Strange results on Softpedia.How can you explain it?

Hi friends,
Here in this forum it has been very often said that the popularity of Norton and others big 2 (Mcafee and Trend Micro)can be explained by their being pre-installed to newly-bought PCs and huge ad-policy.And I have always agreed with such a vision of the point.But lately new data have made me rethink my previous "convictions".I surfed on the http://www.softpedia.com and discovered to my astonishment that Norton 2006 beta! is the most popular download in the field of antiviruses.As I view the situation, the sites like www.softpedia.com are frequented by advanced soft-seekers,which are not addicted to well-promoted brands-ordinary "house-wives"could download Norton right from Symantec official site.As it has turned out not only do ordinary users are Norton fans,but a lot of soft-lovers.Besides to Norton the other most popular AV downloads on Softpedia -ANtivir and AVG-it is easy to comprehend,cause they are free(it's strange but free Avast is not a popular download).
Meanwhile I have to give softpedia guys(girls?)full credit-they recommend their visitors to download really the best AV products:Kaspersky(beta) and the current version,ATS(Anti-Trojan Shield),which demo I tested a year ago and it detected nasties,neglected by late TDS3.But ordinary visitors disparage the advice of specialists and download not recommended,but well-promoted progs . I have the following queustion:"What makes all those people download Norton or other "musts" from software specialised portals,neglecting the advice and recommendations of profies having such a great option of alternatives?"If I wanted to get a new version of Norton ,I should surf onto Symantec site,but not download.com,softpedia or 2cows...