Hi Luther,
Luther Kolb to Paul Walker, 06 Jan 98 02:33.
 LK> It always pays to read the fine print disclaimer, assuming the
 LK> advertiser is honest enough to include one.  Dr. Solomon, just like
It probably does, but I've not bought any of them in a box - most you don't 
need to, and due to a site license I can get Dr Solomon's (disks only) for 3 
pounds, so...
 LK> oil in Dr. Solomon's case because they actually detected 94% of Secure
 LK> Computing's "Full Collection", but other scanners which score 100% or
 LK> close to 100% in the Wild List test make a VERY poor showing in the
The ones I listed have always been fairly reliable, whatever I've thrown at 
them - whether it's a virus they know of, or one that they haven't seen 
before. That's why I listed them.  Of the lot, I'd have to say that in 
this regard I find TBAV's heuristics the best, since they're very fast but 
also very good. AVP probably is good, but at least IMO it's far too slow.
 LK> Have a look at an Invircible ad if you want to see some REAL snake
 LK> oil.  Zvi Netiv INVENTED snake oil!
Tell me about it - that's why I keep invircible 2.something here, because I 
amuse myself by pointing out that his claims are wrong, in alt.comp.virus.
Strangely enough, I never get a reply, and he usually goes away again for a 
month or so. (Not due to me, I'd imagine!) 
 PW>> I haven't used AVP much.
 LK> You should!  :-)
As I said, I find it far too slow. That's why I like TBAV, since it gets a 
scan throughput of several megs per second, reliably, and doesn't miss many 
viruses.
  Paul              (p.r.walker@warwick.ac.uk)                 
... BDC: Break Down and Cry
--- FMail/386 1.22
---------------