OK. Possible. Do you have any sources for your statement? Edit: OK, so I see you quoted 2 posts from this forum. How ture is that I don't know but I think those 2 posts make sense. However, talking about GENERIC detection was not my intention neither deniz's. Because if you want to argue about the total number of viruses (if you count a variants to be a virus) out there, no one, I mean no one, even the antivirus experts, knows how many out there in the wild. Why? Because one single virus can theoretically have millions of variants. I think if you go all the way to argue about how many variants (viruses in your vocabulary) can be generated in one day, one year, then this discussion will be meaningless, because I can also define "one" virus to be the generic one because I did not say that one variant=1 new virus. I did NOT say or think anything like that. My original point was, the viruses tested by av-test.org or av-comparatives.org, can not be all new viruses less than 1 year old, and they can not be all variants of some generic viruses. You mentioned that the samples tested have viruses from back in 2005, and we do not know how many were from the year 2008. "http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1320421&postcount=174". So deniz's statement is wrong even only based on your words. My point was, the newer viruses are potentially more harmful/in the wild and should be able to give us more realistic information if tested against those new viruses.