CSO article / AV Test

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by risl, May 21, 2009.

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

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    Spoken like a true preacher :D

    How many Avira copies did you sell this week?
     
  2. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,814
    Anyone that changes there AV based on this test needs to have there head examined. This test is a total joke from the test bed to the implementation of it. :cautious:
     
  3. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Since I use free, I don't have to sell unlike the NOD you have to peddle. I am sure with all the drubbing it has taken in tests, convincing someone to go for an inferior product and that too after a substantial payment in this day of gloomy economy must be an uphill task. Feel sad for you, must be hard knocking on people's doors and getting shooed away. ;)
     
  4. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Its not about bigger or smaller, its about consistency, if one AV manages to stay among top three over a time period goes to show the quality of work being done by their team. You don't need pesky HIPS if you are running LUA+system wide DEP with a quality AV. I see all these layering as a joke, it just brings Windows to a crawl and creates further trouble down the road.
     
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,715
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    I would respectfully disagree with your assertion that Eset has taken a drubbing in tests. To be sure others have tested better in some tests and not as good in others. Your choice of Av is a fine one. Other than that I fully agree with the rest of your statement regarding excessive layering.
     
  6. Arup

    Arup Guest


    That was only a retort for the particular post, I would still prefer Eset over many other AVs but then when there is a free and viable solution on offer, why even bother to go for the paid one.
     
  7. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,715
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    At first we do. But over time we tend to shed them like new members at a nudist colony.
     
  8. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Yep.....then we like to bitch, moan and fret over our Windows going slow and crashing.:D
     
  9. geko

    geko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Posts:
    35
    :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:

    Oh my god.

    I dont know what to say. Im speechless. :'( :'( :'(
     
  10. Arup

    Arup Guest


    The point is many fail to see the reason why all of a sudden one or other programs stop working, they blame the program but not the layers they have piled up. Someone here commented that he would never layer is PC to make a quad core run like a 486, his words are worth in gold.

    As regards OS, I enjoy best of both. I have XPx64 loaded on one of my PCs as its used for video chat by my wife to talk to her folks back home, my own personal PC is all Ubuntu. I have no regrets in using either, I rate the 2003 based XPx64 as Windows best effort till date. Rock hard stability and excellent GUI response, with all the updates it has matured like a fine scotch should.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 22, 2009
  11. dicksmith

    dicksmith Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Posts:
    9
    Once again the nerds with their heads up there own arses brigade are out in force. The average man or woman in the street when hit by a virus on their home pc dose not care a great deal if the files are damaged files, non-malicious files, keygens/cracks and similar crap, nor what methods were used to test their particular antivirus. They simply want to know, 'will the anti-virus on my machine clean the crap off so, I can get back on MSN or Ebay? On every pc I have been given to clean, Avg has performed poorly, last week on an infected pc with 7 trojans, Avg free found 1. Clamwin, which I would not use as my frontline anti-virus, found 3, and Antivir free found all 7. Even Avg 7.5 found more. So I, for one support the CSO article and his tests.
     
  12. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    I'm not playing with baby today, sorry.


    I agree, but the point is that, corrupted files cannot infect you, neither can non-malicious file, keygens/cracks (otherwise it would be classed as malware) or other crap.
     
  13. progress

    progress Guest

    Yes, I read that Avira also detects Non-CD/DVD-Patches as malware o_O

    I think this test is rubbish :)
     
  14. Zimzi

    Zimzi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Posts:
    289
    This time Stefan sounds like one of the Dr.Web fanboys. :D
     
  15. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,814
    If I was a developer I would be pissed also to publish something as junked as this test is a embarrassment, even if you scored well on it. :blink:

    For the Record ALOT of AV's do this. Along with keygens and cracks some of it is becuse how the program works some of it is from fitting in the Unwanted program / Harmful program category. Pretty much anything that changes a program for how it was "Supposed to work" to how it dose now.
     
  16. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Nah! you are playing with something else for sure, make sure you got plenty of KY jelly and a copy of NOD CD in front of you.
     
  17. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    I find it hilarious you seem to think bashing NOD32 in some way, or using it against me is actually going to hurt me? Are you actually trying to attack me personally, by using software I use? Um, how long have you spent in the real world? It's a piece of software not a member of my family.

    Let me teach you something, us normal people (non-fanboys) couldn't really care what you bash, we just laugh at the fact people like you are one of the first to retaliate against anyone bashing a product you use, like it's some kind of personal attack? No, I can't understand why, nor do I pretend to understand the empty mind.
     
  18. Arup

    Arup Guest

    You bought it up with your cheap failed jibe at my selling Avira, face the game now or don't come to the ring next time. The fact that you are defending your choice and attacking Avira and its user confirms your fanboi status beyond any reasonable doubt. You care and care a lot and shine the light through your ears and you will find out who has an empty mind. Now better rush to the pharma for some of that KY before it runs out. I hear Pathmark pharma is having a big sale on it.
     
  19. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,814
    Let's just move back to the Original topic and save the rest for PM's. :D We are hear to bash crap tests not one and other lets get back to it. :cool:
     
  20. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    Damn those are crap test results.
     
  21. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Damn Avira....... ;)
     
  22. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,873
    According to this test Eset detected 65%, Norton 56%, Kaspersky 56%, AVG 3%... Come on, the whole thing is a joke, once again a good example of how the internet can be misleading with mendacious reports.
     
  23. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,873
    As much as I dislike Symantec for many reasons, it has always had great detection percentages even in its worst versions (2004-2005), Eset is one of the best (my second favorite AV), and Kaspersky too has a long tradition of top detection. Something went wrong, especially for AVG, 3%? If I were AVG I'd sue the guy and the magazine for damages.
     
  24. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,814
    I'm sorry but this test is a joke and nothing more. Tests like AV corp that use millions of samples and show detection rates of all 4 of those above the 95 percentile. Just proves how poorly this test really was. :cautious:
     
  25. progress

    progress Guest

    I think this thread should be closed now :)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.