New PC World article about free antivirus software

http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,113462,00.asp

It seems to say that Avast is best and AVG is second-best.

 

I'll try again.

http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,113462,00.asp

In that last post, the last few characters of the URL don't work. You may have to type them in.

URL tags added to the link

 

Sorry, but this article says nothing.
They could use better the time and the place to make an other symantec advertisement

Regards,
Godzilla

 

However, if u want to post url's try this:

(url= h**p://yourlink) Description follows here (/url)

use "[" instand of "(" as shown in the example above

 

To everyone from Firefighter!

The magazine article linked above says:

"BitDefender Free edit v7: Uses same scanning engine as the VB100- and ICSA-certified Standard Edition, on-access and on-demand scanning but no e-mail scanning, automatic updates, 8.8MB."

When that on-access option was added to this free version? So far what I was used that BDF free, there wasn't any on-access scanner!

"The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

BitDefender Free Edition v7

quoted:
[glow=red,2,300]System scanning
On demand scanning - Powerful scan engines ensure detection and removal of all viruses in the wild every time you need it. [/glow]

it seems that they did not even try it

 

yeah and get paid for it too( in the public)

but since symantec is one of the biggest advertisers in pc mags you will never see a bad review of their products. at least i've never seen one..

 

To Godzilla from Firefighter!

How dare u criticize PC World, have u seen what was on the top of PC World's logo?

"Technology advice you can trust"

"The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Well, Wilders is doing a beautiful job in critisizing Symantec. They simply won't even review the product in their list of AV's...

I guess that mindset is if it's not mentioned, maybe it'll go away... LOL...

 

Hmm Spybot blocks "Avenue A, Inc" when I go to that link

Straight Shooter; I'm not sure I've seen the "criticizing" going on from Wilders; I would point out that this thread has (so far) been members talking, not admin or moderators.

Aside from that, the topic is about a pcword review.

 

Nobody’s criticizing Symantec. Symantec has some good products but there are better and more effective ones. If you like Symantec's products then keep using them no problem here....

...and please stay on topic...


tECHNODROME

 

i just sent an e-mail to Pc World about their free av article, it will be interesting to see if they respond. If they do I will post it here.

 

Well I didn't really expect a response to my e-mail but at least they could check what they are writing about before the publish it like it was gospel.

 

If that is truly how they operate it seems that you would never see anything bad mentioned about Dell, IBM, McAfee, Microsoft, Adobe, AOL, etc. but you do all the time.

You'd think that the bigger advertisers would always get better reviews if this is how they really do things. So since Microsoft is certainly a bigger advertiser than Qualcomm (Eudora) you'd think they would never say anything bad about Outlook in comparisons. Here though they do: http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,113091,00.asp

Likewise if it was all about advertising money clouding their coverage why would they even have an article about free antivirus software?

And most important I probably need glasses but I didn't see one mention of Norton Antivirus anywhere in the article. Therefore this is a good example of clouding the issues yourselves instead of looking at the facts.

 

Well golly, msingle, just because they have criticisms of products from their advertisers doesn't mean they aren't going to recommend those products over competitors products when it comes to a showdown. If Pc World ran an antivirus showdown, what do you think they would recommend, and HAVE recommended constantly in the past?

Criticising their advertisers' products doesn't make them the lesser pimp, and they also have their proselytising missionaries ::snipped:: to spread FUD everywhere else, so they're covered on all fronts.


No need to make things personal... LWM

 

IMHO, discussing a review, and THEN progressing to discussing the reliability & objectivity of said review is, I believe, very much within the purview of *staying on topic."

Isn't this precisely what was done with respect to Wilder's lengthy thread concerning VirusP's reviews?

Hey LWM -- I know you're just trying to do the job. No offense. Just a passing comment from an old f**t.

 

@LWM- Too true. Looking back, the issue of PCW being abed with $ymantec just sort of crept in unawares, while we were all watching Gilligan's Island.