AV-Comparatives: Real-World Protection Test July-October 2019 Chart: https://www.av-comparatives.org/com...chart_month=Jul-Oct&chart_sort=1&chart_zoom=2 PDF: https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/real-world-protection-test-july-october-2019/
As usual, Microsoft Windows Defender: False Positives = 58... Kaspersky: Blocked 99.1% only…... F-Secure: Blocked 99.3% only / FP: 25…...
Good results for Avira, Kaspersky the only one with 0 FPs, Eset with standard real world protection...
Seriously: For what are those tests good for? Average users don't read them, advanced users don't care.
Qihoo cuts ties with three antivirus testing firms in software dispute https://www.scmp.com/tech/apps-gami...dispute?_escaped_fragment_=&edition=hong-kong
I service 3 companies & their ITs all read those tests & give them a lot of weight because their bosses read them, too. Also, AFAIK, all my friends & family are aware of those tests & base their buying decisions partly on those tests. I suppose it's a matter of 2 choices: either (a) base buying decisions on available data, OR (b) assume the tests are not significant and make a blind choice based on name recognition or hearsay or price or a review in PC Magazine or roll some dice or whatever. IOW, while those tests may not be perfect, they are pretty much the only game in town when it comes to basing decisions on some sort of objective data, as opposed to using an Ouija board.
I'm not advanced and i'm better than average, so should I qualify as intermediate? By the way for an advanced user as you hiltihome you shouldnt' have a keen interest in these results, it does not seem to go along with your original premise,does it?
