
![]() |
|
I think i may have cracked a rib after seeing that pic. Fallin down but can still reach keyboard..... |
|
false positives are a big thing, but some of the 'suites' that don't detect false positives, also mist a lot of the real threats. spectrum of security: usability <> protection choose your side ;) |
Whats sad about that is people like my mom need to be very protected, but can't find the control panel if asked. If a virus scanner was to delete something that she used she would not know what to do. |
Non-C-style programmer, I cast thee out! j/k |
|
Webwasher is a gateway product and thus means nothing to consumers. It's interesting, however, that the biggies (McAfee, Symantec) aren't among the top scorers. I'm also interested in system degradation stats. Wish they did some tests around that. Norton is famous for bringing PCs to their knees, though 09 is supposed to address that. |
I'm not suprised at all. |
I too am not suprised. When you work in a computer repair shop and most of the load these days is virus/spyware removal you become all too familiar with the day to day shortcomings of the Biggies so to speek. |
|
To be quite honest, i'm not surprised either; just wanted to point to it. |
|
Hm. Interesting to see that there is no kaspersky in this test... |
|
Actually, Kaspersky was part of the test... It just didn't rate high enough in any of the above-mentioned categories. We only highlighted certain findings and were not trying to be comprehensive in our coverage of the story. You can see the full results of all 34 security apps here: http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02. Kaspersky got "very good" ratings on the malware and adware/spyware on demand scans, a "good" on proactive detection, and middle ratings (not sure what they called the mid-level ratings) on false positives and scan speeds. |
|
>> "If you use a [Microsoft Windows based OS} computer on a regular basis, chances are you are running some sort of anti-malware application." << There. Fixed that for you. |
Your silly. |