Comments on: Best Antivirus Programs Fail VB100!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 03:33:41 +0000

ALL OF YOU ARE BULLSHIT ESET HAS NO WEAKNESS AND IT HAS THE BEST SECURITY EVER BUILT IT SOME FIVE YEARS IT WILL RELEASE IT LATEST DETECTION OF HEURISTICS FOR 99.99 PERCENT OF FREE FROM ANYTHING.

(eset s.p.r.o.l DAVID software progrmmer)

By: CoryC

CoryC — Tue, 20 May 2008 02:00:19 +0000

Anonymous wrote:

Always used Norton, Always will. I sooner give up some system resources for good protection than use something like AVG.

[Poor performance] + [Uses massive system resources] = [Bad anti-virus]

By: CoryC

CoryC — Tue, 20 May 2008 01:40:11 +0000

dtanderson wrote:

Avast! only failed because of 2 false positives? I don’t find that bad. I would rather have false positives than misses….

Even if that false positive is a critical operating system file that's gets removed and then the OS won't boot? Accuracy matters.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 17 May 2008 13:00:43 +0000

Always used Norton, Always will. I sooner give up some system resources for good protection than use something like AVG.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 18:57:45 +0000

Fred Thompson wrote:

Sure would be nice if they’d also test the various freeware and shareware Linux firewalls like Astaro.

They do actually test some of the Linux antivirus applications in a separate test, and I might do a write up about that.

Fred Thompson wrote:

What difference do the PAST results make? They’re nothing but a slight indicator of PAST performance which isn’t the same as current performance. They’re not even a good predictor of the future. Author X finds his scanner Y failed on virus type Z so he improves the scanner. That was then, this is now.

I have to disagree with that. I think that you can look at the past results as a good indicator of how the apps will perform in the future. Look at how many times ESET has passed compared to the others. That means they have had to fix very little as a result of the tests.

Anonymous wrote:

My only hope is that ESET won’t be “bought out” by some bloated giant like Symantec.

That would be absolutely terrible, but I don't think ESET will sell out like that.

Francis Sim wrote:

I think 2 false positives is good enough for me to stick with Avast! It is lean enough for me to prefer it over Symantec.

I would definitely use Avast! over Symantec. You won't see me disagreeing with that.

By: not Sol

not Sol — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:46:32 +0000

Amak wrote:

There is no “best” antivirus. Each one has its weakness….though some of those are inexcusable (Norton’s ridiculous scan times comes to mind).

I didn't say it was the best...I agree with you on this one.

Francis Sim wrote:

I think 2 false positives is good enough for me to stick with Avast! It is lean enough for me to prefer it over Symantec.

If you want to roll out anti-virus on a corporate level to servers and workstations, the ESET is still very good...and Avast! [in my opinion] not as robust...but on the personal use front - Avast! is free for home use and fails on 2 false positives. So what do you think I run at home?

By: Francis Sim

Francis Sim — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:33:42 +0000

I think 2 false positives is good enough for me to stick with Avast! It is lean enough for me to prefer it over Symantec.

By: Wandering electrons

Wandering electrons — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 11:41:15 +0000

Although I was pleased to see that my firewall of choice, bitdefender, had passed, it should always be kept in mind that the results of antivirus tests will vary with the methodology used. (That said, I do agree that catching known viruses is an absolute bottom-line entry point for competency.)
And then, there’s an old adage in science: “Absence of proof is not proof of absence”. When your antivirus tells you “no viruses found” it means exactly that: the program didn’t *find* any viruses, but that does not necessarily mean that there *are no* viruses in your computer.
It’s a shame that making multiple antivirus programs live happily on a single computer is difficult…
Anyhoo

By: Tinhed

Tinhed — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:07:56 +0000

what about clamwin? better still clamav + ubuntu. cheers

By: yeshu

yeshu — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 07:56:37 +0000

i use nod32 and i have had absolutely no problems from the past 2 years….3 cheers for eset nod32..