Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ON
SUBMITTED TO:
N.R. INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
PROJECT GUIDE:
GEETANJALI CHAUHAN
GROUP MEMBERS:
NAME
ROLL NO.
BHAVIN PATEL
39
KISHAN PATEL
42
UTKARSH AGGARWAL
109
ANERI AGRAWAL
110
DIVYA SHAH
186
MOHIT VADHER
209
SALONI VAKHARIA
211
Phone: 26430373
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the report on A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VARIOUS
ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE USED AMONG PEOPLE IN AHMEDABAD. is submitted
to N R Institute of Business Administration, affiliated to Gujarat University, in
the partial fulfilment of the requirements for the completion of Practical
Studies in third year, semester six of the B.B.A. program for the year 20142015.
____________
_______________
_______________
Director In-charge
Professor in-charge
External Examiner
Date: / /2015
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our profound gratitude towards all the people who
helped us in the creation and completion of this project.
We would like to sincerely thank the director, DR. AVANI DESAI for giving us
an opportunity to learn so much out of the research made and our project guide
Prof. GEETANJALI CHAUHAN for providing us indispensable assistance during
the project and enabling us to complete our project. We express our special
thanks to Prof. Minal Joshi in guiding us for the statistical analysis in our
project report.
PREFACE
As a part of academic curriculum prescribed by Gujarat University for final year of Bachelor
of Business Administration, we are required to prepare and submit a research project on an
Industry. The research is to involve primary and secondary data collection and analysis.
The academic objective behind preparing project report which includes management theory
taught in classroom and their practical applications.
The preparation of this report is based upon facts and findings noted during primary and
secondary data.The scope is to study consumer preference in the city of Ahmedabad.
In this research project, we have tried to represent on analysis and findings which will often
reflect on the current scenario. Despite of best effort there may be emission and error which
may please be excused.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
NO.
TOPIC DESCRIPTION
1.
INTRODUCTION
2.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
5.
FINDINGS
6.
SUGGESTIONS
7.
LIMITATIONS
8.
CONCLUSION
9.
ANNEXURE
10.
REFERENCES
PAGE NO.
Chapter - 1
INTRODUCTION
ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE
Avast
15%
4%
6%
6%
8%
27%
AVG
Symantec
McAfee
9%
22%
Avira
ESET
Kaspersky lab
Others
COMPANY PROFILE
QUICK HEAL ANTIVIRUS
FOUNDER:
The company is co-founded by brothers Kailash and Sanjay Katkar in 1991.
Quick Heal Technologies Pvt. Ltd. is an India-based global computer security
software company headquartered in Pune, Maharashtra.
PRODUCTS LINE:
AVG Antivirus
FOUNDED:
AVG Technologies is a Czech company formed in 1991 by Jan Gritzbach and
Tom Hofer, with corporate offices in Europe and the United States. The
company specializes in computer security software.
PRODUCT LINE:
Home security
AVG Zen
AVG PC TuneUp
AVG PrivacyFix
Business security
Mobile security
NORTON Antivirus
FOUNDER:
Peter Norton is an American programmer, software publisher, author, and
philanthropist. He is best known for the computer programs and books that bear his name
and portrait. Norton sold his PC software business to Symantec Corporation in 1990.
PRODUCT LINE:
Norton 360
Norton Internet Security
Norton Antivirus
McAfee
FOUNDER:
John McAfee is a Scottish-American computer programmer and founder of
McAfee, Inc.
McAfee, Inc. is an American global computer security software company
headquartered in Santa Clara, California, and the world's largest dedicated
security technology company. The company has been a wholly owned
subsidiary of Intel since February 2011, and now forms part of its Intel Security
division. Intel confirmed in 2014 that it planned to drop the McAfee brand.
PRODUCT LINE:
All Devices:
McAfee LiveSafe
PC Security:
Mobile Security:
Mac:
PC Utilities:
ID Confidential 2013
Secure IE
Rapid IE
PC Confidential
Snapzip
KASPERSKY
FOUNDED:
Kaspersky is an antivirus program developed by Kaspersky Lab. Kaspersky Lab
is ranked as one of the top antivirus vendors globallycompeting with
household names like Symantec SYMC and McAfee. Kaspersky Lab is an
international group operating in almost 200 countries and territories worldwide.
The company is headquartered in Moscow, Russia, with its holding company
registered in the United Kingdom.
PRODUCT LINE:
Kaspersky Lab offers a variety of security applications designed for consumers,
small business, corporations, and large enterprises.
For Home:
Kaspersky PURE 3.0
Kaspersky Internet Security 2015
Kaspersky Internet Security Multi-Device
Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2015
Kaspersky Internet Security for Mac
CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR
Consumer behaviour is defined as the behaviour that consumers display in
searching for, purchasing, using, evaluating and disposing of products and
services that they expect will satisfy their needs.
BUYING BEHAVIOUR
Buying Behaviour is defined as all psychological, social and physical
behaviour of potential customers as they become aware of, evaluate, purchase,
consume, and tell others about products and services.
Buyer behaviour includes the acts of individuals directly involved in obtaining
and using economic goods and services including sequence of decision
processes that precede and determine these acts. Actual purchase is only a part
of the decision process as to why, how often, and where and what of people buy.
Buyer behaviour is the most important factors of successful marketing.
To understand the likes and dislikes of the consumer, extensive consumer
research studies are being conducted. These researches try to find out:
What the consumer thinks of the companys products and those of its
competitors?
How can the product be improved in their opinion?
How the customers use the product?
What is the customer attitude towards the product and its advertising?
What is the role of the customer in his family?
A customer responds to the stimuli or response model and may or may not
purchase the product. The inputs, (buying power, marketing mix and other
factors) processing, outputs and feedback influence the buying behaviour of the
prospect if he is satisfied. Marketing mix is the marketing effort in product,
price promotion and distribution appeals. Promotion appeals are advertising,
salesmen, reference groups and sales promotion. Other inputs are intra & inter
personal influences, and other environmental factors. Intra-personal influences
are reflected in motivation, perception, learning attitudes and personality of
buyers. Inter-personal influences are represented by family, social class,
reference groups and culture. Other environmental influences are general
economic conditions, pending legislation, fashion trends and technological
advances.
Chapter 2
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
Research Methodology:
Research methodology is a way to systematically solve the research problem. It
may be understood as a science of studying how research is done scientifically.
In it we study the various steps, the research process that is generally adopted to
study the research problem and basic logic behind them.
Research Design:
A research design is a logical systematic plan prepared for directing a research
study. It is the framework or blueprint for collection, measurement and
analysis of data.
Descriptive Research:
It is a fact finding investigation with adequate inference, it has focus on
particular aspects or dimensions of the problem studied. Data are collected by
observation, interviewing, questionnaire, etc.
In the following study, DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH has been used to
conduct the research.
Sampling:
Its the process of selecting a small number of elements from a larger defined
target group of elements.
Sampling frame:
The list of sampling unit from which a sample is drawn is sampling frame.
Sampling Size:
Sampling size refers to total number of respondents targeted for collecting the
data for the research Out of total population.
In the following study, the sample size of 250 respondents is taken. These
250 respondents were made to fill the Questionnaire.
Data Collection:
Data collection took place with the help of filling of questionnaires. The
questionnaire method is used widely and is also an economical means of data
collection. Questionnaires are more reliant with verbal responses to questions,
written or oral. It is essential to make sure that the questionnaire is easy to read
and could be understood by all spectrums of people in the sample. It is also
important for the researcher to respect the time and energy spent by the
respondents. Hence, the questionnaire was designed in such a way, that its
2. Tabulation
The process of placing classified data into tabular form is known as tabulation.
A table is a symmetric arrangement of statistical data in rows and columns.
Tabulation is the process of creating a contingency table from the multivariate
frequency distribution of statistical variables.
3. Pie charts
A pie chart (or a circle graph) is a circular chart divided into sectors, illustrating
proportion. In a pie chart, the arc length of each sector (and consequently its
central angle and area), is proportional to the quantity it represents. The pie
chart is perhaps the most ubiquitous statistical chart in the business world and
the mass media.
4. Percentage
A percentage is a way of expressing a number as a fraction of 100. Percentages
are used to express how large/small one quantity is, relative to another quantity.
The first quantity usually represents a part of, or a change in, the second
quantity, which should be greater than zero.
5. Bar charts
A bar chart or bar graph is a chart with rectangular bars
with lengths proportional to the values that they represent. The bars can be
plotted vertically or horizontally. A vertical bar chart is sometimes called a
column bar chart .A bar graph is a chart that uses either horizontal or vertical
bars to show comparisons among categories. One axis of the chart shows the
specific categories being compared, and the other axis represents a discrete
value
6. Frequency Distribution
A frequency distribution is a table that displays the frequency of various
outcomes in a sample. Each entry in the table contains the frequency or count of
the occurrences of values within a particular group or interval, and in this way,
the table summarizes the distribution of values in the sample.
7. ANOVA
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a collection of statistical models used in order
to analyze the differences between group means and their associated procedures
(such as "variation" among and between groups).
In the ANOVA setting, the observed variance in a particular variable is
partitioned into components attributable to different sources of variation. In its
simplest form, ANOVA provides a statistical test of whether or not the means of
several groups are equal, and therefore generalizes the t-test to more than two
groups.
Primary Data
Primary data consists of original first-hand information collected specially for
the purpose of study. It is statistical material which the investigator originates
for him for the purpose of enquiry in hand.
2. Survey
a) Mail Questionnaire
b) Personal Interview
c) Telephonic interview
In the following study, the primary data is collected through Questionnaire.
Secondary Data:
Secondary data consists of information that already exists somewhere, having
been collected for another purpose. It refers to the data which have already been
collected and analyzed by someone else.
These data are not fresh, and reliability of these data has to be tested before it
can be used in the research.
Plan of Analysis:
Select the important question and issue, which inhabit growth and
segmentation in the industry.
Collect the data through questionnaire and put together in the form of
table for analysis.
Inference should be drawn from the analysis to attain the objective of the
study.
Chapter 3
DATA ANALYSIS
AND
INTERPRETATION
Options
Yes
No
Total
No. of respondent
231
19
250
Percentage (%)
92.6%
7.4%
100%
Analysis:
From the above table it can be seen that 92.6% of the respondents are
using antivirus software and 7.4% respondent are not using anti-virus
software.
7%
Yes
No
93%
Inference:
From the above chart it is clear that vast majority of the respondents
are using antivirus software. So we can say that people are aware
Options
Paid
Free
Total
No. of respondents
123
108
231
Percentage (%)
53.25%
46.75%
100%
Analysis:
From the above table it can be seen that 53.25% of the respondents
are using paid anti-virus software and 46.75% of the respondents are
using free anti-virus software. From this information we can say that
the proportion of free and paid users is nearly the same.
47%
53%
Paid
Free
Inference:
From the above chart we can see that the percentage of paid users is
more than free users. But, the difference between them is very less.
Majority of users prefer paid version of Antivirus software over the
free version. So we cannot say that the users are only free users or
paid users.
Options
Online Purchase
Retail outlet
Total
No. of respondents
51
72
123
Percentage (%)
41.5%
58.5%
100%
Analysis:
From the above table we gathered the information that 41.5% of total
123 paid users make their purchase of anti-virus software from online
and rest 58.5% of the total 123 paid users are buying their software
from retail outlets.
Retail outlet
Online Purchase
0.00%
Inference:
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
Options
No. of
respondents
68
Percentage (%)
135
58.4%
24
10.4%
1.8%
Total
231
100%
Analysis:
29.4%
From the above table it can be seen that 58.4% of the respondents use
antivirus software to be protected from viruses from internet, 29.4%
use it for viruses from external devices, 10.4% of the respondents use
the software for viruses from Bluetooth connection and 1.8% of the
respondents use antivirus software for other reasons.
10% 2%
29%
58%
Inference:
From the above chart we can say that people are using anti-virus
software mainly for protection from viruses from internet and then
after they see the security from the external devices. We can see that
least people use software for other source security.
131
44
56
84
13
36.4%
5.5%
Analysis:
From the above table we can see that 56.7% of the respondents are
aware of Quickheal. Popularity of Kaspersky and McAfee is same
among the respondents with 36.8% and 36.4% respectively. 24.2%
respondents know about Norton and 19.1% respondents are aware
about AVG. 5.5% of the respondents also know about brands other
than the five mentioned in our project.
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
Kaspersky
Quick Heal
AVG
Norton
McAfee
Others
Inference:
It can be clearly seen that Quickheal has the highest market share
when it comes to popularity. Quickheal is famous among respondents
because it is able to reach its target customers through advertisements
Options
Kaspersky
Quick heal
AVG
Norton
McAfee
Other
Total
No. of respondents
43
85
24
31
41
7
231
Percentage (%)
18.6%
36.8%
10.4%
13.4%
17.8%
3%
100%
Analysis:
From the above table maximum of the respondent users are of
Quickheal. 36.8% of the total respondents use Quickheal followed by
Kaspersky which have 18.6% of the total respondents. McAfee has
17.8% users of the total respondents. Followed by Norton with
13.40% and AVG with 10.40%. Remaining 3% are other users.
40.00%
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Kaspersky
Quickheal
AVG
Norton
McAfee
Other
Inference:
Quickheal users are maximum, this shows that Quickheal is popular
among all the respondents. Reason why Quickheal has the highest
share is because of the high quality it offers and the after sales
services offered are also good. AVG users are the least among the
above mentioned companies as the respondents dont find the quality
to be good. Also, AVG fails at providing combo offers which makes it
less attractive to customers.
Good
19
14
Ok
3
5
Poor
0
0
Very Poor
0
0
5
9
14
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
20
18
16
14
Quickheal
12
Kapersky
10
AVG
Norton
McAfee
6
4
2
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Respondents find the price of McAfee products to be high. Kaspersky
is found to be the least expensive among all and it therefore preferred
more.
Table showing Product Range of different companies.
Excellent
Quickheal 10
Kaspersk 23
y
AVG
1
Norton
5
McAfee
3
Good
14
10
Ok
5
7
Poor
0
0
Very Poor
0
0
9
10
12
2
6
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
20
Quickheal
15
Kapersky
AVG
Norton
10
McAfee
5
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Kaspersky and McAfee provide good range of products whereas
Norton offers only few products.
Excellent
Quickheal 13
Kaspersk 8
y
AVG
4
Norton
2
McAfee
6
Good
14
12
Ok
9
6
Poor
3
2
Very Poor
1
1
2
3
6
4
5
6
2
1
2
0
1
0
14
12
10
Quickheal
Kapersky
AVG
Norton
McAfee
4
2
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Quickheal and McAfee have managed to satisfy respondents with
their after sales services. But Norton fails to do so.
Table showing combo offers of different companies.
Excellent
Quickheal 16
Kaspersk 2
y
AVG
2
Norton
3
McAfee
2
Good
13
14
Ok
5
11
Poor
4
0
Very Poor
2
2
3
9
11
5
6
5
1
2
2
1
1
0
16
14
12
10
Quickheal
Kapersky
AVG
Norton
McAfee
4
2
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Respondents are attracted by the great combo offers Quickheal offers.
Combo offers by AVG are less preferred by respondents.
Excellent
Quickheal 20
Kaspersk 12
y
AVG
2
Norton
5
McAfee
5
Good
15
13
Ok
4
2
Poor
0
2
Very Poor
1
0
3
8
7
5
2
4
1
3
2
1
3
2
20
18
16
14
Quickheal
12
Kapersky
10
AVG
Norton
McAfee
6
4
2
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Respondents are satisfied with the quality product that Quickheal
offers. Respondents are not happy with the quality of AVG and
Norton products.
Quality
Percentag
e
Excellent Good
Ok
Poor
47
43.5%
15
13.8%
2
1.9%
42
38.9%
Very
Poor
2
1.9%
Quality
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
It can be inferred that free version of antivirus software also tend to
provide good quality products as majority of respondents have rated
the quality to be excellent or good. Companies offer free version of
antivirus software as a part of their promotional policy, their main
objective is to increase the number of users for their antivirus
software. Therefore, they give free download of 30 days or 90 days
use of antivirus software. Once consumers start using it then they
realise the benefits of these antivirus software and then they purchase
the paid version. Therefore, companies are very conscious while
giving free download of antivirus to users.
Excellent Good
Durability 15
Percentag 13.8%
e
61
56.5%
Ok
Poor
26
24.1%
5
4.7%
Very
Poor
1
0.9%
Durability
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
When companies offer free antivirus for any given duration like 30
days or 90 days they strictly follow the durability of the product.
Therefore, our analysis shows that people using free antivirus
software are opine that in terms of durability free antivirus software
are good enough. 56.50% have rated it to be good.
Purpose
Excellent Good
Ok
Poor
23
44
34
Very
Poor
1
Percentag
e
21.3%
31.4%
40.8%
5.6%
0.9%
Purpose
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Our research analysis shows that as far as purpose of the companies is
concerned it is satisfied to a certain extent and consumer purpose is
also served to some extent as it can be seen that 40.80% of the
respondents have rated it to be ok whereas 31.40% have rated it to be
Good and 21.30% have rated it to be excellent.
Excellent Good
Ok
Poor
Very
Poor
Availability 24
of updates
Percentage 22.2%
34
33
14
31.5%
30.6%
12.9%
2.8%
Availability of updates
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
Our data analysis shows that updates are also available for free
version of antivirus software. It is shown through the analysis that
people are satisfied as 31.50% of the respondents have rated the
availability of updates to be good whereas 22.20% respondents have
rated it to be excellent. Only 2.80% respondents find it to be very
poor
Excellent Good
Ok
Poor
Very
Reliability 21
Percentag 19.5%
e
31
28.7%
27
25%
20
18.5%
Poor
9
8.3%
Reliability
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Inference:
As far as reliability is concerned for various antivirus software
28.70% of the respondents have rated the reliability to be good
whereas 19.50% respondents have rated it to be excellent. Only
8.30% respondents find it to be very poor.
Options
Below 500
500-1000
1000-2000
2000-3000
Total
No. of respondents
5
43
55
20
123
Percentage (%)
4.07%
34.96%
44.71%
16.26%
100%
Analysis:
According to the survey, 44.71% of the respondents prefer price range
of 1000-2000. 34.96% of the respondents spend 500-1000 whereas
16.26% of the respondents spend 2000-3000.Only 4.07% of the
respondents spend below 500 for an antivirus software.
16% 4%
35%
45%
Below 500
500-1000
1000-2000
2000-3000
Inference:
From the above chart, we can see that the most popular antivirus
software used is Quickheal which ranges from Rs. 1000-2000 (total
security costs of Rs. 1150). So Rs.1000-2000 is the most preferred
price range for buying antivirus among people in Ahmedabad.
It is also inferred that a very small percentage of respondents, only
4.07% of the respondents are spending below 500 which shows that
people are concerned about their security and majority of respondents
prefer to spend more on antivirus software.
Options
1 Year
2 Years
3 Years
More than 3 Years
Total
No. of respondents
55
76
55
45
231
Percentage (%)
23.8%
32.9%
23.8%
19.5%
100%
Analysis:
From the above table we can get the information that how long a
single user use anti-virus software. From above information we can
clearly see that large number of user use their software for at least 2
years. 32.9% of total respondents use software for 2 years. People
who use their anti-virus software for 1 year or 3 year are in same
proportion which is 23.8% of total respondents.19.5% people use
their software for more than 3 years.
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
1 Year
2 Years
3 Years
Inference:
From the analysis, it has been noticed that the maximum number of
respondents are using their current antivirus from the past two years,
this shows that the respondents are really satisfied with the product
they are using and are in no mood to switch in the near future.
Option
Daily
Weekly
Once in every 15 days
Monthly
Total
No. of respondents
67
34
51
79
231
Percentage (%)
29%
14.7%
22.1%
34.2%
100%
Analysis:
In above table they provide information about how frequently a
person scans his/her computer and laptop.. 34.2% and 29% people
from all respondent scan their computer monthly and daily
respectively. 22.1% people scan their computer once in every 15 days
and 14.7% people for weekly scanning.
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Inference:
From the above chart we can clearly see that large no. of respondents
scan their devices daily or monthly. So we cannot clearly say that
respondents scan their device at what time because we get the mix
result from respondents.
No. of respondents
38
54
57
82
231
Percentage (%)
16.4%
23.4%
24.7%
35.5%
100%
Analysis:
From the table we can get information that how frequently people
check their computer for software update. Large no. of people check
for update of software on monthly period. 35.5% of total respondents
check for update at monthly period. 24.7% and 23.4% of total
respondents check for it every 15 days and weekly respectively. 16.4
% people daily check it.
16%
36%
Daily
Weekly
23%
25%
Inference:
From the above chart we can clearly say that very small proportion of
people check for update of antivirus daily. Most of the people check
for update at monthly basis. So we can see that proportion of monthly
check is more than that of daily check. This shows antivirus updates
dont happen on a daily basis.
Option
Yes
No (not effective in
scanning)
No (slows down computer)
Total
No. of
Percentage (%)
respondent
s
204
88.3%
18
7.8%
9
231
3.9%
100%
Analysis:
From above table we can clearly see that respondents are highly
satisfied with their current antivirus software. 88.3% of the total
respondents are satisfied. 11.7% of the respondents are not satisfied
with their current antivirus reason being 7.8% of the respondents feel
the antivirus is not effective in scanning with and 3.9% respondents
feels it slows down the computer.
8%
4%
Yes
Not effective in scanning
viruses
Slows down computer
88%
Inference:
Majority of the respondents are satisfied with their current antivirus
software. This shows that the antivirus is effective in scanning and
removing viruses. The companies are meeting up with consumers
expectation. But a small fraction of the total respondents feel that the
software is not effective in scanning virus and also slows down the
computer.
Chapter 4
STATISTICAL
ANALYSIS
Kaspersky
Satisfactory level of different components:
Price
Product Range
After sales services
Combo offer
Quality
ANOVA
Source of
Variation
SS
Df
MS
P-value
F crit
Rows
2.27374E13
5.68434E-14
8.03441E15
3.0069172
8
Columns
582.8
145.7
20.5936395
3.76984E-
3.0069172
8
Error
113.2
16
Total
696
24
06
7.075
Inference:
For rows: since 1>0.05, it is accepted.
Therefore, there is no significant difference between average characteristics of
Kaspersky.
For columns: since 0.0000376<0.05, it is rejected.
Therefore, there is significant difference between the performance satisfactory
level of Kaspersky.
Quick heal
Satisfactory level of different components:
Price
Product Range
After sales
services
Combo offer
Quality
Excellent
Good
18
23
13
16
20
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
19
10
3
7
0
0
0
0
14
13
15
9
5
4
3
4
0
1
2
1
SS
Df
MS
P-value
F crit
Rows
3.00691
7
Columns
1198
299.5
Error
142
16
8.875
Total
1340
24
33.74647887
3.00691
7
1.29642E-07
Inference:
For rows: since 1>0.05, it is accepted.
Therefore, yes there is no significant difference between average characteristics
of Quick heal.
For columns: 0.000001296<0.05, it is rejected.
Therefore, there is significant difference between the performance satisfactory
level of Quick heal.
AVG
Satisfactory level of different components:
Excellent
Price
Product Range
After sales
services
Combo offer
Quality
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
7
1
5
9
0
2
0
0
0
0
4
2
4
2
3
3
4
5
2
2
1
2
0
1
1
ANOVA
Source of
SS
df
MS
P-value
F crit
Variation
Rows
2.84217E-14
7.10543E-15
1.56163E-15
3.00691728
Columns
57.2
14.3
3.14285714
3
0.04371622
5
3.00691728
Error
72.8
16
4.55
Total
130
24
Inference:
For rows: since 1>0.05, it is accepted.
Therefore, yes there is no significant difference between average characteristics
of AVG.
For columns: 0.043716<0.05, it is rejected.
Therefore, there is significant difference between the performance satisfactory
level of AVG.
Norton
Satisfactory level of different components:
Excellent
Price
Product Range
After sales
services
Combo offer
Quality
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
8
5
9
10
3
6
0
0
1
0
5
3
5
11
9
8
2
6
2
3
2
3
0
1
3
SS
df
MS
226
56.5
50
20
2.5
F
22.6
P-value
3.49824E07
F crit
2.866081
402
Total
276
24
Inference:
For rows:since 0.00000349824<0.05, it is rejected
Therefore, there is significant difference between average characteristics of
Norton.
McAfee
Satisfactory level of different components:
Excellent
Price
Product Range
After sales
services
Combo offer
Quality
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
3
3
14
12
3
5
0
0
0
0
6
2
5
6
11
7
6
5
4
2
2
2
0
0
2
ANOVA
Source of Variation
SS
df
MS
P-value
F crit
Rows
3.00691728
Columns
286
71.5
16.34285714
1.65957E-05
3.00691728
Error
70
16
4.375
Total
356
24
Inference:
For rows: since 1>0.05, it is accepted.
Therefore, yes there is no significant difference between average characteristics
of MacAfee.
For columns: since 0.00016595<0.05, it is rejected.
Therefore, there is significant difference between the performance satisfactory
level of MacAfee.
Chapter 5
FINDINGS
Findings:
Our data analysis draws out following conclusions:
Chapter 6
SUGGESTIONS
Suggestions:
After complete research, the study reveals that there are areas of
improvement. The following are the suggestions that could be adopted by
the organization in order to curb the current issues and gain a competitive
advantage.
Chapter 7
LIMITATIONS
Chapter 8
CONCLUSION
Conclusion:
The study was conducted to know the preferences about various antivirus
software used among people in Ahmedabad.
It was found out that Quick heal is the most popular and also the most used
antivirus software among the respondents. The respondents are very satisfied
with the quality of Quick heal. Quick heal has managed to make permanent
customers by the after sales services it provides.
On conducting the detailed study it could be said that Kaspersky has managed
to attain the second place after Quick heal. Respondents prefer Kaspersky
because it is cheap as compared to its competitors. Also, Kaspersky offers a
high product range which attracts customers. Besides having all this features,
Kaspersky is not the best seller because of its poor performance.
MacAfee offers good product range but what discourages respondents from
buying it is the high price of the products. Respondents find price of McAfee to
be high as compared to others.
Norton and AVG both have the least users because respondents are not satisfied
with the quality they provide. Moreover, AVG does not provide good combo
offers, which is one of the reasons behind its poor performance. Norton falls
short on providing good product range and also the after sales services dont
seem to satisfy its consumers.
It could be concluded that yes, the antivirus software does not
fully protect your computer but, no matter if the antivirus
solutions are vulnerable or not, we can see that 92.6% of the
respondents prefer to install antivirus software to feel a little
more secure.
ANNUEXURE
NAME:
_____________________________________________
GENDER: Male/Female
AGE: _________________
any
Anti-Virus
software
in
your
No
Free Download
*If
Retail outlet
Kaspersky Quick Heal AVG Norton McAfee Other (please specify) ______
Good Ok
Poor
Excellent
Good Ok Poor
Very Poor
Price
Product range
After sales service
Combo Offer
Quality
2. QUICKHEAL
Price
Product range
After sales service
Combo Offer
Quality
3. AVG
Excellent
Price
Product range
After
sales
service
Combo Offer
Quality
4. N
Good Ok Poor
Very Poor
Very Poor
4.NORTON
Excellent
Good Ok Poor
Very Poor
Price
Product range
After sales service
Combo Offer
Quality
5. McAfee
Excellent
Good
Ok
Poor
Very Poor
Price
Product range
After sales service
Combo Offer
Quality
7. If you are using a free version then please rate how satisfied are
you?
Excellent
Quality
Durability
Purpose
Availability of updates
Reliability
Good Ok
Poor
Very
Poor
8. What is the price range of your anti-virus software that you are
currently using?
Below 500 500-1000 1000-2000 2000-3000
9. How long have you been using your current anti-virus software?
1 Year
2 Years
3 Years
Weekly
Weekly
Monthly
No
REFERENCES
Website:
https://www.opswat.com/resources/reports/antivirus-october-2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaspersky_Lab
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McAfee
http://www.mcafee.com/us/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVG_Technologies
http://in.norton.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quick_Heal
Book reference:
Marketing management by Philip Kotler
Marketing management by V.S. Ramaswamy, SManakumari