Product of the year from av comparatives

Av comparatives a major independent antivirus testing company has released its list of 2012 winners in each category ranging from best on demand protection and product of the year.

This year kaspersky has been crowned with title of product of the year. Till now eset holds the record of getting most product of the year. IF you see the winners you will notice these two are the av's most appreciate and liked by geeks. Although due to its cheap rates kaspersky has nudged it eset in its popularity yet eset is a formidable opponent. There are also some other av companies at least in India pickup speed. One of which is quick heal and is heavily advertised and also works well. Although i have not tested quickheal much but heard many saying its very good.

More here: http://www.av-comparatives.org/en/comparativesreviews/summary-reports

Even though I don't trust these tests (coz some sites do paid reviews), it is good to see Kaspersky recognized as the best. AV+ in all :clap2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avibky

. Although due to its cheap rates kaspersky has nudged it eset in its popularity yet eset is a formidable opponent.

---

Just bought a 3 user license for Kaspersky Internet Security. Its the best in security, pricing, and performance :first:

I dont think they are completely untrustable, they are trustable to an extent. Ash good. I thought you would change you av provider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avibky

I dont think they are completely untrustable, they are trustable to an extent.

---

That's why I said "some". I say this because I have seen a few websites recommending a premium Antivirus and rating their competition very poorly.
It should be fair and they should display test results showing why they recommend it over the others. AV comparatives did a reasonable job by explaining their choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avibky

Ash good. I thought you would change you av provider.

---

Well, I always thought of using either Kaspersky or Avast (free version). Both are good, but Kaspersky is a tad better :wink:

LOL ash. Hmm good Kaspersky is v good. But ash we won kis right so why purchase??

No doubt Kaspersky is good AV software and deserves an award, but as Ashwin stated, I do not completely trust these tests. For example, Norton received all advanced ratings but it wasn't mentioned other than a quick overview of the program. The only bad point it received was the automated help desk. But in my experience with Norton, I was always able to talk to a live agent. Also, those tests were very limited. They didn't discuss some other important factors of the AV products tested such as system resource use, false detection rates, etc. And what really puzzles me are the retrospective tests. Why? It shouldn't be about what a product could do in the past but what it is capable of now. I noticed quite a few vendors opted-out of those tests and I can understand why.

I am not completely arguing with their results, some of the products they claim are at the top are in fact good (i.e. Kaspersky). I just think that these tests seemed biased to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avibky

LOL ash. Hmm good Kaspersky is v good. But ash we won kis right so why purchase??

---

What I won was a 1 user license, I have 3 computers at home. So, I bought a 3 user license.

Btw, I removed the pdf link from the first post. They don't allow it, so I added a link to the Summary results instead.

Quoting their policy

Quote:

---

AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - About Us

It is not allowed to offer the results in any form in full or in parts on a website for download,or to take parts of it into own tests or to use the data ulterior without a written permission of the management board of AV-Comparatives.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeremy

No doubt Kaspersky is good AV software and deserves an award, but as Ashwin stated, I do not completely trust these tests. For example, Norton received all advanced ratings but it wasn't mentioned other than a quick overview of the program. The only bad point it received was the automated help desk. But in my experience with Norton, I was always able to talk to a live agent. Also, those tests were very limited. They didn't discuss some other important factors of the AV products tested such as system resource use, false detection rates, etc. And what really puzzles me are the retrospective tests. Why? It shouldn't be about what a product could do in the past but what it is capable of now. I noticed quite a few vendors opted-out of those tests and I can understand why.

I am not completely arguing with their results, some of the products they claim are at the top are in fact good (i.e. Kaspersky). I just think that these tests seemed biased to me.

---

Norton opted out in a couple of tests last year and hence weren't in line for their award, and I guess the same applies to others with the N/A ratings. Kaspersky was the over-all winner because they scored ADV+ in all of their tests. In my opinion, this was by no means a fair review.

And Kaspersky was the top recommendation in an Android test by AV comparatives which drew a lot of criticism. They failed to review top Antivirus products like LookOut, Dr.Web, etc. That was definitely a biased review.

I am not against Kaspersky of course :p but I dislike such unfair reviews.

P.S: FYI, Kaspersky have a free version for Android users,I know that Avi is already using it :p
I'll make a thread about it in the Android section for our Android users ;)

Actually, I've been under the impression that out of all the AV testing, AV Comparatives is the most reputable.

I've been looking at their tests for the last 4 years or more and I've seen rankings of the offerings change.

There are plenty of other review sites that I frankly don't trust at all.

So, what am I missing here?

Are there other outfits that do better test rankings of anti-malware offerings?

AS jelson says av comparatives is one of the best sites for checking an antiviruses capabilities.

Jeremy av comparatives do have a test which judges the performance impact of an antivirus. AS for your second part with respect to retrospective tests, The antiviruses are tested not with old malware but with old definitions which are used to detect new virus samples. Why is this done, so that the heuristics and detection capabilities of the anti viruses are tested. This is an essential component for any av. An av which gets 75pc above score in such tests with low false alarms. is very good. As for your third part jeremy in each and every test they measure the false alarms generated by the av and give ratings accordingly too. To test a total suites effectiveness against real world threats "The whole product dynamic tests" is conducted.
So jeremy please take a careful look at the test results pdf and also please see the testings they do.

As for removing the link to the pdf, thanks ash for doing so as i had not read their policy. Many sites directly share the pdf so i too followed suite. So once more thanks.

Oh i did not know that you had 3pcs i thought you have only one. So enjoy kis.

---------- Post added at 05:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:47 PM ----------

And yeah jelson pcmag also does a good amount of testing. THe other good ones are ICSA Westcoast and VB100. to view vb100 test pappers you have to pay them though. Pcmag reviews appear fair but i still think in a way they are biased towards norton. The other goodsite is 7tutorials.com who give unbiased reviews at least i find so. And also he covers all the grounds in av testing.

---------- Post added at 05:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:51 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashwin

Just bought a 3 user license for Kaspersky Internet Security. Its the best in security, pricing, and performance :first:

---

Hey ash how much did it cost. For me in the stores its RS800. So whats the price there?

@Bala Not sure If I really like Av comparatives, especially after seeing their Android tests. Perhaps as they are new to it, they messed up.

And I bought Kaspersky Internet Security from Flipkart.com , 883 Rs + free home delivery.
Got it delivered to my doorstep within 30 hours or so :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avibky

And yeah jelson pcmag also does a good amount of testing. THe other good ones are ICSA Westcoast and VB100. to view vb100 test pappers you have to pay them though. Pcmag reviews appear fair but i still think in a way they are biased towards norton. The other goodsite is 7tutorials.com who give unbiased reviews at least i find so. And also he covers all the grounds in av testing.

---

Thanks for the info avibky!

I've looked at PC Mag and I agree they're pretty good and agree about their bias for Norton. I think the point is they are skewing along the lines of their demographic (not PC enthusiast, but basic computer literate consumers with a corporate slant.)

Fact is, for most people -- you know, those who know only enough to do email and log onto Facebook -- I now point them toward Norton. It doesn't suck anymore (2001 - 2009 it was really lousy), been testing well (middle to top tier) and it's extremely simple with very few pop-ups. ==> suitable for Grandma ;)

I'll have to look at 7tutorials. I've looked at VB100 before but not recently. Never had occasion to check out ICSA though.

Yes thats right norton is the best example of never give hope. The were suckers once but now are top. ITs true its grandma suited. Even kaspersky is pretty good until your grandma does not poke around the settings. They have reduced a lot of popup queries. But the biggest reducer is comodo IS. Comodo used to pop an alert for each n every thing but from the 5.6version its drasticly dropped. Just now one of my relatives got quickheal. They purchased through their isp so got it at a discount. They are pretty happy with it.