Latest AV-Comparatives: avast last but one!

[nsm0220]

but thats not good for gdata because avast is have a bad year

I see you're back on your Gdata bandwagon. This is the avast! Forum. 

duh because im using avast though gdata you should know that by know

whatever something bad happens to avast it all way affects gdata.have you notice that in the test.

[true indian]

That doesnt mean u come here and began your gdata wagon wheel...

Neither...i know that u posted in a youtube comment saying that we are over our heads...Hmmm

u also mentioned that avast is crap...

That also hurts avast feelings...

why u come here then?

I have initially warned u...

and i think u should stay away and leave this thread alone rather than hijacking it with useless gdata crap...

[ady4um]

I have a crazy  suggestion for Avast Developers. Adapt avast so to perform great at the tests (apparently, great PR in the eyes of some specific users), even if that means reducing the real actual security!!!

Wait, Oh no! Let's think again. The tests are only 1 way to compare different AV tools in a certain specific way or using specific methods. The real actual final security comes from real use, and the means that avast offers for the benefit of user's security may not be correctly measurable by the specific methods used by a certain AV test.

OK, so, maybe the tests are only one way to compare different security tools, and not the only one nor the definitive one?

Yeah, I think I'll keep testing my personal use of avast, while I'll be open to the possibility of changing to some other tool if really necessary. I hope Avast Developers will keep focusing in real security and much less in marketing.

In the meantime, I am more interested in other useful topics.

[true indian]

Gdata has purchased avast! engine....so why should avast! help gdata in any way?

stop hijacking this thread please?

[CraigB]

but thats not good for gdata because avast is have a bad year

I see you're back on your Gdata bandwagon. This is the avast! Forum. 

duh because im using avast though gdata you should know that by know

whatever something bad happens to avast it all way affects gdata.have you notice that in the test.

You should also know by now that avast has no control over what Gdata does with there scanning engine so it's pretty pointless for you to keep posting here im afraid, your comments - suggestion's and pitifull threats you make against this forum ( avast ) and it's members are not welcome, it would be very appreciated if you would just go back and crawl under your Gdata rock  

[Pondus]

Something strange happens with all threads that nsm0220 post in........... They usually end up being locked   

[CraigB]

Something strange happens with all threads that nsm0220 post in........... They usually end up being locked   

That would be nice, banned even better 

[dagrev]

I have a crazy  suggestion for Avast Developers. Adapt avast so to perform great at the tests (apparently, great PR in the eyes of some specific users), even if that means reducing the real actual security!!!

I'm all for that as it would almost have to of necessity also increase "actual security" which valid testing to some point does indicate.  Personal testing and experience is almost irrelevant as one cannot know if it is the user or the AV keeping the one system clean.  My real world testing in the last 6 months showed avast let a couple things in.  I'm a very careful user who doesn't visit risky places so my real world testing doesn't look so good. Seems to reflect what the the lab tests indicate--Avast needs to address this. 

As I've said elsewhere when VLK admits the tests do in fact reveal a concern that needs addressing--enough said. Apparently Avast takes valid testing seriously.  

Bring on Ver 7.

[Hellion]

I have a crazy  suggestion for Avast Developers. Adapt avast so to perform great at the tests (apparently, great PR in the eyes of some specific users), even if that means reducing the real actual security!!!

Wait, Oh no! Let's think again. The tests are only 1 way to compare different AV tools in a certain specific way or using specific methods. The real actual final security comes from real use, and the means that avast offers for the benefit of user's security may not be correctly measurable by the specific methods used by a certain AV test.

OK, so, maybe the tests are only one way to compare different security tools, and not the only one nor the definitive one?

Yeah, I think I'll keep testing my personal use of avast, while I'll be open to the possibility of changing to some other tool if really necessary. I hope Avast Developers will keep focusing in real security and much less in marketing.

In the meantime, I am more interested in other useful topics.

Some of the tests mean nothing, but it makes sense to look at detection tests as these test the AV's at their most basic form - Signatures and Heuristics...

In the test zero day malware is used that any user in the real world could contract, I believe this to be a good test if a large number of samples are used.

Avast has always held the standard for scanning speed and this is a GREAT plus, but I would gladly trade that for better protection...

[RejZoR]

Well, i'm not going to have any excuses because i know some parts of avast! don't performs as they should. Behavior Shield being one of them. If anything bypasses Web Shield and Network Shield, not much will stop the threat localy. And thats where some brands provide behavior based detection that actually works and it works really well. avast!'s behavior shield doesn't exactly do it's job. avast! 7 is suppose to fix this part but for now, we don't know for sure since there is no avast! 7 beta just yet.

[ady4um]

@Hellion,

I'm not saying that avast doesn't need to improve. I'm not saying that the tests don't matter at all.

What I said was that it is only a (little) PART of my decision to use one antivirus or the other.

About specific tests being some "must" because "every user can find these malware", I would agree about the set of malware to be tested against, but the methodology is still a problem (for any antivirus, not only for avast). The method that one antivirus stops some malware can be measurable by the specific test, while other antivirus uses a very different method to stop the same malware and the same test is not able to measure this other method of protection. Both protection methods stop the same malware, but only one protection method is evaluated by the specific test. The results of the test won't show you "real" results, but a comparison about a certain method of stopping malware.

In short, avast needs to improve (as always), but I take the tests (also when avast's results are better) only with a very little weight in my decision. Examples of other factors are system resources, forum help, ease of use and more.