“COMODO is all about protecting the end users, that’s fine. But you know what ? Users want to have an idea on how well they are protected”
you said it!!!
Like I said in my email: If there is a proper test that does test how well a product protects by running malware and executing it on the real PC and how the product performs against it, sign me up!!!
What aspect of: these tests do not prove protection do you not understand? Look at the The Joker, poor guy thought these av tests actually execute malware!!! Funny!
That’s the poor way to avoid your product to get tested. We don’t like the methods ! You may never like the methods, but users still want to know how you perform.
I think it would be nice to get it tested to, maybe the tests arent perfect and such, but it’s still the best way to compare against the others for now…
I would really like to see Comodo in the Retrospective/ProActive Test on av-comparetives…
And i would thoose Avira, i use Avira myself.
It allways do good in tests, you allways hear alot of good things about it, and the heuristics are great.
And most importent, if i disabled Defense+, i would feel more security with Avira then the antivirus in Comodo.
But i will probably uninstall avira when CIS gets CIMA and Boclean integrated…
For somebody that wants to “create trust online” I am sorry but in not testing your software you are doing more harm then good, I also think your argument is flawed as the number 1 rated AV software had to jump through hoops (the same hoops you don’t/won’t/can’t jump though) to get where it is. (The next excuse when or if you do test might be oh they only text certain type of malware on CIS while all the others get a pass.) To be honest it’s a bit like a spoilt child losing at football (only by 1 goal mind) and takes his ball and goes home. If my anti virus was as great as you think yours is then I would want the whole world (creating trust online) to hear about it now how can I do that I wonder…Maybe by comparing eggs with eggs if you have the better eggs then people will buy them (or download it whatever!) Saying things with no back up does not make it true even if you think it makes it true. Just for the record I do use CIS.
Another thing which makes me crazy is when people say the AV needs work, an answer that happens almost every time is to talk about D+ what they fall to look at as what about the poor sod that has only installed the AV and not everything else.
On that note Melih is right and other security companies share the same point for example Dr. Web, TrendMicro, Panda Security as well as Kaspersky. AMTSO is currently providing some directions as well as standards to the testing industry.
I just found a document to prove further Melih’s point. I think the entire industry support the concept and trustworthiness of dynamic testing. Hey Joker Dynamic Testing means when you actually execute the malware and run it. The bottom line for the AMTSO is DYNAMIC TESTING.
The following document will put any argument against Melih’s futile, only die-harders will attempt to carry on aimlessly.
if you provide that malware