M
Manzai
Thread author
It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
F-Secure? ....How is this possible? THAT'S WHY we don't need to believe ''independent tests'' from AVComparatives , AVTest and more
I just got the second shock (first was Baidu)
I just got the second shock (first was Baidu)
M
Manzai
Thread author
I can say.....good results for Norton Behavior blocker, at least we now know that is better than F Sesure 
And Skype, I forgot to hide
Oh, I was confused when I see Norton 360 popup. I thought, “What? It’s actually a competition between Norton and F-Secure?”
u should trust more the independent test labs instead of this "fail" youtube reviews. this test shows nothing in real world.
F-Secure is waaaaayyyyy to heavy. Runs like 6 processes eating up 200MB of RAM and constant CPU cycles. The banking mode is worthless according to MRG.
M
Manzai
Thread author
Wrong !
Lab => Malware pack, analysis and no execution
YouTube test => Malware Pack, analysis and execution + ZeroDay
No i don't think so, Especially when i see Panda Cloud Free scores No1 with 100% detection in AV Comparatives, and Bitdefender with Kaspersky ALWAYS No1 (100% detection) in AVTests, definitely something ''smells bad'' in these ''independent'' tests.
Yep, I can't get how Ad-Aware and Emsisoft score lower than BitDefender when they use the same engine. The truth is, AV testers sometimes accept payments in exchange for a slight change in the score.
On the other hand, @Striker is right about something: AV Tests are performed on polished machines with triple checks to seek any conflicts, because they have a profit of, what, $2000 a week? While MT testers are stuck with old and virtual machines because the profit can't cut it for them.
So unfortunately AV Testers are greedy, if they weren't so, then these hard workers wouldn't have to sacrifice their time to help make the real decision. So there's a problem here, either go with the professional testers who collect money, or the innocent people with not as smooth testing. If only the Av testers could...
Come over to our own Malware Hub and see for yourself - hundreds of test we do, and they don't square with those fake lab test results. Reason is we don't let the AV companies review and revise our results, and we don't take money to do them. either.
YouTube testing is good and bad. So many amateurs making videos when they don't even know how to use the product or all its features. Then throwing 20 pieces of malware at it within 60 seconds. 99% of average users will come across malware about 2x/year if that. These videos are made with background music rather then narrated. I mute everyone. The videos are haphazardly made. Copy paste, copy paste without even allowing the security being test to react. That is not real life. Also the use of a VM is not real life. Certain products behave differently such as Norton. Amateur YouTube testers think WSA is bad but they do not even have a clue to look under monitored processes. The average person would believe AVC or AVTest.org over some YouTube video with music blaring.
you sure about that, the only difference between Manzai and the Independents is that they have lobbyist, cash flow can make or break a result. just saying.
great test => True computer, updated OS (and 1 test on x86 and other on x64 or only x64) with "tipycal software" (Microsoft office, java, flash, ff and chrome, etc), Malware Pack, analysis and execution + ZeroDay + Forensic analysis on run and after run malware.
You may also like...
-
-
-
F-Secure Internet Security v25.2
- Started by Shadowra
- Replies: 60
-
Tencent iOA Endpoint Security 2025
- Started by Shadowra
- Replies: 18
-
F-Secure Internet Security 2025 US Key (1 Year / 1 Device) 16,96€- Started by Brownie2019
- Replies: 4