all data is used to indicate what you want it to show.
At 09:52 PM 7/29/2010, Ralph Smith wrote: >Willlburrr!... > > >---------- >From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:53 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues >Subject: RE: OT: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > >Not if his name is Mr. Ed. :-) > >Sent from my HTC Tilt 2, a Windows® phone from AT&T > > >---------- >From: Ralph Smith <[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 8:49 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues <[email protected]> >Subject: RE: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > >I don't disagree, but when you are presented >with information you have to evaluate the >validity of the data, and hopefully get >clarification from those involved when it >implies that there may be a problem. Virus >Bulletin actually warned in the explanation of >the chart that it was just one result and that >conclusions shouldn't be jumped to until there was more data. > >And sometimes, a horse is just a horse, of course. > > > >---------- >From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 4:39 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues >Subject: RE: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > >My point was really that all AV vendors have experience FPs, not just Vipre. > > > >I agree that statistics can be a valuable tool, >its just that which ones you choose and how you >present them can be misleading. For example, in >a horse race between the US and Russia, the US >horse won. In the American papers, it was >reported that the US was took first place. In >the Russian papers, it was reported that the US >was next to last and that Russia was second >place. The statistics reported in both cases >were true, but the picture they gave of the race was very different. > > > >From: Ralph Smith [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 3:08 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues >Subject: RE: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > > > >True, but there were people on the VIPRE forum >that were hit just as hard by a couple of the >FPs that VIPRE had. Im not knocking VIPRE at >all I like it a lot and would purchase it again with no hesitation. > > > >However, when a well known organization like >Virus Bulletin publishes test results, it makes >sense to look at the data and try to understand >what it means and how it may impact your >organization. I personally feel confident with >Sunbelt, but I would be interested to understand >how they interpret the chart and what they feel >the implications are for their product. > > > >By the way, some lies may be statistics, but not >all statistics are lies. Information, including >statistical, is the basis for sound decision making. > > > >---------- >From: Kim Longenbaugh [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 2:28 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues >Subject: RE: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > > > >How about a little perspective on false positives? > > > ><http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html>http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20003074-83.html > > > >and a reminder about statistics from Mark Twain: > >theres 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics > > > > > >From: Ralph Smith [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:20 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues >Subject: RE: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > > > >Ive had VIPRE for a couple of years now, and >was fortunately not hit hard with the false >positive problems others have had. With about >180 Win XP machines, Ive had only a half dozen >infections in that time all but one of the >rogue AV kind, so I have been feeling pretty good. > > > >However, the chart that was linked to is a bit >worrying the only popular business class AV >solution that scored worse was CA (my former >solution), and most of the others McAfee, >ESET, Kaspersky, Sophos to name a few show significantly better results. > > > >It would be interesting to hear a comment from >Sunbelt a little reassurance needed here. :-) > > > > > >---------- >From: Erik Goldoff [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:48 PM >To: NT System Admin Issues >Subject: Re: Vipre effectiveness & false positives > > > >I don't know what you have now, but I can tell >you from experience at various client sites over >the last year or so, none of the following was >without issues : Trend, McAfee, Symantec SAV & SEP > >On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Carl Houseman ><<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote: > >For all of you staunch Vipre supporters, I'm >just wondering, are you still so staunch given >the various false positives over the past >year? It seems like I remember reading here >about one every quarter or so, and I can confirm >at least 3 since (from online records and >messages I didn't delete) since June 2009. And >how many of you have had to deal with infections >despite having an up-to-date Vipre? > > > >Issue I'm debating is a switch from another >product to Vipre, and even though the price is >very good, I'm looking at the Virusbtn RAP >quadrant >(<http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml>http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml) > >with a very poor showing for >"Sunbelt". Including the false positives and >cost of switching, it doesn't add up to a good >choice. At least if the protection was much >better, then the occasional false positive might >be justified. Is there any 3rd party >comparison or statistic that gives Vipre a better than average result? > > > >I'm not looking for endorsements or praise for >their tech support heard that all before. But >if you've had Vipre on 10 seats or more and have >kept track of live infections after a year or >longer, and effort to avoid or recover from >false positives, that would be great to >know. Please include total number of seats in any report. > > > >Carl > > > > > > > > > > > >Confidentiality Notice: > >****************** > >This communication, including any attachments, >may contain confidential information and is >intended only for the individual or entity to >whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, >or copying of this communication by an yone >other than the intended recipient is strictly >prohibited. If you are no t the intended >recipient, please contact the sender by reply >email, delete a nd destroy all copies of the original message. > > > > > > > > > > > >Confidentiality Notice: > >****************** > >This communication, including any attachments, >may contain confidential information and is >intended only for the individual or entity to >whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, >or copying of this communication by an yone >other than the intended recipient is strictly >prohibited. If you are no t the intended >recipient, please contact the sender by reply >email, delete a nd destroy all copies of the original message. > > > > > > > > > > > >Confidentiality Notice: > >****************** > >This communication, including any attachments, >may contain confidential information and is >intended only for the individual or entity to >whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, >or copying of this communication by an yone >other than the intended recipient is strictly >prohibited. If you are no t the intended >recipient, please contact the sender by reply >email, delete a nd destroy all copies of the original message. > > > > > > > > > > >Confidentiality Notice: > >****************** > >This communication, including any attachments, >may contain confidential information and is >intended only for the individual or entity to >whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, >or copying of this communication by an yone >other than the intended recipient is strictly >prohibited. If you are no t the intended >recipient, please contact the sender by reply >email, delete a nd destroy all copies of the original message. > > > > > --------Andy-Ofalt---863-3449------405-Ag-Admin-Bldg------for more information go to http://ict.cas.psu.edu/Contacts.html ---------- My little blurb to eat up bandwidth and make your mail box even larger +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The real problem is that IP, a connectionless protocol, was never developed to be the universal protocol. ATM was developed to serve that purpose and failed. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
