My New Anti-Malware Product Rating System
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Let's face it. I'm not testing these applications on a point-by-point basis and I honestly have no idea how much malware exists during each test....so I needed to come up with a new rating system...a more "non-techicnical, tell ya like it really is" rating system.
So, here is what I came up with:
Products that are a waste of my time and yours will getting a rating of:
Sucks!
Products that perform decently, however may need a substantial boost from another product get a rating of:
Decent!
Products that perform great and need very little help from another application will get a rating of:
Awesome!
Let me know what ya think!!!
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
thanks for the suggestions guys…now ya got me thinking again…
@adel - the problem I always had was that stars 1/2 and 3/4 were always tough to decide on. I don’t know…I’ll think about it over a few beers!
How about rating other aspects of anti-malware products. Right now your ratings seem to strictly be based on how well they smash malware. While this is probably the most important thing, there are other things to consider.
Maybe this is not what you’re interested in doing.
But here are some suggestions:
- False positive rate
- How well product component updates are done and if they are included in support or not
- Support: do they answer their emails and/or telephone? (even if it’s not matt from remove-malware.com)
- Ability to generate bootable media
- Memory consumption and/or cpu usage.
- Ease of use
- How well they install and un-install. Some anti-virus programs leave bits and pieces around that can continue to load and affect system performance and operation.
Change the “sucks” to “sucks monkey balls”. Might not be the most family friendly term but I love to use it.
@ Tim.. i dont think False Positive would be relevant to his tests.. since these are mainly about ‘grabbibg’ as much a you can on an infected PC… with all those numerous alerts and infection reports it would not be possible to pin point for legit software getting falsely detected. And looking for FPs is not the purpose of the test
Just my opinion 
But other than that i have to agree with you on comments about other aspects of the software…
it would be nice if u also include overall protection. u see some programs are better at protecting then at removing. u see if the program can protect u, u wont hav to worry about removing. u should really think about that. dont just rate a program on 1 thing. u hav to look at the overall protection
haha
very soon we would see security products with a.. “Matt Rating - Awesome” rating on websites and retail boxes…
LOL!
Actually, thats a good step, but i wished you could kind of make it broader… probably rate it with ‘Stars’..
5 Star - Excellent, hardly any cons
4 Star - Very Good overall
3 Star - Decent but could be improved
2 Star - Not upto the mark… bad security choice.
1 Star - F-Secure has competition!!! (LOL i loved that review)
One thing I would like to suggest… it would be better if you could rate the software overall.. like.. ease of use.. easy interface… quality of pop ups (info etc)… and other aspects…
Just my thoughts