Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 72227" data-source="post: 832352">I too am not overly fond of his tests. For me it&#039;s not so much about how a product scores, but rather his arrogance and his cowardliness to hide behind his followers every time some one challenges him on something. It really is blatantly obvious that he has a list of programs that he likes, along with ones that he does&#039;t like. That&#039;s totally fine, as everyone has their own lists too, but it is evident in his testing that he does demonstrate bias towards certain products. I mean he really goes out of his way to constantly &quot;prove&quot; that WD is crap (in his mind). Sad part is, it can do well, but somehow his conclusion will still be like &quot; well I still don&#039;t recommend it&quot;, blah, blah, blah.Youtube is full of wannabe security experts IMHO. The testing methodology used (including Leo&#039;s) really isn&#039;t indicative of how to properly test a program. The same methodology that is be used, is the same as it was 10-15 years ago and really hasn&#039;t changed. Meanwhile programs, malware and infection vectors have changed, but the testing methodology hasn&#039;t IMHO. No one has a random folder full of exe&#039;s just randomly appear on their computer with their real-time turned off.Finally, I do take issue with the fact that he works for a competitor (Emsisoft) and he makes no mention of this during any of his tests. In my view it&#039;s only ethically right to have a disclaimer that he does work for a competitor. Nothing against Emsisoft, they are a fantastic company with a great product, but to be honest I am surprised they let him get away with this, at least the ethical part IMO.Sorry, enough of my rambling, but I just take issue with some of these tests and the fact that some people like Leo act like they know everything and provide false/misleading info to others on how to choose a program.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite109" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 72227, post: 832352"] I too am not overly fond of his tests. For me it's not so much about how a product scores, but rather his arrogance and his cowardliness to hide behind his followers every time some one challenges him on something. It really is blatantly obvious that he has a list of programs that he likes, along with ones that he does't like. That's totally fine, as everyone has their own lists too, but it is evident in his testing that he does demonstrate bias towards certain products. I mean he really goes out of his way to constantly "prove" that WD is crap (in his mind). Sad part is, it can do well, but somehow his conclusion will still be like " well I still don't recommend it", blah, blah, blah. Youtube is full of wannabe security experts IMHO. The testing methodology used (including Leo's) really isn't indicative of how to properly test a program. The same methodology that is be used, is the same as it was 10-15 years ago and really hasn't changed. Meanwhile programs, malware and infection vectors have changed, but the testing methodology hasn't IMHO. No one has a random folder full of exe's just randomly appear on their computer with their real-time turned off. Finally, I do take issue with the fact that he works for a competitor (Emsisoft) and he makes no mention of this during any of his tests. In my view it's only ethically right to have a disclaimer that he does work for a competitor. Nothing against Emsisoft, they are a fantastic company with a great product, but to be honest I am surprised they let him get away with this, at least the ethical part IMO. Sorry, enough of my rambling, but I just take issue with some of these tests and the fact that some people like Leo act like they know everything and provide false/misleading info to others on how to choose a program.:) [/QUOTE]

Verification