you can always spot a BS comparison when you see symantec on top specially when it comes to self-protection. this one just made me realize that AV-TEST is a useless website so i guess the info wasnt useless in the end?
by show of hands, how many of you guys have witnessed norton getting disabled by malware?
ROFL what a joke this test is.
EDIT: forgot they also mention Avira being 100% as well, i might just pass out by the smell of BS...
Totally agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, AV-Comparatives usually gives the "Advanced+" awards to weird Antivirus Software. I'm not stating that Avira or Symantec are not good, but everybody here should agree that Kaspersky, ESET or Emsisoft are much better.
And it's quite interesting that they sometimes get low marks. According to AV, ESET is usually low in performance, even worse than Bitdfender. Sounds pretty strange, doesn't it?
Do not trust any kind of site like those.
Virus Bulletin SEEMS the only one reliable.