[
Well, I think that the concept of this whole test is completely wrong. I have never seen their testbed but according to their web they
did not replicate the viruses at all!!! And how they know the file is infected?? Let's quote them:
The 50795 virus samples were chosen using VS2000 according to Kaspersky, F-Prot, RAV and McAfee antivirus programs. Each virus sample was unique by virus name, meaning that AT LEAST 1 antivirus programs detected it as a new virus.That means that:
- the set can contain the false positives from the four products mentioned above, meaning that any other product is penalized while not detecting such file
- also it means that if some virus is not detected by those scanners but is detected by some other antivirus, it will NOT be included in the test set, which gives the unfair advantage to those products
No wonder all of them are in the top five!
I am sorry to say this, but the antivirus detection testing is very difficult task and I do know many (if any?) people on the Earth which are able to do this in the right way. I definitely know that the authors of these tests do not belong to them...
BTW: Even in the most thorough tests avast! has more than 90% detection rate
Pavel
Pavel, although I am a little more than a beginner, two things came to mind when I checked out that site...first, that was done in May...several months ago...maybe those results have changed .
second, who sponsored the testing? is it like the drug companies here in America do? announce results that make their drugs look good (so they can make money) and others look bad? was it really a disinterested 3rd party that did the testing and what was the exact protocol followed?
I sincerely doubt that this was a fair assessment of the antivirus programs...
Avast! Rules!!
CoJo
