Why not?
All AV's got the same shot. The same links in the same round of tests. 15 links or 100 links, they got the same links.
These are 15 random links that anyone could come across while surfing the Internet with their choice of protection.
No AV in the test got an unfair advantage. They were all loaded with the default settings and all were allowed to update to the latest signatures.
The test is what the test is.
So whose test should we trust? You, GeorgeB and I all got different results.
Well, I suppose all you can do is take all the tests with a grain of salt. Trust yourself? Dunno...Avast stopped all 30 links and did so very fast and efficiently for me. Now, with that being said, that doesn't mean Avast can stop everything and I certainly never said it could. It simply stopped the 30 random links that I had.
Personally, if you look at my setup in my signature, I don't leave it to one single program for protection. I think everyone should have a layered approach to malware protection. I feel pretty confident that what Avast doesn't stop, Malwarebytes Pro will.
If you look at the AV-tests done in Dec 2009 you will see that not one product ever scored 100 %. Here is the link to the results.
AV-Test.Org Releases Real-World Malware Protection Report - Security Watch
These tests were done on new malware and the top performer still did
not detect 100%.
In both your tests, you detect 100%, there is something wrong with your testing
I've explained my testing. Obviously AV Comparatives uses more than 15 or 30 links/pieces of malware I would imagine.
Kaspersky also stopped all 15 links on the second round of testing. So it's not just Avast.
Of course avast is pretty good. Im using it!
I'm not using Avast5 because it has compatibility issues with 64-bit
Quote
