PC Magazine AV Tests (blocking and removal) (31/1/2012)

malware blocking chart
http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,iid=326555,00.asp

malware removal chart
http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,iid=326554,00.asp

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399585,00.asp

Another AV test:
http://www.programmifree.com/confronti/confronto-antivirus2012.htm

 

Thanks...interesting!

 

Something what that is unacceptable is always interesting!!
BTW i am surprised too.
K7
WSA2012
Comodo

 

isnt this very relative.

since they test different products at different time, hence different set of malware are used for testing.

Hence this comparison makes no sense.

 

Interesting, they should test them all at the same time.

 

You are surprise because of Comodo protection? LoL
Just try to find a malware able to bypass it completely is not an easy task.

 

CIS's protection from malware is good.
CIS's protection from goodware is its Achilles heel.

 

Thats what they do in AV-C amd AV-Test otherwise how can we be sure that this relative %age of detection is correct.

You cannot check (accurately) who is better by giving different question paper to solve for 2 persons.

 

Agree!

 

Also agree. This is also one of the main problems with the tests on YouTube (i.e., they test one product against a set of links and then draw conclusions on its effectiveness without testing other programs at the same time against the same links).

 

I disagree because to me it does not matter when the malware samples were collected or even when the products were tested or how many products were tested at one time, it simply does not matter to me. What matters is any good product would be able to do well under any set of security circumstances. Hence, PCmag tests are quite relevant.

Thanks.

 

Even though it's a Comodo article WSA did a Great job!

TH

 

Yes,it was almost flawless in this particular test.Hopefully this is a sign of the product's maturity and further tests will corroborate these findings.

 

actually TH, those are excellent results. My oh my, how things change fast in our world. Kudos to Webroot.

 

High Five for Webroot!

 

how can u ppl draw any conclusions from a such a biased test ?

u have no idea if any validation has been made, on the samples or the procedure.

 

well, how bout they dress nice.

 

It is funny depending on who is doing the testing and the results they are achieving. A particular security suite does well here but poorly there.

 

Looks like you are using it at the moment. Thoughts on it, or is that the subject for another thread?

 

Honestly?? Just kidding and you are dressed nicely to.


Yes we can talk here about it. It is lacking in some areas. Especially detecting. It has gotten better but if this was the best it was going to get, I would not use it.

Now having said that, I am using it and love it. Mainly because I know in a short period of time, it is going to get a shot in the ass, to say. It will be like penicillin for a sore throat. That is when we are all going to see this product start performing like it was intended to do from the start.

Now I said in a short period of time, what I didnt say is if that was my time, or Prevx time.

The best is yet to come on WSA.

 

well, tbh trjam here doesnt count as a real user. he s more like a chommelier tasting several wines...

 

yeah, and right now I am working on a bottle of Ouzo.

 

ouzo power, the new greek antivirus.

features:

high (alcoholic) detection grade
sandbox (night in a police cell) when overloaded
behavior detection (whistles at nice foxy ladies to avert the user)

 

It's a slow day...we need something to toss around but I think we lost trjam to the wine closet! And the Super Bowl isn't until Sunday!

 

eset was dismal in this test...