another magazine AV group test

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by rothko, Jul 20, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rothko

    rothko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Posts:
    579
    Location:
    UK
    hi

    i know magazine tests of AVs don't generally go down well, but they usually make for good discussion, especially when the experts weigh in and pull them their methods to pieces!

    so here is another one that has just been published in the UK by PC Pro magazine, quite a well respected magazine really - one of the most popular amongst IT Pros here I would say.

    http://www.pcpro.co.uk/labs/155/antivirus-software/products.html

    enjoy :D
     
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Some comments on NOD's rating in this test has already been discussed over on the Eset forum.
     
  3. rothko

    rothko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Posts:
    579
    Location:
    UK
    yeah, NOD32 didn't fair too well with this reviewer
     
  4. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I don't understand why they mix up paid and free stuff together.
    Like avast! and AntiVir don't have their real counterparts...

    And whats up with number of samples!? 200+ samples!? Give me a break... :rolleyes:
     
  5. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    come on they tested on ~200 samples, that's a very conclusive test of detection rates. Also GUI reviews are subjective to the reviewer.
     
  6. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Oh yeah, BullGuard is better then Nod and Norton. Total crap.:thumbd:
     
  7. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    at least they got onecare right :D
     
  8. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    well that, and Avira almost.:D
     
  9. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,408
    I never pay very much attenshion to any of these magazine AV or AS reviews.
    Take them with a grain of salt.
     
  10. Antarctica

    Antarctica Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Posts:
    1,617
    Location:
    Canada
    You are too kind, I would say 1 lbs of salt.:D
     
  11. ugly

    ugly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Posts:
    276
    Location:
    Romania
    What I see here unchanged compareing this with other antivirus tests is that Kaspersky is nr.1.
    As always. :thumb:
     
  12. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    they got avira wrong, they used the free version of it, they should have used the premium version, who knows how many of those "viruses" were adware/spyware and thus undetected by the clasic version
     
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    does not make sense. o_O
     
  14. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    what do you mean?
     
  15. ren

    ren Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2006
    Posts:
    45
    hello,

    perhaps because deepguard is f-secure technology and not kaspersky one, which is proactive defense module.
     
  16. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    well i think it's norman, but anyway i think they mean that the clicker & other trojan it found was due to that. it doesn't say deepguard is from kaspersky
     
  17. ren

    ren Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2006
    Posts:
    45
    re,

    you're right about the article, I misinterpret it. my mistake. sorry.
     
  18. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    detection was made by the av parts, why do they differ?

    and to think avg FREE beat 7 of those tested for detection, which is most of them..... is just stupid.
     
  19. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I agree. Who do you trust? Yourself.:rolleyes:
     
  20. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i dont trust none of these, or even the big tests from av-test and av-comp.

    i look at them in interest of course, but i dont personally take anything from them, i just find them interesting is all.

    who i do trust?.....nobody!

    live life on the edge, always alert, i believe thats the best way :)
     
  21. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    well Chris, you opened the can of fishing worms. My dying question is, with nothing implied, why does AV Comparitives find Nod always number 1, and 600 other sites dont. I am not saying it isnt, because I like it, but the reality is, all this testing is bullshit. Pardon my, "you fill in the blank." But really, you best trusting source in this matter, is the frigging members here. Not a so called testing expert, not a magazine, not a young dude in Greece. It is the members here at Wilders. And that my friends, is the gospel truth. :D
     
  22. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    kav 7 has new herusitic analyzer, maybe that's it.
     
  23. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i dont know why av-comp find nod32 so great and some others dont, i dont really look too much into these tests, like i said... i just find them an interesting read.

    personally, i would have no problems what-so-ever using nod32 no matter what people said about it.

    do you think i dont get the same comments for drweb?

    it doesnt bother me one single bit, there will always be 'that-type' of people around, sometimes its fun to confront them :D

    however, if i ever left my drweb which i very much doubt, id probably go-back to fsecure, as i had some good years with them and i know what they can and cant do and how things seem to run, or might give fprot a trial and see how that would go.
     
  24. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Ermm... nevermind :rolleyes:
     
  25. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    if i created a website, did ZERO testing but posted the results... people would agree with the results.

    lol, they would if i put avira, kaspersky or whatever at the top, with nods heuristics at the top, and but drweb near the bottom.

    .....................

    its pure fact that people would agree with the results, yet NO TESTING at all made.

    i find that funny in itself, and just shows what people are like. :D
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.