i can respect that answer, with a few caveats to clarify disparate
circumstances. for example, if it was just the magazine writers/editors
doing the technical tests/evaluations, then i agree i would not put any
faith in the results/recommendations. however, if the magazine
contracted a widely-respected IT security firm in Germany to do the
tests (as it is in this case), then the testing process would be reputable.
i also agree with you that, if i person compared products and decided
that the extra bells and whistles (such as personal data privacy
protection), are more important than the effectiveness of the main
purpose of the product (such as detect and remove viruses/worms), then
published recommendations should be ignored, because they typically
focus on the product's primary purpose. similarly, if bells and
whistles were more important, i would buy an Acme-brand minivan, mostly
for the bells and whistles, and ignore Consumer Reports test results,
whose recommendations give greatest weight to the primary purpose of the
product (to get me and my family from point A to point B, economically,
with a high degree of safety, and low incidence of mechanical failure).
however, if the main purpose/focus of a product (such as detection and
removal of viruses/worms) is more important than bells and whistles
(such as personal data privacy protection), then i would give a great
deal of weight to the test results of experts (not magazine
writers/editors) who Also focused on the primary purpose of the product,
especially considering the fact that i do not have the time, money or
desire to go out and buy several competing products, search for and
collect thousands of samples of PC infections, and spend days testing
the products against the infections. for example, if 6 anti-virus
products were tested against a suite of 5500 viruses/worms, and 1000
people wanted to buy the anti-virus product Best able to achieve it's
primary purpose, then 999 out of 1000 people would buy BrandA, if test
results proved BrandA detected/removed 5400, BrandB detected/removed
only 4400, BrandC detected/removed only 3400, etc. 1 out of 1000 people
would go out and steal a copy of BrandA. in this case, there is very
little room for subjectivity.
in both these circumstances (where (a) bells and whistles are more
important than the primary purpose of the product, or (b) where the
primary purpose of the product is more important than bells and
whistles), "go out and buy what's best for you" is not substantive
advice, because in both these circumstances, all these people will "go
out and buy what's best for them" anyway, even if their personal
preferences are different. it's like saying "go out and do what you
feel is right" is not substantive advice, because everybody we meet and
talk to will "go out and do what they feel is right" anyway, regardless
of whether the person is a priest dedicated to self-sacrifice and
service to others, or in the KKK.
