antivir first thoughts

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by chrcol, Oct 18, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. chrcol

    chrcol Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Posts:
    762
    Location:
    UK
    ok my nod32 has been expired for a month or so and so I decided to check an alternative out before commiting to a renewal and have installed the trial of antivir premium.

    So far thoughts are.

    Bad

    1 - web guard slows down browsing very noticebly, it behaves as if my connection is saturated but isnt.
    2 - web guard stopped 2 sites I visit often from working properly.
    3 - if web guard is disabled unlike nod32 it seems web content doesnt get scanned at all since the eicar test files dont throw up any alerts.
    4 - cannot use smtp scanner if encrypt mail.
    5 - no signature on downloaded mail to confirm scanned.
    6 - less fine tuning options.
    7 - False positive on a file on my hdd.
    8 - breaks speedtest sites.
    9 - no https scanning with web guard, more bigger problem than nod32's dodgy ssl scanning as nod32 still falls back to generic scanning on http/https.

    good

    1 - Overall system responsiveness is defenitly faster.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2010
  2. Saraceno

    Saraceno Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Posts:
    2,404
    Although many use it without a problem, I'll point out the obvious here, I don't think it's the program for you.
     
  3. Vladimyr

    Vladimyr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Posts:
    461
    Location:
    Australia
    LOL:D
     
  4. chrcol

    chrcol Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Posts:
    762
    Location:
    UK
    Seems to be the case.

    Shame as the system certianly feels snappier than under nod32, but am surprised to see it doesnt support ssl email (now read pop ssl isnt also supported except it silently doesnt check instead of telling you). I am guessing the slow web browsing is not due to the scanning itself but rather the delay in proxying the data.
     
  5. Dundertaker

    Dundertaker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Posts:
    385
    Location:
    Land of the Mer Lion

    Yeah, I agree. A first time user(as with all "first time users" for a security app) for Avira will definitely see some drawbacks BUT many are satisfied users of it. Have experienced this when I transfered from Avast but after a while and asking questions on how to configure it for my preferences I came to like it. I now use Avira Premium Security Suite 10 in one of my systems (I use FSecure 2011 on the newer pc) but I don't like the firewall so I did not install it. I use Outpost 7 instead and the two work well in my system even when I turn off webguard.

    It all boils down to user preference.

    Regards!:D
     
  6. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    I'd like to comment about a few of your points.

    1 - Some people complain about it, I personally don't use it, although when I did the slowdown was negligible.

    3 - If the web guard is disabled, it won't scan anything, however the main guard should take over once things are written to disk. The Eicar test on my computer is picked up by the main guard, but one has to execute the files in order to see it in action.

    6 - This maybe true, but as far as detection is concerned (IMO the most important factor) Avira is always doing very well in tests.

    I would also check whether there are any Nod registry keys leftover and what other applications are active. I agree with what's been said though, no application will play well with all computers.

    If you are using any 32 bit system, I would also disable "Proactiv" using "Add or Remove Programs/Avira/Change" It has been known to slow down computers without adding much to detection.
     
  7. chrcol

    chrcol Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Posts:
    762
    Location:
    UK
    thanks, good to know on point #3.
     
  8. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    1,785
    it runs very very light on my old laptop ( 1 gig raM) and the browsing is much lighter than AVG which i removed because of browsing issues . And i also have the free Avira on another old computer at home which really does not have the problems with the update and was really surprised :thumb: :thumb: maybe things are changing for AVIRA
     
  9. mike21

    mike21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    416
    1 - do not judge by speedtests, judge from the actual page load time. I suggest to use firefox addon "Fasterfox lite" which has a page load timer. Then you can see in milliseconds the actual difference. Give it a try (flush the cache each time)
    3 - this is the proper behavior, if you disable the webguard you simply do it because you want the web content no to get scanned. All the years I am in this forum, there is a permanent debate if the web guard of any AV is absolutely necessary provided the operating system is up to date and the browser is fully patched. I would say it is not necessary if you use firefox with necessary addons like noscript adblock etc. Not doubt a sandboxed browser is even better in some aspects.
    6 - I do not think so, what are you missing?
    7 - this is the main disadvantage of antivir, the price you pay for the always top detection
    8 - minor complaint. :D
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.