Comodo has the best detection!

[Seany007]

@naren post:16

Experts may not say 2 engines can protect you, they may say 2 engines may protect you little better.

Suppose Comodo licence BitDefender

Now if you see any comparison table.

Comodo - 85%
BD - 87%

The little benefit is 2%

The other day on the same comparison table may be
BD - 85%
Comodo - 87%

So no need of BD.

But you may say both may be detecting different malware so there is better protection.

Yes, but for me the difference may not be huge but little. Offcoz little better protection will be there coz of 2 different engines. But may also give probs.

And Comodo with innovative technologies & try to achieve more & more usability, in my opinion no need of any third party engine.

You said it. Every little helps.

[Seany007]

@Placebo post:17

As Naren already stated, the detection improvement is negligible.
Considering you use default denial, it is not necessairy to think about detecting the different malware. More important is to protect yourself against it.
The impact on detection while running multiple antivirusscanners is, in my opinion, to low to spend your precious system recources on.

Of course when things go wrong and you need to cleanup, I can only encourage you using different antivirus engines. As a single engine will not detect all virusses and/or clean them up. Using multiple engines will help you with that.

So in short, for protection no, for cleanup yes

I was only talking about AV’s. Not Firewall and DEF+. For ppl who just use Comodo AV and WIN Firewall shall we say.

[khanyash]

@Seany007 post:21

You said it. Every little helps.

Everyone has their own opinion. I respect yours & mine too.

Hav Fun

Regards
Naren

[Seany007]

@naren post:23

Everyone has their own opinion. I respect yours & mine too.

Hav Fun

Regards
Naren

Some read for you.

why-one-virus-engine-is-not-enough.pdf

[khanyash]

@Seany007 post:24

Some read for you.

Home :: GFI

The title itself is wrong.

1, 2, 3…no numbers of AV are enough.

It should be “Why AV’s are not enough?”

[VitRom]

Wow! It’s cool! It’s amazing!!! It’s…
But wait… Why is the only source of such triumphal reports still shadowserver? Where are the other well-proven tests results? Is it complot against Comodo?

[Seany007]

@naren post:25

The title itself is wrong.

1, 2, 3…no numbers of AV are enough.

It should be “Why AV’s are not enough?”

Ha ha ha LOL! I rest my case… ;D

[Seany007]

@VitRom post:26

Wow! It’s cool! It’s amazing!!! It’s…
But wait… Why is the only source of such triumphal reports still shadowserver? Where are the other well-proven tests results? Is it complot against Comodo?

Word up LOL!

[rogerg2]

@naren post:16

Experts may not say 2 engines can protect you, they may say 2 engines may protect you little better.
The little benefit is 2%
And Comodo with innovative technologies & try to achieve more & more usability, in my opinion no need of any third party engine.

A little common sense, surely exceeds that “2+%” each and every time!

Comodo + common sense = 100%

[MikeN92]

I would really like to see Comodo in av-comparatives. Just an idea, even if I think people shouldn’t pick their security programs based on any testing sites/magazines. The real tester should be the user.

[biozfear]

@malwarekiller post:18

no not really…thats not the truth…I would love comodo too in any case…since i am its user myself…and its performance matters for me and my PC’s security…

Yes you are a user of Comodo but its firewall only. In your eyes its always avast as the AV. Any user that visits a few forums will see that too on your posts or even on the comments on youtube that you post.

So don’t lie about the love for comodo since you only use its firewall. :-TD

[Citizen_K]

@biozfear post:15

malwarekiller: Since when you are bothered about such tests and information? If I recall correctly, unless avast performs good, you will not consider those tests valid…

Anyways on a daily basis each vendor will have different results and you should know that by now…

@biozfear post:31

Yes you are a user of Comodo but its firewall only. In your eyes its always avast as the AV. Any user that visits a few forums will see that too on your posts or even on the comments on youtube that you post.

So don’t lie about the love for comodo since you only use its firewall. :-TD

Stop trolling malwarekiller.

It looks like the two of you may have a history outside the Comodo Forums. We are not interested in a brawl between the two of you,

[Melih]

@VitRom post:26

Wow! It’s cool! It’s amazing!!! It’s…
But wait… Why is the only source of such triumphal reports still shadowserver? Where are the other well-proven tests results? Is it complot against Comodo?

More than happy to take the Paid tests if you are prepared to pay for it.

Shadowserver is independent and free!

Why do you think Vendor sponsored results is better than an independent one? Its a sad state of the AV industry where users have been educated to trust vendor sponsored results rather than independent and user driven ones…very sad…

[Seany007]

@Melih post:33

More than happy to take the Paid tests if you are prepared to pay for it.

Shadowserver is independent and free!

Why do you think Vendor sponsored results is better than an independent one? Its a sad state of the AV industry where users have been educated to trust vendor sponsored results rather than independent and user driven ones…very sad…

On a serious note it’s true. I trust more youtube guys who test AV’s. Have a look at Melih blog and you will find the truth VitRom

[webbie146]

Comodo’s detection rate these days is actually very solid + amount of signatures is going down which is great to see! :-TU

[clockwork]

The most important point for any “average” antivirus is:

The performance.

If i would have to choose between 100% detection or good performance,
i would choose performance and i would install additionally a host intrusion protection

Comodo firewall and defense+ should stay able to run on older machines.
All the antivirus improvements which are demanding performance should be selectable.

[malwarekiller]

@biozfear post:31

Yes you are a user of Comodo but its firewall only. In your eyes its always avast as the AV. Any user that visits a few forums will see that too on your posts or even on the comments on youtube that you post.

So don’t lie about the love for comodo since you only use its firewall. :-TD

Hey! look,this is CIS forum alright!! I am not here to argue…I cant understand what u talk about…nor i dont post a lot here neither on youtube…and so u dont need to be harsh to me

and u are no one to judge whether i should like comodo or not…

Now,lets get back to topic alright Before u calling me something why not take a look at your self…you eset fanboy! !ot!

[VitRom]

@Melih post:33

More than happy to take the Paid tests if you are prepared to pay for it.

Looks like we are in the two different Internets. Almost every well-known tester in the my Inet (av-comparatives, matousek, anti-malware) makes an AV tests for free and asks for paid only for tests 1) made out of regular (i.e. once in three month) order or 2) for products that didn’t meet to a some (published) criterias.

@Melih post:33

Why do you think Vendor sponsored results is better than an independent one?

Because above mentioned testers publishes their methodology (and even testsuite, matousek at least) and their results 1) are easy to verify (here is a lot of virus collections available online, in the my Inet at least) and 2) mostly similar to my own xperience.

Well, should I following this conspiracy logic disregard any 100% results of CIS? Does it mean that this tester was, uhm… sponsored and real result is 120%?

[pykko]

Why the total number of viruses is different for each vendor?

How could you make a table with detection rates from the best to the worst, when you don’t test the same number of malwares for each product ?!

[JimmieD]

@clockwork post:36

The most important point for any “average” antivirus is:

The performance.

If i would have to choose between 100% detection or good performance, i would choose performance and i would install additionally a host intrusion protection

Comodo firewall and defense+ should stay able to run on older machines.

All the antivirus improvements which are demanding performance should be selectable.

Yes, this is critically important! What possible good is an antivirus that won’t allow the computer to run? I just uninstalled 2 AV’s in the last couple of months for that very reason.

Anybody that wants to say how great Avast is needs to go to their Forum and read for a couple of days. There’s page after page after page of complaints because Avast has caused very serious problems, on all types of operating systems. I guess any computer is real safe if the antiviruse causes that you can’t even get on the internet or open your email program, that’s an Avast specialty. I speak from personal experience…

Comodo has been great ever since I installed it!