@dagrev Yes, I understand about the outdated software you mentioned, but all AVs were tested under the same old software and therefore it seems a "somewhat" fair comparison. Would not the up to date software simply point to them doing the work of catching virus' and the like, not the AV itself
The reason I don't agree is because ISTM that you are assuming some things that I don't agree with.
1. That all software updates are equivalent when it comes to security.
2. That the Browser has no or very little impact with regard to Malware protection.
3. That the Operating System has no or little impact with regard to Malware protection
4. That all AV programs work just as efficiently with regard to Malware detection irrespective of what Browser, and Operating System you are using with the AV.
5. That Flash for IE is going to be just as secure as Flash for non-IE browsers.
6. That same for Java as with Flash
JMO
Thanks for trying to help me better understand, but maybe I wasn't clear. I agree that all those things are important to security. Let me try another way: I don't think that updated software will make any
AV program itself inherently better--only look better in tests (equally so for all AVs), because the current updates would have allowed for a vulnerability to be exploited in the first place. Thus the current software would be doing the catching of some problems before it got to the AV in the first place.
I understand how current software makes a computer more secure, but how would those things make, say avast, score better and not equally raise the score for all or most others? I'm thinking the current software would simply make for fewer vulnerabilities in the first place, for the AV to have to react to--but this would be true of all AVs equally. In the end it seems the current software would make for fewer AV responses and would not necessarily indicate the AV better or worse itself. But like I said, I'm not tech person, I'm just trying to think through it.