AVG vs Avast!

I honestly have stopped paying much attention to Virus Bulletin for some years now.I consider it an index,but not an important one.I trust more the 3rd party tests that use broader use of malware which is not in accordance with virus companies definitions.As a matter of fact,i really enjoy Firefighter's tests in this forum,because as far as i can tell,he has no particular interest in promoting an antivirus over another.I also don't mind false positives that much,but this can give a fail in Virus Bulettin.I have 1 resident and 2 on demand AVs as well as 2 antitrojan (free) on demand.If i get a positive i always verify it with the rest and then with jotti's online scanner.So false positives aren't an issue for me.In 3rd party tests Avast is always doing better than AVG.This said,as i wrote in my previous post,i simply can't stand the way Avast's interface works.I even use a skin that i like (pirate),but each time i have to go to advanced settings i get irritated.It's just the way it's built that i can't stand,not even for on demand scanner.I also always had problem with the report file in Avast.It seemed unable to be created no matter what.Anyway,i change my security configuration very often (this week i ve changed the programs 3 times) ,but i don't see Avast on my pc again soon.Right now i m quite happy.I think Avast would be much more of my taste if it had lesser components (I mean,look at AntiVir.Doesn't have dedicated email scanner,but i would use it as resident any day compared to Avast with its dozen plugins if it wasn't for the long updates.After all,if an attachment is infected,AntiVir will block it on execution anyway,just like KAV 4.X was doing.AVG has a clean interface too,although a bit more complicated than version 6).Why having instant messaging or p2p plugin?Is it really necessary?All it adds is clutter.How many AVs have such plugins?Only Avast from what i know.It might impress some people,but it's only annoying for me.I remember i was 5 minutes in front of the installation page trying to figure out what was the difference between "web shield" and "network shield"...Already the 4 processes AVG has are a bit much for me.Just can't stand the idea of the task manager full of av components.

 

Whats all the fuss with plugins (providers)? If you don't need them,don't install them. It's all about flexibility. I use GMails (web form,not POP3) so i don't need MS Outlook/Excghange and Internet Mail providers. Bam they're gone. I don't need IM Shield and P2P Shield. Bam, they're gone too. I use only Standard Shield,Network Shield and Web Shield. You can fully remove any of providers anytime you want (at avast! installation or later using Add-Remove Programs->Change option). You can also remove Internet Mail provider even if you are using POP3/IMAP mail clients,but you'll then also lack special heuristics in Internet Mail provider,plus some other goodies.
If you want you can have only Standard Shield and avast! will work identically to AntiVir.

Standard Shield -> it's a basic form of file scanning (Real-Time) used in all todays antiviruses. Doesn't scan inside archives (can be enabled in Professional Edition).

Network Shield -> advanced network and workstation protection against MSBlast and Sasser type malware. It may also block other types of attacks.
Works as very specific firewall or intrusion detection system.
This provider is NOT a replacement for firewall!

Web Shield -> detects threats even before they enter browser,works similar to NOD32 IMON HTTP scanner

IM Shield (Instant Messager) -> checks all files transmitted via mIRC,MSN and many other IM programs. Difference from Standard Shield is that this one checks even inside archives in thorough mode.

P2P Shield -> Similar to IM Shield,but checks all files transfered through P2P applications. Also checks archives in thorough mode.

Internet Mail -> Scans inside archives in thorough mode,uses heuristics to identify unknown threats based on attachement type,attachement structure,MIME,message body and subject,iFrames and many other
Detects malware before it even gets into your mail client. Greater chance of detecting malware that is hidden in mail (like exploits).
MS Outlook/Express is similar,but dedicated for MS Outlook (from Office package).

There is practically no limitations of providers usage. You can have only Standard Shield,you can use Standard Shield and Internet Mail or only Web Shield and Network Shield. You can only use P2P Shield and IM Shield.
There is tens of combinations so anyone can use exactly as he/she wants.

Here is my setup of provider for example:
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/2803/aswonacs2tl.png

Before this setup i was using only Standard SHield and Network Shield.
Before Web Shield was introduced...

 

Ah,so that's what it was about!Thanks.I don't say that the plugins are evil,they just annoyed me.For example as i said,i couldn't figure out what was network shield compared to web shield and mail plugin compared to Outlook plugin.But that was only the start.Then it's the interface itself that repells me (specially the advanced options).But,hey,you can't keep everyone happy.I really tried many times to use Avast because has good detection.But it's beyond my forces.I just don't like something in this av...

 

About the VB test , you should download the detailled test.

For the November test for example : Avast and AVG detected 100 % of the ITW
viruses but it's slightly different for the macro and polymorphic viruses.

For the on Access test : Macro . Avast missed 18 / AVG missed 23
Polymorphic : Avast missed 112 / AVG : 757.

 

I will stay with AVG untill Avast changes its looks and all that clutter in the settings. I do not find it as simple and clean as AVG and I cannot tolerate it' interface. No way.

 

I agree with you in this point.

I don't like the configuration of avast!. We can config almost everything, but his GUI and the way that we have to config some features is very bad... And now we have some incompatibilities if we use the WebShield...

Maybe the v5.0 will resolve the major of these annoyances...

 

I don't know,for me AVG had confusing and crappy old looking GUI. Its separated in two control centers instead simply one. Images and buttons look like they escaped from Win3.1... for example you like NAV interface,others again don't.
Same with AVG,you like it,i don't. Skins are basically the only way to make every user happy,but again they don't like to see AV using skins

I had one skin under construction that would mimic Norton interface,but with avast! logos and colors. To bad i never really had enough time to go further from drawing board... Maybe someday...

 

I forgot to mention that I also don't like AVG GUI...

Something like NOD32 or KIS is great...

 

I would like to thank everyone for their input in this thread. This is exactly what I was looking for (thanks Wilders members) and exactly what you don't get (information wise) when "I've noticed across the net in many Tech/Hardware forums that when the subject AV arises the word AVG seems most spoken, almost a parrots phrase". Instead you get information like "AVG is the best" or "AVG and Avast! found 25 things Norton AV missed"

The reason I started this thread is because at one popular Tech site a thread titled "What AV is better than Norton 2005" The person stated he had no problems what so ever with Norton and liked it, he wanted to know what AV's were better. You had a couple "KAV" "NOD32" an "Avast! & Bitdefender" and a resounding "AVG is better than Norton" C'mon lets be serious, how could someone feel AVG or Avast! for that matter is better than Norton 2005 in detection ?

@RejZoR, in your post #52 you did a very nice job pointing out that feature/versatility wise Avast! has more advantage over many AV's, just think if the detection rate could also match the Top AV's.

As for the "unprofessional look" of Avast!, I guess you could say the same about Windows XP, Mac OS and Linux (KDE theme), three OS that Avast! fits the Theme of things

Like I said in my original post "I have have both on seperate PC's" and I think AVG does a good job with my PC habits, the only thing I don't like about AVG is the known update problem that crops up from time to time. IMHO when it comes to "versatility" "features" and "detection" the clear winner is Avast!.

 

I know exactly what you are saying I felt the same way about EZ AV. Just did not like it and could not explain why.

 

I would like to see AVG with one control panel. I agree on that as well. I hope some of the right people so they can make changes to please users.

 

Well I used Avg before and it was okay. Only got hit by one virus though. I don't really care too much on GUI. Its detection rate is what I care the most. I am currently using Avast and it is pretty good. Some custom skins and skinless look professional to me. Avast interface is simple enough to learn; more simple to learn than some firewalls. If any virus, trojan, etc. scanner detect something, you should always check what it detected. Not just for avg or avast. I would rather have maybe a couple false positives than have many virus or trojan slip by, like avg reputation has. Avast however seems more advanced than avg in some areas, but avg is catching up and i hope it will prove to be a great free competitor.

 

Interesting read..... i never knew there was a simple skinless mode. Would that save Ram?

So in theory IM and p2p are nothing more than a IMON for these 2 app. And if they are extracted in com Standard will catch it anyway.

And i argee with most people that Avast interface and setting is not the best done piece of GUI.

May be i try avast sometime later ( version 5 )

But for free... it is already the best! ( I reckon they should at least bundle rejzor external control app )

 

Skinless interface is there since first release of avast! 4.6.
It's also enabled by default. So when you install and start avast! 4.6 you'll automatically get skinless interface unless you enable skins via Program Settings.

Btw,here is my new skin project first previw:
http://img175.echo.cx/img175/9417/avast46newedge1va.png

Design is taken from splash screen and it should look professional enough for anyone.

 

you sure its enabled by default? Not on mine, it came up with a annoying skin when I installed for the first time. I have the newest version. I think this is why everyone sees skin form of avast and don't even know there was a skinless gui.

 

i have NOD32and was good but i think this made my PC a little obstrusive,specially with all the advanced setings of Blackspear,ok i try AntiVir and is good but not for my PC,is for a old one,my PC is my Music Home Studio and is powerfull PC,ok now i go to install again my little baby...AVAST BABY..COME TO ME AGAIN...... oh yes,i need money for my new 5 string bass and i can pay for more software,i buy Cakewalk Home Studio and can,t pay for more software now,Avast is my solution right now,

 

down with both! lol JK. NOD 32 beta or BitDefender or KAV are more stable than either one of these two. I personally use the BitDefender free edition but since it does not have a live scanner, I use Ewido with it. Works beautifully with free automatic updates. I have tried Avast and AVG but naaah.
In my opinion,
Avast is for more security-geeky people
AVG is for people who just want a simple AV.

 

But none of menationed above are free or with functional Real-Time scanner...

 

I have Avast! FREE version installed on my kids pc and it blocked and cleaned a trojan recently, I'll have a look on their pc and see which one it was exactly. Might just have been spyware as Spywareguard also detected an attempt to change the homepage, although Avast! got it first. It's always nice to see a product work in realtime though, and seing as it happened while one of my kids was on the pc re-assured me no end.

 

All of those complaining of the AVG GUI, should try the lastest release (AVG Free 7.0). It is much cleaner and more modern whilst still maintaining consistency (Windows title bar remains) with other applications.

The tests provide that compare AVG with Avast! does AVG no justice, as AVG will always be the better product in both detection, UI and everythingwise.

Furthermore with Avast!, I don't like how you have to register with your personal street address just to download the free versionon their software and reregister every 12 months.

AVG is also simpler to use and there is no need to configure anything. It protects you as is out out the box. With Avast! everything is cluttered, all the configuration options etc.

AVG (IMO) wins.

 

That is the one and only thing that really disturbs me about avast! because I don't understand why providing your address is mandatory and what they do with a database full of addresses. I asked that in the forums over at avast! and I was not pleased with the explanations, so I removed their software from my system just because I disagree with their methods of registration for free software. Sure, I could have used a fake address, but that is besides the point...

 

avast! already have the optimize scanner, that only scan the new modified files, but it seems that even with this, use more resources than AVG or AntiVir...

I also see more disk activity and slow windows start with avast!...

avast! have a better detection rate and features, but the configuration, some incompabilities and resources should be improved in v5.0...

 

It has been explaioned nearly milion times. Half of it by me.
They use these registrations to estimate update server load,so they can always provide max download speed for everyone.
I also don't understand why are people always complicating so much. Just use your city instead of exact street address. You can use fake name. So what.
Main thing is that they can count your registration as active user.
Hey,i used fake name too (actually nickname used on avast! forums). Street address was just my main city and i used my real country.

 

...but they did say that they do use it for marketing by sending out information on other avast! products as well and there is no mention of that during registration. Personally, I think that it should be an option, not mandatory.

 

They never i mean really never send anything to you unless you subscribe extra news (this is completely separated from registration form).
I use avast! for 2 years and they haven't sent me a single mail (about new programs or offers,nothing).
I don't know where have you read that they send any offers...