Pcworld 10-07
- Thread starter tom1573
- Start date
you know what? that's the funniest test i have ever seen. first they've given spybot's main page wrong but now it is corrected i think.
second: they've said that spybot doesn't detect the changes made to the startup entries but it does.
third: spybot's scan time is said to be too long but it is known that spybot makes a very fast scan.
and finally i personlly think that spybot can't have too low detection rates.
second: they've said that spybot doesn't detect the changes made to the startup entries but it does.
third: spybot's scan time is said to be too long but it is known that spybot makes a very fast scan.
and finally i personlly think that spybot can't have too low detection rates.
@dj.turkmaster
I'm afraid that you have misunderstood something.
This is taken from the PCWorld test for Spybot-S&D 1.4:
"Behavior-based detection
Detected additions to HKCU Run keys - Yes
Detected additions to HKLM Run keys - Yes
Detected changes to Startup folder - No"
It is correct that Spybot-S&D 1.4 doesn't detect changes in the Startup folder. There is a difference between startup entries(RUN entries) and the Startup folder.:lip:
I'm afraid that you have misunderstood something.
This is taken from the PCWorld test for Spybot-S&D 1.4:
"Behavior-based detection
Detected additions to HKCU Run keys - Yes
Detected additions to HKLM Run keys - Yes
Detected changes to Startup folder - No"
It is correct that Spybot-S&D 1.4 doesn't detect changes in the Startup folder. There is a difference between startup entries(RUN entries) and the Startup folder.:lip:
Hello.
Magazine reviews are subjective, however we are now at Spybot-S&D version 1.5.
I read the PC World article, and though it was about version 1.4, it did put some doubt in my mind.
tashi
Member of Team Spybot
Hello.
I could give several examples of excellent Anti Virus programs that consistently rate at the bottom in magazine reviews, if they are even mentioned at all.
Here is another review for Spybot-S&D 1.4, from Tech.co.uk http://www.tech.co.uk/computing/software/utilities/review/spybot-sd-14
In the end one has to make one's own personal decision.
Our latest release Spybot-S&D v1.5 is, as always, improved upon the previous version.
How NOT to Test Anti-Malware Products
Best regards.
I could give several examples of excellent Anti Virus programs that consistently rate at the bottom in magazine reviews, if they are even mentioned at all.
Here is another review for Spybot-S&D 1.4, from Tech.co.uk http://www.tech.co.uk/computing/software/utilities/review/spybot-sd-14
In the end one has to make one's own personal decision.
Our latest release Spybot-S&D v1.5 is, as always, improved upon the previous version.
How NOT to Test Anti-Malware Products
Best regards.
Last edited:
Interested in reviews?
I had antivirgear virus.
Norton couldn't even detect it.
Microsoft, using two programs, indentified parts of the infection but left enough to immediately reinfect.
Spybot found it immediately and eliminated it completely.
Now that is a review.
Why is anyone reading magazines that need advertisers more then accuracy:funny:?
I had antivirgear virus.
Norton couldn't even detect it.
Microsoft, using two programs, indentified parts of the infection but left enough to immediately reinfect.
Spybot found it immediately and eliminated it completely.
Now that is a review.
Why is anyone reading magazines that need advertisers more then accuracy:funny:?