WTF, if they can give the 1st position to Norton, they can do anything....
If they can place Kaspersky in the 10th spot, then i guess they can do anything more LOL.
But on a serious note, the test by *www.protectstar.com
does not include spyware/adware - so much about they notion of the best antivirus internet security suite of 2008 !!
I just looked into the test done by *www.virusbtn.com/
That includes adware/spyware and malware testing - its results also places Avira on the first place
Results here under :
Detection rates for malware, adware and spyware
Product Malware samples Adware and Spyware AntiVir (Avira) 99.3% 99.1%
Avast! (Alwil) 98.8% 97.9%
AVG 96.3% 98.6%
AVK (G Data) 99.9% 99.9%
BitDefender 97.8% 98.8%
ClamAV 84.8% 82.4%
Dr Web 90.4% 92.8%
eScan 96.7% 92.1%
eTrust / VET (CA) 72.1% 56.5%
Fortinet-GW 92.4% 91.2%
F-Prot (Frisk) 96.7% 92.0%
F-Secure 96.8% 93.5%
Ikarus 98.0% 98.8%
K7 Computing 65.5% 59.5%
Kaspersky 97.2% 92.0%
McAfee 95.6% 98.6%
Microsoft 97.8% 91.5%
Nod32 (Eset) 97.8% 96.3%
Norman 92.8% 91.9%
Norton (Symantec) 95.7% 98.6%
Panda 95.6% 95.6%
QuickHeal (CAT) 85.7% 86.7%
Rising 94.1% 95.9%
Sophos 98.1% 98.8%
Trend Micro 98.7% 95.1%
TrustPort 99.6% 99.8%
VBA32 89.9% 92.1%
VirusBuster 76.2% 77.8%
WebWasher-GW 99.9% 99.9%
ZoneAlarm 96.4% 94.5%
Number of samples 1130556 83054
Overall results
Product malware on demand adware / spyware on demand false positives scan speed proactive detection response times rootkit detection cleaning AntiVir (Avira) ++ ++ (*1)
+ ++ + ++ + + Avast! (Alwil) ++ + + + o + o o AVG + ++ (*1)
+ + o o + o AVK (G Data) ++ ++ o -- + ++ -- - BitDefender + ++ o - ++ + + o ClamAV -- -- - -- - ++ -- -- Dr Web o o o o + o + + eScan + o o - + ++ -- -- eTrust / VET (CA) -- -- ++ o - -- + ++ Fortinet-GW o o -- + ++ + n/a (*2) n/a (*2)
F-Prot (Frisk) + o + + - o o o F-Secure + o + o ++ + ++ + Ikarus ++ ++ o + + + o o K7 Computing -- -- o - - - -- -- Kaspersky + o o - + ++ + + McAfee + ++ ++ o + o + ++ Microsoft + o ++ o - -- o ++ Nod32 (Eset) + + ++ ++ ++ + + + Norman o o + - + o o o Norton (Symantec) + ++ ++ ++ + o ++ ++ Panda + + + + ++ o ++ o QuickHeal (CAT) - - o o o o - o Rising o + + o o o o + Sophos ++ ++ + + ++ + + + Trend Micro ++ + + + + + ++ + TrustPort ++ ++ - -- ++ ++ -- -- VBA32 - o o o + o o + VirusBuster -- -- + o - o o + WebWasher-GW ++ ++ o ++ ++ ++ n/a (*2) n/a (*2)
ZoneAlarm + o o - + ++ + o
Index ++ = very good > 98% > 98% no FP < 2 h
+ = good > 95% > 95% 1 FP 2 - 4 h
o = satisfactory > 90% > 90% 2 FP 4 - 6 h
- = poor > 85% > 85% 3 FP 6 - 8 h
-- = very poor < 85% < 85% > 3 FP > 8 h
So you see its a lot confusing - if anyone comes across a comprehensive testing results - please do post them here.
