SUPERAntiSpyware 5.0 limited Pre-Release
- Thread starter jamescv7
- Start date
- Status
bogdan
Level 1
- Jan 7, 2011
- 1,362
Statistically relevant or not 1/20 sounds bad enough to determine me not to use SAS as the 3rd on-demand scanner. Maybe I'll use Emsisoft instead (although in the AV-Comp review it has many fp-s).
It might help to do a scan on the same samples with the current official release of SAS...maybe it's a bug in the pre-release version
It might help to do a scan on the same samples with the current official release of SAS...maybe it's a bug in the pre-release version
MetalShaun
Level 1
- Mar 3, 2011
- 424
Dieselman said:
He is the CEO, and i doubt he would care about such a small sample set.
Quick scan currently takes 29 seconds on my computer.
Scan type : Quick Scan
Total Scan Time : 00:00:29
Operating System Information
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit, Service Pack 1 (Build 6.01.7601)
UAC Off - Administrator
Memory items scanned : 598
Memory threats detected : 0
Registry items scanned : 59283
Registry threats detected : 0
File items scanned : 10158
File threats detected : 2
Doesn't matter.......................What threats did it find on your pc? I love when people say small samples don't matter. I work for an engineering company. Believe me when we are testing beta products and 19 fail out of 20......................The presses stop. Emergency kicks in and everybody is curious to see what happened. No one says "Well it was only 20 pumps". Whatever. So if 11 apples are bad in a bag full of 12 you will still buy it? NOT.
MetalShaun
Level 1
- Mar 3, 2011
- 424
Dieselman said:
It detected 2 files i had sat in a folder on my desktop. You cannot compare this test to manufacturing or retail. So if SAS detected all 20 samples in this test would you do a U turn and start using SAS again and declare it was better the both MBAM and HitmanPro. No you would say it was a lucky day for SAS with the sample set and you would need more data to see if it can be reproduced. (At least thats what any logical person would do)
bogdan
Level 1
- Jan 7, 2011
- 1,362
If 11 apples are bad in a bag full of 12, it doesn't mean that most apples in the world are bad (if a product fails to detect 11 out of 12 samples it doesn't meant that it will fail to detect most malware in the wild)... just turning words around (joking). Anyway we can all agree that the results in this test are bad for SAS. We can wait for the final release to be tested and argue then
- Jan 24, 2011
- 9,378
SAS test results in all my test were never that good...Always a disappointment,and so far SAS 5 dosen't seem to be "THAT VERSION"....the version who will drastically improve SAS detection.....
Maybe we aren't testing it right..maybe I should use only spyware....who knows
Maybe we aren't testing it right..maybe I should use only spyware....who knows
Very true Tweak. I got into a heated argument with SuperAntispy. I asked him why SAScore.exe needs to be running even on the free on demand version. He said for better protection and removal of malware. I came back and said "Well MBAM and HMP remove more malware then SAS and they dont need a service running". I showed him the video of SAS only detecting 1/20 samples. His reply was more like "I dont care". Whatever. Reminds me of Comodo. Bring up a problem to them and then deny any wrong doing.
- Status
Similar threads
