Atention AVG users...

  • Thread starter Thread starter ArameFarpado
  • Start date Start date
Gee...that's useful information and I thank you for posting it but why the
rude comments? They're just anti-virus programs. Lighten up, dude. Life's
too short for stuff like that.
 
I've never heard of that company before.
Why should I believe their results?
Are you sure they aren't skewing their results to make certain products look
good?
 
So AVG is the great does not? yeahh...

check out this site
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/home.html

and this report
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse/report14.pdf


you're all brain infected...
Click to expand...

That's funny. As this data seems to be purposely biased against AVG.

The first conclusion chart is nothing more than rating a package on how
many threats it should detect.

There are 17 s/w packages listed there...all are entitled Anti-Virus, AV,
etc....and the AVG offering is AVG Anti-Malware, not Anit-Virus !!!

Of course an anti-spyware program will not perform well against anti-
virus programs when asked to scan for viruses.

Apples and Oranges. Duh.

Of the 20,522 total 'threats', 19,914 would typically be classified as
viruses, NOT malware. So actually, an anti-spyware app picking up 8% of
viruses as well isn't that bad.
 
Could it be this, which includes antivirus?

http://www3.grisoft.com/doc/products-avg-anti-malware/us/crp/2
Click to expand...

You are probably right. I didn't even know that AVG had that product. I
was thinking about Anti-Spyware when I replied.

I still think that the right product was not chosen for the test.

Additionally, the OP posted test results with out stating what the test
really was. Reading thru the text in the pdf report didn't explicitly
state what the details of the tests were.

As it turns out, these results are for a 'forward-looking' AV test.

On this page at the same site,
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2007_02.php it has
results of a standard AV test done on Feb.7.

It seems as though all the tested packages performed similarly, with AVG
detecting 96.37% of known viruses. There were 8 higher and 8 lower.

Fast-forward to the posted results...if you look at them at this page:
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2007_05.php it really
explains what the test is.

Essentially, the tested s/w packages were left in that state, no
definition updates were done to any of them. They then collected exploits
from 2/7 until 5/7 and then tested the programs, in their 2/7 state (and
2/7 definition files) against the 'new' exploits thay had gathered.

So the test results posted had nothing to do with an overall rating of
AVG Anti-Malware, but instead the results of these s/w packages after NOT
being updated for 3 months.

So if your definition files are kept up-to-date, this test really means
nothing.

For their REAL results of AVG Anti-Malware, see the first link....

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2007_02.php
 
Pretty nasty comments from someone who was seen in a public bathroom with
his pants down to his knees and red palms if you know what I mean :-)

Karen Jane Panze (Not an MSDN Subscriber or a right wing Wacko) Just FYI
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Pretty nasty comments from someone who was seen in a public bathroom
with his pants down to his knees and red palms if you know what I mean :-)

Karen Jane Panze (Not an MSDN Subscriber or a right wing Wacko) Just FYI
Click to expand...

You are a pretty disgusting piece of porcine detritus. Keep your filth
out of here.

- --
Iron Feliks

Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGayitIEgejQPpTu4RCjJ4AJ90VX2uCiYocDjpLFKupbSeZVEgsQCglawT
twHQp08aweSkq9zLpyPSyfk=
=T4SO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Back
Top