http://softwarereviewhq.com/anti-virus/comodo-antivirus-review-and-internet-security/
That is a very good review Melih.
That’s hard to consider a review on my part. A review goes over strengths and “weaknesses”. I know CIS is pretty solid and I use it, but it’s not perfect. I see no mention of any short comings, it looks just like a paper ad. Also an affiliate link in each and every review (not just comodo) is very interesting…
+1
Once CIS can consecutively pass the VB100 and also receive AV-TEST.org certification, I will be impressed.
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=94 (1 Pass / 5 Fails)
http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/test-reports/
It’s nice to see CIS has ICSA.org certification…
https://www.icsalabs.com/product/comodo-internet-security-premium
You have to look at the report for deeper understand why a certain product got the certificate or not; Certificates give only an indication and for instance AV-test stress a lot on cleaning an infected pc which is not always. VB100 do not take heuristics in consideration, and mark that the product fail.
Don’t take everything is shown; misleading information is everywhere so make you’re own opinion based on your experience and not what other say.
I respectably disagree.
In regards to malware protection, one would have to actively infect their computer(s) to form an opinion of what works and what does not. I would think most, including myself, would prefer independent testing labs to do this with all available security programs compared.
Now in regards to the VB100, if it is true heuristics are not tested, then there is even more demand on the security program to work instead of using other features to try to take an educated guess at what are and are not malware. For the AV-TEST certification, I agree that it should be a priority to clean an infected computer which is a great test as opposed to an OS reinstall.
Then CIS is not the right tool at the moment; the philosophy behind CIS is to protect a clean PC, CCE is for cleaning. Don*t forget that’s hard clean a pc 100%. From what I know CIS will clean what is found on infected and unknown file will be sent further for analysis.
I use for instance few tricks that keeps me safe, without being a nerd 
My only problem with VB100 is they test, and that FB is seen as a big problem, when it’s not. AV-Test lays to much focus on cleaning infected pc.
People need to have the initiative to learn the basics how to protect themselves.
CCE is designed specifically to clean infected computers.
CIS is designed specifically to protect from infection
Why not combine the two?
as Melih has said if your computer is clean there is no need for CCE if your computer is infected there is no need for CIS.
It seems to me any Windows antivirus solution should have the ability to clean. It sounds like what you are saying is if something gets by CIS then CIS is useless and CCE would have to be run.
If a computer gets infected the very best and most reliable way to make sure that it gets 100% clean it is to wipe the drive and load it with a known clean image. I have been using Comodo for over 3 years and neither of my computers have ever been infected.
~Maxx~
this is what Melih has said not me.
If CCE is used by users will limited knowledge it will have great consequences, for instance Malware Geek is that he windows got in an endless loop because he use it as it comes… that you can do with malwarebyes, hitman pro and other but not with this tool.