- Feb 24, 2016
- 246
No problem actually thought avira would go around 740 detections ... but its rather weak as it seems....vs the othersThank you for your efforts.
No problem actually thought avira would go around 740 detections ... but its rather weak as it seems....vs the othersThank you for your efforts.
yes me too. either all these top notch reviews are paid . or the free product is extremely worse. or the viruses i used are exactly too new and too old ( but the old half is actually spread between weeks and months old )to be fair i'm very disappointed in the Bitdefender results.
well an AV isn't only about signatures tho.yes me too. either all these top notch reviews are paid . or the free product is extremely worse. or the viruses i used are exactly too new and too old ( but the old half is actually spread between weeks and months old )
No problem actually thought avira would go around 740 detections ... but its rather weak as it seems....vs the others
E: My few wisdoms: (not sure is it correctly translated in my language to english, but here goes nothing: ) "live and learn" & "You don't have to be wise to sound like one, disguise it!"
You're kidding right?To be honest, that's why I refuse to use free antivirus products - they just do not offer the protection paid products i.e., Kaspersky. They aren't the best/win awards (then the left say it's fake news, they pay off review companies, but is there 100% proof of that?) for no reason.
@Amelith Nargothrond No you didn't understand the point of view. Of course this is place where everybody has "freedom" share their opinions and knowledge, do not take everything so serious buddy.
IMO it would have been better to upload the samples that were undetected to the vendors.. You could have used a throwaway email. As long as you purposely didn't put any documents or anything, it wouldn't have been traceable.
Exactly. No samples were uploaded by the AV cloud protection and the left over samples were not executed, so all proactive features remained dormant.well an AV isn't only about signatures tho.
i can send you the virus pack. i dont make a vid again of 5 hours testing belive it or not.Avast, Avira, Bitdefender and Panda worse than Comodo? Only with video for me to believe, because in my tests Comodo is always one of the worst.
the Programms didnt ask me to upload only WD wanted to Upload and i did. i dont like to Upload 862 files one by one.IMO it would have been better to upload the samples that were undetected to the vendors.. You could have used a throwaway email. As long as you purposely didn't put any documents or anything, it wouldn't have been traceable.
I have a doubt that according to your avira screenshot, your malware files have an extension of .file => I doubt this may affect the detection rate of some AVs
could to try to test WD again with extension .exe?
It's ironic because I do the exact opposite: Refuse to pay for protection. Paid products aren't guaranteed to protect me any better in a situation where I come in contact with malware (let's assume a brand new ransomware sample) than free products and if it does fail to protect me then not only are my files trashed but I'd also feel that I'd have wasted my money. Obviously I keep backups of all my important data and you could argue that these paid products don't cost much for what they offer but at the end of the day if the product does fail to protect me then that money could've been used elsewhere; arguably for a better purpose.To be honest, that's why I refuse to use free antivirus products - they just do not offer the protection paid products i.e., Kaspersky. They aren't the best/win awards (then the left say it's fake news, they pay off review companies, but is there 100% proof of that?) for no reason.