Linked by Kroc Camen on Tue 29th Sep 2009 16:47 UTC, submitted by REM2000
Thread beginning with comment 387102
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
yeah, and avg and other 'free' AV are consider good? i never said it was "good" I said it was "not bad".
as for how i came to that, i did not do massive testing. i said i loaded on my laptop. and played with it. The AV engine is no worse then sophos or avg.
when, i scaned it aganist some old archives it found stuff neither avg or sophos was able to find.
and, when surfing "bad" sites it blocked stuff That sophos or avg never did. so, yea, my impression so far it not bad probley at least as good as sophos or avg.






Member since:
2006-11-24
you guys are killing me. Yes, all of you who voted this up to 4
Tell me, are you running an anti-virus lab? Yes? No? How do you know it is "good"? It is good if the detection rate is good, and in NO OTHER circumstance. But of course you have no clue about that simply by installing it. omg...
It is good when competent sources test it and find it to be good, certainly not because you guys think so.