

 

Indeed
Besides, even if they don't say you need to reboot after installing doesn't mean it is 100% functional, some selfprotection or features may not be completely working without the reboot.

 

"Shadow mode".

 

what does the performance thing mean? surely not the lightness of the product?, bit defender got the highest score and eset the lowest? I don't understand that?

 

Haha. Looks like AV-Test is against ESET one more time, anyway their methodology sucks
we will prove they are wrong, like in the past!

 

I think AV -Test doesn't even comparable to AV-C. and Virus Bulletin.

 

SHADOW, indeed...

 

How have "we" proved them wrong in the past? By posting that we refuse to believe the results of their tests, when our favorite AV hasn't placed in the top?

 

fanboys

 

lol, nice grip over that

 

Shadow Mode enables installing & testing software without permanently affecting your computer. When finished testing the program, simply reboot and POOF! that software never happened.

 

Personally, I think the report may be very accurate.

 

In the AV-Comparatives May 2011 Retrospective Test, Eset and Kaspersky were near the top.
Here, they are at the bottom.

Eset is really slammed in this report. "Eset Internet Security certainly doesn’t offer any effective protection, but it hardly delays Windows startup."

 

2001? I think you meant 2011 by that. Even then, that's not a proper comparison. Whole Dynamic Product Test is what you should look at.

 

I am talking about this:

 

That's meant ESET's Advanced Heuristic is not enough advance yet.

 

Why aren't we seeing the same results with retrospective testing from AV-Comparatives and VB100 RAP testing?

 

Eset is doing reasonably well at MRG in comparison to some others.

 

Anyway,different AV testing organizations have different testing methodologies.

 

True. Only Norton and VIPRE are performing better. That's why the historically poor performance with AV-Test is puzzling. I would like to know why this is occurring.

 

because AV-C and Virus bulletin they are using aroud 500,000 samples of prevalent malware(malware with a high possibility of infecting users in the real world), and the sample group for dynamic tests in AV-C are enough meaningful for validation

 

Emsisoft, Immunet and Prevx. Coranti by percentage.

 

I was comparing to those security products in the test in Chip Magazine.