AVIRA improvements you would like

I have been using Avira Antivir Premium for years and I am happy with it as a rock solid AV program but there are a few improvements I would like to see however I'm not sure whether Avira is interested in this sort of feedback as their forum seems to only be for problems.
So maybe - if there is sufficient interest we could refer them to this thread
I would like lots of things but I just mention 2 ......
A sleeker interface
Fingerprinting of scanned files so that subsequent scans are faster

 

Avira's protection is fine. They should work on getting a lighter product out to the consumers. In fact, all vendors should do this.

 

I agree that Avira's protection is great, it has been a top performer for the last several years; also the repair is quite good. One could also say their impact on the system is quite low.
I think they should continuously keep improving on those two disciplines: protection and system impact. That applies for all vendors, that is why it is unnecessary to announce that kind of future plans, since it is just an continuous process (applies also to my personal favourite, ESET).

If I should name improvements which has to be made to Avira I think they all fall in the category user experience/user interface/usability:

1. prettier integration in the Windows Action Center: I don't like the fact it is shows up as Avira Desktop, I think it should use product name. I also would like it if they would just call the on-demand scanning window something like Scan in progress, and not Luke Filewalker. Because I think average pc users would see that as being more logical. In general they will benefit from a more integrated feeling product;
2. support for more languages, Avira is currently not available in my language, Dutch;
3. a much more modern interface, the current one just looks dated, the interface is a major factor for the average pc users;
4. many improvements to the usability: for example the location of the on-demand scanner function is not the most obvious. Also the icons in the user interface are bad, and not really descriptive about what they really are there for;
5. better documentation and a better Knowledgebase;
6. they already improved the updater quite a lot, but it is still sloppy at times.

For us, the experienced pc users, Avira is a great product. But the real audience for pc applications are the normal consumers, and they would heavily benefit from the above mentioned improvements.

 

Good Morning ! I agree...in that Digital Fingerprinting should be introduced to cut down on scan times...and Avira's Gui is in need of an over haul...but this is minor Avira's Detection and Removal rate are what makes it a truly Stellar program. Hopefully Avira keeps things simple. As far as Avira being heavy on system resources...I haven't experienced this at all...it's always been quick and nimble.Sincerely...Securon

 

Here's my wishlist:

*A Webguard that does not appear to be crippling download speed. I know it doesn't really, but it's just annoying to have to add pretty much all file types to the exceptions list just so as to get an accurate ETA. There's also some compatibility issues with Chrome (for which they provide a hotfix on their forum)
*Cloud and reputation based detection, like Norton's.
*Lower memory usage, there's always room for improvement.

 

Yes Cloud detection will have to be implemented (perhaps through the controversial ProActiv module), hopefully without affecting its on demand capabilities (Norton is fine with a connection, but doesn't perform as well without Internet).

Out of curiosity: can you be more specific about the compatibility issue with Chrome?

 

Get a cool & hype Graphic Designer to work on a serious GUI revamp.
Everything else works great at the moment.

 

most basic requirement

GUI

pls revamp it ... it looks like s/w of 1990's

 

i would like more light and fast in the real time scan engine (guard)
i did monitor with process hacker I/O reads and writes and they are higher then other products

and Digital Fingerprinting like avast would be great

don't know if avira develop cares about our wishes

 

GUI + Sandbox + Hips

 

Less buggy ProActiv and a working x64 version of ProActiv.
And a new GUI

 

-New GUI
-WebGuard: No Browsing Slow-Downs.
-Sandbox.
-Cloud.

 

Basically Webguards slows it down. Seems to be affecting only a few users though. There are few posts on their forum about this

http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=127197
http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=126838
http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=126654
http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=127038

 

Avira free takes longer to treat an infection than avira premium. This disparity should be removed.

 

I see what you mean. I have reactivated the webguard recently and there is an imperceptible delay which I would probably need some precise timing equipment to be able to measure it (Chrome is my default browser). Those cases in your links seem to have a real problem. I wonder what they mean by "hot fix"...

 

It's basically a modified avwebgrd.exe.

 

Hello,

Yes, Avira takes care of suggestions. There is a special thread on the forum called "new features suggestions" here : http://forum.avira.com/wbb/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=36264
Also please note that version 10 also enable you to provide direct feedback, for example to request specific functions in your Avira product under Help -> Send feedback.

Feel free to leave any comments.

 

Aside from the GUI overhall I think I'd like to see (well in the Avira forums) that everyone can post a reply to a thread and not just "community members". More interaction more learning. I also don't like the fact that some hotfixes are sent via PM..just my two cents on their forum. The Chrome hotfix works with Chrome but some have experienced that after applying the hotfix their Firefox has slowed down.

But all in all great solid product there.

 

1.New GUI(a much more modern interfacel)
2.No FP(or minimum)
3.Beter UpDate for Free version(sometimes not work again).
4.WeB Guard or Cloud on free version(may be is too much)
5."Light" version if they can more!Lower memory usage and...
6.ProActiv to WORK.
7.Real 64 bit version

 

Proper HIPS(well I have never seen proActive working every build that I have tested be it BETA or the stable or more precisely never got a single pop up from it).

Faster scan speeds as many have suggested.

Better detection engine(I know it has one of the best detection rate out there but its never been a case for me) coz the main strength of avira lies in its web guard.

And one last thing I don't care about the GUI as long as the product is working good for me, I always liked the GUI of Avira and even didn't mind the v4 of Avast but changes are always welcomed

 

A revamped GUI. (but not to the point of making it 'heavy')
Real-time detection mainly uses the heuristics (and ProActiv)
The user is given the choice of having updated signatures to be in the form of:

a) 'cloud' only
b) 'cloud' with local cache (mainly ITW malware) like the one in Panda cloud
c) desktop-based offline signatures (as it is currently) only

The above applies to free users only. Paid users get an additional option to use:
d) 'cloud' and desktop-based offline signatures

For full or custom folder(s) scan, include an option to use "Persistent cache" like the one in Avast
For "quick scan", follow the Hitman Pro style: which only scans load point locations and in memory objects.

They can also consider if it's worthy to provide an optional Avira DNS service, including to their free users who can then report to them whenever a malicious site is found. In return, this may help to improve their results and indirectly improve the other features available to their paying customers (who may not want to use the DNS service for whatever reason)

I'll leave the Sandbox, and reputation-based detection features as suggested by other members to the Avira dev to consider and implement if they want to.

If they do, then they may also want to consider adding the current paid features (e.g. WebGuard, ProActiv, etc etc) to the free version (not necessary though...they can use this as a marketing gimmick tool to their advantage) and have those 'new' features as the replacement selling points for paying customers.

Alternatively, they can do the complete opposite - include those 'new' features in the free version (but 'water it down' with limitations) thereby making use of free users as their beta testers (scapegoat).....paying customers get more 'advanced' uses of those 'new' features while still retaining their current paid features (e.g. WebGuard, ProActiv, etc etc)

Caution/reminder though: adding new things may seem good but I hope they don't go down the road of "bloat"...

In short, do whatever fits the bill - keep their company funds strong and en-users happy...

 

New GUI

 

I posted a comment at the Avira forum with a link to this topic. Someone stuck an (off topic) label in front of it but it is there - don't know if I should send it to support but I think they follow the forum

 

yeah I saw that. I have to admit been awhile since I installed it but, no web slow downs at all. That is web componet installed. The only thing I did different is I did not tic Integrity checking of system files. Not that it cured it.

 

I don't agree with all those people who want HIPS or sandboxing etcetera. You can't expect from any vendor that they create a TOTALLY different product AND business model when upgrading from version 10 to version 11.
I think Avira should continue relying on it's core competence and keep continuously improving that, see my previous post #3.

Also, persistent cache can be a security risk (that is why I prefer ESET's solution which only keeps the cache until the next update). If detection for a threat is only added on the last signature update, and the file is analysed as clean. It won't be detected until that particular file get's modified.

Also, the word "Cloud" computing is just a buzzword. All vendors use some kind of "Cloud" computing, really I have never encountered one which doesn't use some kind of "Cloud" assistance. Concerning that technique it is more important HOW your implement it, than whether you implement it. (The same applies to all other popular buzzword: behaviour blockers, virtualization, sandboxing, host-based intrusion prevention systems, host-based intrusion detection system, system monitors and so on.) Please let everybody watch out when using that kind of words, implementation of such methods doesn't give any guarantee of improved protection.