Stupid Question

Hi
Just a silly question I'm dealing with for myself.
Why would a program with updates only once per day be more safe than programs which update more times a day?

 

perhaps because a program which only updates once per day has less opportunity to produce false positives ?

 

I guess what counts is the quality of the update.

 

An AV that updates more than once a day would theoretically contain the latest defs for new stuff just hitting the net, so it would probably be better I guess, but it kinda depends on how fanatical you wanna get with all that, and whether you think you need something like an hourly update. So I think the one that updates more often is probably safer (if any), not the other way around..

 

e.g. maybe because it adds more malware in one update (and undergoes more QA testing) than all the small updates together which are released in a hurry, or has a better overall detection than the other product (and therefore already detects most of the stuff that the other vendor adds ) or because it has a better e.g. heuristic and has no need to update so often, etc. Preferable would be a program with high detection rates, good heuristic and updates.

 

Ok so Symantec does more research on their updates than for example Kaspersky or Avira?

 

My guess would be that they can't be that safe. The more often the update how safer.

 

Possibly... or maybe its slower?.. I dont know... and I'm sure most users here dont know either.
Hourly updates can also be deemed better because if there's a newly detected virus, you'll be protected from it quicker if you get a update the next hour than if you get a update a day (or few) later... Positive and negative sides of both.