AV-Comparatives releases their Nov 2014 "Cleaning" test results

Nice to see AVG is good at something, finally... Too bad AVG just can't seem to find infections or is easily disabled by malware so that "great removal" never happens.
 
Avast didn't do too bad. I thought F-Secure was supposed to be something pretty good? Saw it scored quite low.
 
I always take these tests with a huge grain of salt, and this one is no different.

AVG? Good grief...

I have been selling Bit Defender for awhile, and I see that it scores near the top. I suppose that is because it is annoyingly intrusive, and has its claws deep into the system, kinda like Norton. :rolleyes:

Emsisoft, kinda low, lower than I think it should be, but when I run that scanner it normally finds a lot of things that the others miss...?

And why such a short list? Many of the top names aren't included on there. :confused:
 
Last edited:
katz said:
And why such a short list? Many of the top names aren't included on there. :confused:
Click to expand...

Every test they do, they ask each vendor to participate. Some do, some don't. You can't hold the vendors at gunpoint. Their website has good articles on how they run their tests, AV-C is a very solid site that does good real world testing of products, not typical "lab environment" tests like most other testing sites. Plus they're neutral as can be, not biased by advertising dollars like many other so called testing sites.
 
AVG is great at cleaning viruses, but YOU have to find them for it first. :p

Seriously, the number of machines I get infested with viruses and junkware, that are running AVG, really makes me wonder how it could be so good at cleaning them. :confused:
 
AV-C do so many different tests: detection, false positives, performance impact, etc. Removal effectiveness is way down the list of what's really important, to me. I put my faith in AV-C's real world protection test.
 
All I can really find in browsing the article is a 3-tiered layer of groupings, i.e., a few with 3 stars, a handful with only 2 stars, etc....

Are there no removal comparison graphs to look at, perhaps metrics a bit more complex than gold stars handed out in kindergarden?
 
So at least one infection (#14?) that AV Comparatives considered 'widespread' had failed detection/removal on 13 out of the tested 16 products?
 
avg did better than eset? o.0

How do you say cat in Romanian? Well... if I ask that question to a Romanian they will get it right every time, ask it to a statesman, Canadian, or Mexican, and they will have no idea. So, we can see it's the question we ask that determines the scores on the tests.
 
Do keep in mind here, we are talking they are only testing these AV programs against 30 infections. I tell my clients to look at AV comparatives, and go back as far as you can see the trends of the different products. I personally base my belief on what's coming through the door daily. AVG would definitely be at the top of my list of most infected computers (I mean the number of crap that is on them, not just most computers coming in with AVG installed).
 
AVG is also in my badbooks due to their unethical and deceptive advertising of their own product and browser and search engine hijacking and bundles its toolbar with other software getting installed without the user knowing. It uses the same tactics is supposed to protect you against.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

YeOldeStonecat
AV-Comparatives released Sept 2015 Real World test results
Replies
17
Views
2K
phaZed
phaZed
YeOldeStonecat
AV-Comparatives released March-June "Real World" test results
Replies
18
Views
2K
TechPJC
TechPJC
TechPJC
AV-Comparatives - Mac Security Review / Test 2014
Replies
0
Views
614
TechPJC
TechPJC
YeOldeStonecat
AV-Comparatives released March 2014 Real World Dynamics Tests
Replies
15
Views
2K
trevm999
trevm999
YeOldeStonecat
AV Comparatives May 2014 Real World Test results out
Replies
1
Views
880
CLC
CLC
Back
Top