05-23-2011, 02:01 AM
Quote:Woops, lol you did manage to catch me there, I was looking at the wrong date I believe... But Bitdefender, and Norton are at the top as of 2011.
http://www.cnet.com.au/norton-antivirus-...306321.htm
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/collectio...id_av.html
http://top-10-antivirus.com/
http://anti-virus-software-review.topten...cmpid=4637
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368554,00.asp
The one I linked you to is the latest. My source is from February 2011. Plus, it has been updated last April 13, 2011. The ones you've posted are from October 14, 2010, November 29, 2010, September 1, 2010 and two other sources with no date and terrible reputation as seen here and here. Also, PC Mag claims it is the best for 2011 when the testing date is too far-flung. It was being too futuristic. In the current review I have linked you to, BitDefenfer was ranked as the third, Avira as the fourth. I would have uncertainties since Avira's entry was only its free version and yet it got that rank. BitDefender's was its pro version, and Norton's as well, which is far from the other two we are discussing.
Quote:It's decent, i'll say that. But not as good as it used to be for the updates in malware we have currently (as of today). I didn't mention that site in my list of reliable sources though lol. I only listed the ones that I knew were a reliable source for the finishing statement of my last post.
Good, that site should definitely go.
