rf> A few other people have expressed similar sentiments.  I
 rf> guess Vesselin
 rf> was in a difficult position at the time.  It's impossible
 rf> to be 100%
 rf> unbiased when you're actively involved with one particular
 rf> antivirus
 rf> program ... or two, in my case ... and like AVP and TBAV,
 rf> F-Prot is
 rf> generally regarded as being one of the best.  This makes it
 rf> kinda hard
 rf> to keep the _appearance_ of bias (and commercial
 rf> "advertising" for your
 rf> own program) out of the conversation without looking like a
 rf> total dork
 rf> ... but as echo moderator, this is what I try to
 rf> accomplish.
You try TOO hard!  I'm not saying you should be like Bontchev or Netiv or the 
Dr. Solomon staff and shove TBAV and AVP up everybody's noses every chance 
you get, but it's a well known fact that TBAV and AVP are always right up 
near the top, so why don't you just say so ?
 rf> >  rf> It's often said that magazines give "Editor's Choice"
 rf> >  rf> awards to those
 rf> >  rf> AV companies with the biggest ads.  Although it sometimes
 rf> >  rf> looks that
 rf> >  rf> way I'd hate to think that this is really happening,
 rf> > Bullshit Rod!  It "looks that way" BECAUSE most magazine awards go to
 rf> > the company that spends the most on advertising!
 rf> Most people seem to agree with you on this, but I'm not so
 rf> sure.
 rf> (Maybe the fact that if a magazine intends to run an
 rf> antivirus feature
 rf> next month the advertising department calls up AV companies
 rf> to buy space
 rf> in that issue has something to do with it.)
You mean they call and tell AV companies "If you spend $100,000 a year on 
advertising with us, we'll make sure you get favourable treatment whenever we 
do an Anti-virus Test Report."
 rf> > That might be the case NOW, but nobody, not even you, can tell me Dr.
 rf> > Solomon winning Secure Computing's Best Player of The Month Award
 rf> month
 rf> > after month after month wasn't the result of biased testing!  Don't
 rf> you
 rf> > think it's just a little bit TOO coincidental that the minute Dr.
 rf> > Solomon's business relationship with Secure Computing ends, AVP
 rf> becomes
 rf> > #1 ???
 rf> I don't think the tests would have been _deliberately_
 rf> biased.  Netiv
 rf> pulled this kinda crap and his reputation fell through the
 rf> floor.
Fuck him!  He deserves everything he gets!
 rf> I dobut very much if Solly's would be silly enough to fall
 rf> into the same
 rf> trap.  Maybe Secure Computing's virus collection is sourced
 rf> elsewhere
 rf> now ?
OK, perhaps the tests weren't _deliberately_ biased, but the latest results 
prove they were _unintentionally_ biased.  Happy now ?  :-)
 rf> > I'm not knocking Dr. Solomon, it's a good program, and
 rf> > occasionally it might deserve to be #1, but it has NEVER been good
 rf> > enough to be #1 ALL THE TIME!  That's BULLSHIT, and you know it as
 rf> well
 rf> > as I do!
 rf> IMO, _no_ antivirus program is good enough to be #1 all the
 rf> time!
Shit Rod, all you seem to do these days is defend opposition anti-virus 
companies!
LuKE
---
---------------