On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:28:30 -0600, VanguardLH  wrote:

>badgolferman wrote:
>
>> http://www.360safe.com/internet-security.html
>> 
>> AV Comparatives really seems to like this product and have awarded it
>> Advanced+ all year long in several categories.  By contrast avast!
>> seems to have hit the skids in their tests.  Does anyone use this
>> product?
>> 
>> http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php
>
>You'll see Symantec/Norton hasn't been listed there for awhile.  They
>didn't kowtow to av-comparatives demands for ransoming the test results
>(pay up or we wont show our results for you).  There was some other AV
>company that wouldn't pay the ransom, er, testing fees (although the
>product got tested but they wouldn't publish) but it's been too long to
>remember which one that was.
>
>I also like to reference https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml
>(click on the pic to enlarge it, and click again on the image to enlarge
>that) to give a feeling of which products are best on both proactive and
>retroactive protection.

 AVG with much better scores than Kaspersky ?
 Not been my experience. Kaspersky gets almost 100% of the
"fresh" banking trojans, which AVG, Avast and even BitDefender only
detect days later.
 I'm talking bootable/Linux AVs here, so sig only, not resident
heuristic detection.
 []'s
>
>BitDefender ranks better than Qihoo; however, I still don't like some of
>their rude behaviors in their freeware version.
-- 
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy  - Google 2012
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2