Microsoft Security Essentials and McAfee Fail Security Certification - Dennis Tech

Sorry if repost, can't see this Test has been posted on Wilders: From Dennis Technology Labs, April - June 2013 Test of 9 anti-malware software:

Home Anti-Virus Protection Test April - June 2013
http://www.dennistechnologylabs.com/reports/s/a-m/2013/DTL_2013_Q2_Home.1.1.pdf

Bitdefender, Kaspersky, Norton took top 3 spots, MSE and McAfee failed to reach pass mark.

Neil Rubenking's take over at PCMag.com:

Microsoft Security Essentials and McAfee Fail Security Certification
http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security-software/313578-microsoft-security-essentials-and-mcafee-fail-security-certification

Small Business and Enterprise product tests for Apr-Jun 2013 also available at Dennis from link above.

 

It was interesting to see ESET do worst on false positives.

 

It's odd that they tested Avast 7 when version 8 has been out for quite a while now

 

WHATS THE POINT OF THIS!?
NSA has unknown vulnerabilities and backdoors, tapping everything... For how long we will keep playing what "Security software" is 0,0000001% "better" than the other?

 

Well, I guess it's time to shutdown Wilders then.

 

The last thread featured on Simon's blog.

Anti-virus testing conspiracy theories.

 

avast! 7 tested for something from April? C'mon? Scared of avast! doing too well?

 

I LOL'ed.

 

Seems like Intel purchase of McAfee didn't do a thing.

 

We all have to admit that avast is doing extremely well in all tests, even with version 7, which is for sure inferior to version 8.
Really great job.

 

Obsolete stuff. That test is for XP.

"At the time of testing Windows XP was still being
used heavily by consumers and businesses.
According to Net Applications, which monitors
the popularity of operating systems and web
browsers, nearly as many people were using
Windows XP as Windows 7. Windows XP was
running 39.5 per cent of PCs, while Windows 7
was installed on 44.4%i."

Yeah, right... If you are wondering what security program to purchage, it is for future use. If you are still in the XP world, you prolly either don't think about security issues at all, or you are planning to upgrade your system pretty soon to Win7/8, and usually to 64 bit. Either way, XP security testing (under 40% share, in USA or world-wide?) is old stuff, and have been that at least a year now.

"We also
want to collect a full year’s worth of Windows XP-
based test data before upgrading to Windows 7."

So then they'll be ready with the historic test data when only grandmoms are using XP. What they gonna do with the data then?

I guess those who pay the most don't want their products to be evaluated in post XP environment yet, especially in 64 bit.

 

It lowered my opinion of Intel.

 

Hi everyone.

First of all, thanks for picking up on our mistake with the Avast! version number. We did actually test version 8, but the version number in the report was a typo. This has now been corrected and an updated report is available from our site, as usual.

In respect of the details, we tested v8.0.1483, which was released just before we began the test. We always install the very latest publicly-available version of the products at the start of each test.

We don't use beta versions, though, and if a product upgrade ( such as v8.0.1488 ) becomes available during the course of the test we do not upgrade. There is an exception to that rule: if the product's own update mechanism upgrades the product version, as opposed to the engine/defs/whatever version number, then that upgrade will be used.

Obviously I don't agree that only grannies use Windows XP. I use it myself, as it happens. This is simply because I have a decent laptop that achieves what I need it to achieve, but I don't think it will handle Windows 7 very well. I may be wrong about that, but it's my choice and I imagine many other less technical people will feel the same. Third-party statistics show this to be likely.

Nevertheless, in recent months Windows 7 has overtaken Windows XP in the general market and the 2013 Q2 test was the last Windows XP test for us. We are already making good headway with the 2013 Q3 test, which is using Windows 7 (64-bit).

We're using Home Premium for the consumer tests and Professional for the business tests. Microsoft has confirmed that these are the most commonly-used editions for these markets.

Very best wishes,
Simon

 

Yeah, one of my laptops also have XP, among with linux though, that I mostly use with that computer.

But those test results are used for _future_ planning of computer's security, and for future planning I'd say that in home environment the most important OS would be Win8, because you can't buy many consumer systems with Win7. Testing both Win7 and Win8 would be optimal, tho, and limiting it to 64 bit only wouldn't matter much because it's the 64 bit stuff that causes difficulties to security softwares, not the 32 bit.

Also, new security considerations usually come to play when people purchase new systems.

For corporates Win7 will prolly be more important than Win8 for some time, sure.

Nice that you follow this forum and comment our more or less uninformed amateur views.

 

Remember that you are looking at when the test results were released. The Test actually STARTED many months earlier. Not sure if avast 8 was available at that time. That's something only the tester can answer (as they have done above )

 

How To Uninstall McAfee Antivirus
-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg

 

What I find most interesting about these Dennis Tech threads is how far the industry has come in recognizing DT as a legitimate and a premium world-class tester. Back in the day when Norton first contracted DT to do a test, most on this forum dismissed DT as a magazine company, including some vendors (COMODO here's looking at you).

Good job DT. Nice to have a growing alternative to testing besides the Big-2, AV-Test and AV-Comparatives that currently have the entire industry by the ~ Snipped as per TOS ~.

 

why do we bash this guy and his organization? Is it because our product didnt fair well.

I mean looking at the results, they look pretty accurate to me and about where I would figure most vendors to be.

 

If you're alluding to something there, let me allude something else: The b**ls are being thrown all ways, and we are yet to see who plays soft b**l and hard b**l.

 

Trusting on DT is like trusting on Norton in my humble view.

 

Then you cannot trust AV-Comparatives or AV-Test either.

 

Never trusted DT, sorry. End of story.

 

Never trusted American AV spy ... ahm software, sorry.

 

I don't agree with Chimp's assessment either. The fact of the matter is that a majority of home and small businesses are still using XP, and they will probably continue to do so when XP extended support ends in April '14.

 

Mind to post a link to where you got that fact?

Maybe in South-America and Africa, but they prolly aren't reading these English test reports, or planning to get another, better security software. Here in the western world most XP home usage is in a number 2 or number 5 old computer, or among those who aren't too eager to upgrade their security solutions anyway, and certainly not reading test labs reports (they might have buddies, tho, who read and might install the test winner Symantec into their old XP machine).

Small businesses... yeah. But if a security software does well when tested in a 64 bit Windows 7 or 8 environment, there's a high chance it works well enough in XP systems too. At least currently still. Vice versa, not much guarantee...