> You do realize that many of such reports are financed by security vendors who sell a product that competes with MSE directly?
Yes I do. But have you considered that this might not be the case here? You don't back up your indictment with any sources. Maybe, in this instance, half a dozen vendors didn't get together to fabricate a fake test report just to destroy the reputation of MSE (and I'm curious how you think they decided which of their products would receive the top scores... a coin toss?)
> Reality is, MSE is "good enough" for vast majority of people, and on many accounts better then paid software.
But is it? What are you basing that statement on? I've supplied a link to a (seemingly) independent test that finds MSE is really not good enough (poor rate of detection, poor rate of infection prevention). You seem to just be pulling 'facts' out of your arse.