Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 72227" data-source="post: 786939">No product is 100% perfect despite what the test results may say. Kaspersky is a very god product, but it too can be bypassed by malware. Every test you see should be taken with a grain of salt. The problem is, all people look for are the graphs and as a result get a false sense of &quot;wow x product gets 100%, that means I will never get infected no matter what I do&quot;. Truth is, you CAN get infected if you practice unsafe habits. That&#039;s why it&#039;s very important to use good/safe computing habits regardless of which programs/setup you choose to use.Spot on <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite130" alt="(y)" title="Thumbs up&nbsp; &nbsp; (y)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(y)" />This is the other problem I have with these tests. All people look at are the graphs, but don&#039;t take the time read, or know how to properly interpret them. More often than not, if you take the time to read the report, there&#039;s a ton of useful information there. It helps to clarify the results and get a better understanding of them. Your quote from the result graph is a good example. Another is the FP chart that AV-comparatives includes in the report. It breaks the FP&#039;s down in to the &quot;prevalence of the actual file(s)&quot;, but all people look at is the total number and that&#039;s it. Are they from well known programs, or are they coming from programs that no one has heard of or uses? Doesn&#039;t mean that a particular product can&#039;t improve on it&#039;s FP rate, but it does give you a sense of where its coming from.Well how can they, their marketing strategy would be toast<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite115" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 72227, post: 786939"] No product is 100% perfect despite what the test results may say. Kaspersky is a very god product, but it too can be bypassed by malware. Every test you see should be taken with a grain of salt. The problem is, all people look for are the graphs and as a result get a false sense of "wow x product gets 100%, that means I will never get infected no matter what I do". Truth is, you CAN get infected if you practice unsafe habits. That's why it's very important to use good/safe computing habits regardless of which programs/setup you choose to use. Spot on (y) This is the other problem I have with these tests. All people look at are the graphs, but don't take the time read, or know how to properly interpret them. More often than not, if you take the time to read the report, there's a ton of useful information there. It helps to clarify the results and get a better understanding of them. Your quote from the result graph is a good example. Another is the FP chart that AV-comparatives includes in the report. It breaks the FP's down in to the "prevalence of the actual file(s)", but all people look at is the total number and that's it. Are they from well known programs, or are they coming from programs that no one has heard of or uses? Doesn't mean that a particular product can't improve on it's FP rate, but it does give you a sense of where its coming from. Well how can they, their marketing strategy would be toast:p [/QUOTE]

Verification