Wow! Look at WSA at AV-Test

I think 99% of the users dont care to submit anything manually, they who are interested like us maybe do it.
I see Comodo does something of the kind when a new file is seen, their cloudscanner springs into action, but I dont know if the whole file is uploaded?
With Kingsoft it takes a while for new files to get checked, it seems by the time it takes for some files that they are checked manually?

I hope I did not derail the thread now.

/E

 

are Dr.web and Webroot same company?

 

Not unless there has been a very recent merger

 

No way Webroot acquired Prevx back in Nov 2010!

HaHa

TH

 

No way Dr.Webroot Secure anywhere in space.

 

HaHaHaHa.
Maybe leaving my ESET SMART SECURITY 5.
Even My Fav. Avast free is much better
Edit: Really happy India contributing in Antivirus industry.....
K7 That's some Good Score!!

 

Cant say I blame you going by the test results.That said, I still really like Eset.

 

Can anyone say when ESET had a good score in the tests made by AV-Test?

The answer is never, and I didn't expect that to change this time either.
So I don't understand why people are so surprised with ESETs results?

I don't say this as a fan boy because I like Webroot just as much.
I say this because it's the truth, AV-Test is a test that ESET never performs well in, unfortunately.

About Webroot, well it shows that the product matures and keeps on improving all the time, and the future looks bright and interesting

 

If you look at ESET score inside, it won't look that bad!!!
And just kidding not leaving ESET. Have been running it for last 6 months,
Really happy with it!!!

about the comment: I never miss an opportunity to critisize anything
First with WSA then with Avast now ESET.
Detection of widespread and prevalent malware:100%
Thats enough
Maybe switching to Norman after this test results. lmao

 

Eset doesn't do well in testing, but I have heard of it nail things in the wild and it's saved my bacon a few times when I used it.Drweb is another for poor testing yet there was a time people where using cureit to detect and clean up what others didn't.

 

Nicely said!!! Still using it. Sometimes!!!

 

Thanks.

 

About the testing method.....
Detection of widespread and prevalent malware : Samples used: 5,000
Detection of actively running widespread malware : Samples used: 39
Wow. That means if XYZ antivirus is able to find & remove traces of the "randomly selectes" 39 Malwares then it is given 100%
What about other 4961 samples where other products would have done better than that XYZ!!!

 

Yes, actively running, meaning each sample is executed to infect the machine, rinse and repeat 39 times and see how well AVs remove them individually. That's plenty.

 

Indeed, you can only test one sample at a time, as malware can conflict with each other and sometimes even remove other malware, the results can't be reliable if you test multiple samples at the same time.

 

So that means these tests can't be 100% reliable.
A single test like this can't describe a product Best or worst.
The best thing will be try by your self & if that works for you then keep using it

 

When a product has consistant record of being poor for removing malware in these test for 2 years or more as Eset has then that speaks plenty. Eset has had plenty of time to improve this weak area, but has not. I believe the most likely cause is they have a shortage of coders. It takes them too long to roll out new builds for bug fixes so that indicates to me a shortage of coders. I will be staying with Eset for now but I'm going to give Kasperky and Symantec a try on some of my machines. The only AV I have used other than NOD 32 over the past several years has been Avira. In the end I started getting random BSOD's with Avira so I switched entirely to Eset. The fact Eset has run well with my setup has been the reason I have stayed with them. I was really disappointed that Eset did not come out with a true cloud AV this year, but they did finally add HIPS to their protection so I must give them credit where credit is do. Prevx were the pioneers of a pure cloud AV, and still are probably the best pure cloud AV available IMO. If it wasn't for Prevx then I don't believe we would be where we are today with all the security vendors adding the cloud to their protection. Webroot was smart enough to seize such an opportunity and now we have WSA which is probably better funded than Prevx could afford. It is potentially limitless as long as they continue to follow the principles that got them where they are today. Those principals came from Prevx so if they let that team continue to work their magic then the only direction they will go is up, and continue to rise for many years.

 

When I still ran A/V on my PCs , I never committed to subscriptions longer than ONE year. Had they offered shorter subscriptions [6 months, etc.], I would've taken those in a heartbeat.

If an A/V starts going south on detections or giving incompatibility problems or many FPs or poor customer support, it would be easier to opt-out after a year. I know they sometimes offer discounts to people who sign up for two or three years subscription but IMHO, the risks or having problems in the log run outweigh the benefits of the $$$ savings.

I always did that with all A/Vs I used in the past, McAfee, Norton, ESET.


Carlos

 

I'll have to take these results with a pinch of salt.
All (all) tests in YouTube show Webroot to be way bellow average. The most recent one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWWl...DvjVQa1PpcFPQdygUAjo-0zjdov04LcSDBOtljJAr5T4= indicates a very poor show.

Other reviewers, like Languy99 an so forth produce the same conclusions.

I don't think this product is close to mature... but then, you're the master of your machine.

 

Norman actually did pretty well on this test. They are already touting how well they did on their website, claiming "Norman Security Suite Now Ranks No.1 in Usability AV Test," which is technically true (a number of ties for top spot).

http://www.norman.com/

 

Really? I wouldn't even go there...

I think you have it backwards. You take the YouTube results with a grain of salt (if you're going to consider them at all). They really should be used solely to give you an overview of the product and how it responds when it encounters a "threat" so you know if the product will work for you.

There has been an explosion in the "YouTester" pseudo-industry lately and it sickens me how poorly a lot of these guys run these "tests"; and calling it such is giving them more credit than they deserve.

I'm not going to go into detail on why these tests are NOT reputable, reliable, and/or valid, because that information is already widely available in the rules of this forum and in the various topics that have been closed for people posting those results.

In regard to Webroot, there definitely needs to be more data, and perhaps a lot of us are overly joyed about this one test, but we are also confident from this point on they will continue to do well. One thing worth pointing out is Joe told me that he thought AV-TEST just tested it using only build 8.0.1.44. We are now on .154 and .158 is in beta! Judging by how much improvement they did in such a short amount of changes with the .44 version, just imagine what the scores could look like from the version we are on now, which specifically had improvements in detection and especially in removal!

Give Webroot some time, and don't be mislead by amateurs on YouTube who get their hands a virtual machine, some flawed testing methodology ideas, and call themselves malware analysts because they have an account on VirusTotal.

 

@ Montmorency I have to agree with STV0726!

TH

 

Same here. Unfortunately I keep finding myself renewing NIS, KIS, and ESS every year. Even shopping when it's on sale, I still find myself paying up to $150 per year for security suites and being not entirely happy with any of them. I guess by renewing them all I don't give any of them any incentive to do a better job.

 

True That!!!

Yeh. If you know how to use your PC. You can survive without an AV !!

 

+1 STV0726, I have no faith in YouTube Testing.