Avira is Winner -Again-

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by guest, Aug 12, 2008.

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

    guest Guest

  2. fried_oyz

    fried_oyz Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Posts:
    22
    It seems to me that Kaspersky and Symantec 'won' instead.
     
  3. Oldjim

    Oldjim Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Posts:
    99
    I don't understand the scoring when it says this in the body (pages 13/14)
     
  4. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    It is an old test/comment (from June)
     
  5. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    And? Slightly dated does not detract from the efficacy of Avira.
     
  6. CountryGuy

    CountryGuy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    139
    I'm confused - With this test Avira is tied for third with OneCare, McAfee, and Panda. Norton and Kaspersky had the best end results per the PDF...
     
  7. kinwolf

    kinwolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    Posts:
    271
    Indeed, when you read the text, and not only the chart, you see alot of
    But Avira did splendid in any case.
     
  8. CountryGuy

    CountryGuy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    139
    Avira did great, no doubt -- But the title of the thread is way misleading.
     
  9. tetsuo55

    tetsuo55 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Posts:
    126
    Its quite obvious that avira lost this test to norton and kasperski.

    However the test mentiones nothing about what settings where used in the scanners. Also its not really fair to compare the limited free version avira to the other payed scanners. Avira has a paid version which scans for a lot more attack vectors.

    This test simply proves that Avira free failed to detect 1 of the test-cases and failed to remove 2 of them. I bet that if the test was redone with Avira premium suite and settings at MAX avira would have done better (as has already been proven in other tests)

    If you look at all the other tests it looks more likely kasperski and norton got lucky this time
     
  10. fried_oyz

    fried_oyz Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Posts:
    22
    Well, this is just a small-scale test (5 samples!), and I believe its main purpose is to educate rather than provide comparative information.
     
  11. tetsuo55

    tetsuo55 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Posts:
    126
    i think you're right.

    This is meant to scare the public and the AV creators into finding better solutions for this problem
     
  12. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    If you take any notice of all the anti-virus(in fact anti-anything)tests that are released
    1)you'd be changing your security software faster than most people change their socks
    2)you need your head read for taking notice and doing what's in"1)"
     
  13. kjempen

    kjempen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    Posts:
    379
    I think all virus tests are good... small or big they all serve a purpose (if done with enough documentation), that is to point out flaws or holes in a security program. And the vendor should take notice of the test and try to improve in the area that the test(s) shows the program is lacking in.
     
  14. computer geek

    computer geek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Posts:
    776
    These tests are stupid. If professional virus hunters like Avira an symantec with all those employees can't get it, so can't test people.
     
  15. ugly

    ugly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Posts:
    276
    Location:
    Romania

    No , the fact is kaspersky and symantec are very good cleaners ( and DrWeb not tested here). Just another example :
    http://www.anti-malware-test.com/?q=taxonomy/term/14
     
  16. tetsuo55

    tetsuo55 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Posts:
    126
    Interesting results.

    Avira scores high overal on the site, but indeed kaspeski is almost always in the top3. Too bad nobody is testing Comodo Anti Virus, i am very interested in seeing how it compares to the rest

    (still the tests on that site are unfiar, they tested the weakest version of avira against payware virusscanners)

    Its the Premium edition of Avira that has the good results, not the free edition (it misses several layers of protection)
     
  17. ggf31416

    ggf31416 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Posts:
    314
    Location:
    Uruguay
    I doubt that the paid version of Avira could get better results.
    The mail and web scanners won't help to desinfect a system. The other difference is the adware/spyware detection but the free version detected all the inactive samples so there was no ad/spyware.
     
  18. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Premium or free.......Avira uses same scan engine.
     
  19. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Not correct- the same engine is used.
     
  20. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Or should I use these test to help me make my determination as to what wins. Oh, my head is spinning, tests, tests and more tests, and from what I read, none are accurate.;)
     
  21. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    You obviously have made a decision as to the AV you use. Others can do the same with or without the tests. That said, the tests likely mean less than real-world experience demonstrates, but I am also skeptical of those that say the tests are not that accurate. They do mean something, as there is a relatively high correlation between unrelated tests. For example, Kaspersky does not have a high proactive rating at Shawdowserver or AV-Comparatives- does this mean something? I think it does.
     
  22. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    How can it be explained that Dr.Web does very well at shadowserver but is "garbage" in some other tests?
     
  23. Zombini

    Zombini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Posts:
    469
    As always, if Norton wins then the test gotta suck right. Go Norton trolls!
     
  24. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    What do you think?
     
  25. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    It hasn't won any tests that I value- i.e., AV-Comparatives, and it is not being tested at Shawdowserver. However, its ok protection.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.