avast! 7.0 released!

I do not like the fact that so many products do this. it should be opt in not opt out.

 

it doesn't ask about installing just does, sorry its not there, avast messed this up...getting like CNET with addons

 

Jmonge,

I think it is different depending upon whether you have the free version or the paid one. On the paid version it ASKs before sandboxing apps, which is how Avast 6 worked. There are pluses and minuses to both methods.

 

"Avast is named Editor`s choice top FREE suite for 2012 by CNET":.....more fodder for the mob here!

 

you get what you pay for or there is no such thing as a free lunch...

 

I believe there is confusion caused by different installers. Note the screenshots where one clearly shows the option to install Chrome and the other does not. Perhaps your installer showed the screen that didn't announce Chrome? Can you confirm that one way or the other?

I think we all agree that "Opt In" is preferable to "Opt Out". I think we also agree that if I'm right and some of the installers are not indicating that Chrome is bundled that's not OK. Still, at the end of the day all you have to do is uninstall Chrome and reset your default browser. How difficult is that for you or me to do? Once Avast! 7 Free is installed the only ads are in the UI. How often is it necessary to look at the UI?

 

One quick question on both of those screens: Is the "Custom Install" the same as the "Compatible Install", or is that a 3rd option on both screens? (If it's the 3rd option, it's clearly much smaller than the other two options, and could be easily missed, or confused with the "Compatible Install".)

Regardless, the screenshots clearly show a marked difference between the 2 installers.

 

but I downloaded the security suite why should I get the chrome browser
i paid for the program I should have to opt out of anything I paid the $...

 

nord1 thanks

 

I've not tried the "compatible" install and don't know how or if it's different from "custom", but you're correct that the "custom" link is much smaller and separate from the "compatible" button. Obviously the Express and Compatible installs are encouraged over Custom.

 

Where did you download the installer? If you downloaded a "trial" version it could explain why Chrome was bundled with the suite. Understand that I'm not trying to justify deceptive marketing practices, but to be fair we have to make an effort to understand what's going on. If you downloaded the installer in the process of buying the license and still wound up with Chrome then I agree that's objectionable. I would complain directly to them.

 

Excellent job on helping to clarify this issue. +1

 

trial as I'm bringing stuff over from the old laptop but still a program that can be only bought to be used should not come with hidden adware even if its a browser. I worked to get the crap off the new laptop to start with I didn't want to put something else that I didn't want , I keep my machines basic...sorry just my 2 cents, FWIW if it were a free one I would still have an issue as you should clearly indicate what is being put on your machine...

 

The two times I installed Avast 7 free (downloaded from Softpedia and FileHippo) there was no option whatsoever related to Google Chrome.
Both times it installed the browser without either asking me nor giving me a chance to stop the installation (remember this was the Costum install).

Also, both times the program showed itself terribly buggy (no conflicts possible with previous apps because I always use a system image when swapping AVs).

Finally, I consider this new version to be bloated with modules/components. If this is the way free AVs will evolve I'll just use Sandboxie on its own.

 

Same here. I got a new Lenovo V570, and went so far as to COMPLETELY wipe the entire hard drive of all the "Lenovo features". (Those "features" monopolized TWO HDD partitions, to accommodate their "One Button Restore", or whatever they call it. As a result, I was unable to shrink the huge C drive partition to a more workable size, and create a separate data-only partition with the resulting free space, since all the Lenovo proprietary partitions had already pushed the Windows "4 partition" limit to the max.)

So I took a Windows 7 Pro 32-bit disk that I'd never used and installed it, after first deleting every Lenovo partition (there were actually THREE -- 1 small one for "system", one for "One Touch Restore" with the original "out of the box" image, and one for a Lenovo-named partition, part of the "One Touch Restore" with one current image option). So after all of that, the last thing I wanted was some a/v software bloating up my super clean install with junk I did not want.

 

good way to do it & KISS method works, I think avast has gone and added too much, keep it basic and it works get too complicated next thing you have is conflicts...

 

Agreed. And that's why I decided to use a freebie that prior to the release of Avast v7 I never would have considered. (I can't give the name because it's against the TOS here of comparing two different products.) Nevertheless...it works. It's unobtrusive. There are very few settings (or conflicts) to have to deal with. And after having gone to GRC and tested my system with their Shields Up tests (and using only the built in Windows firewall), this system is totally stealth across the board, and totally bug free. (I ran Spybot S&D, Malwarebytes, Comodo Cleansing Essentials, and SuperAntiSpyware -- and each test came up 100% free of any problems.) So to each his own, but I'm no more willing to run a bloated a/v now than I was years ago when Norton and others were bogging down otherwise quick systems.

I am considering installing Sandboxie, to provide that extra layer of protection. But even there, I'm not rushing into it. I'm reading their FAQs, tutorials, and forum site -- in detail -- to try to get familiar with the benefits, and/or problems, of installing such a program. They're great when they work, but they're a hassle when system conflicts arise.

 

would you be so kind as to PM me what you're using, thanks...

 

I agree....avast overextended themselves with Version 7. I still had 5 months left on my paid subscription with them, but it wasn't worth the hassle for me to fight all the conflicts. Too bad....oh, well, I am very pleased with my current antivirus, and it's free....kinda makes up for the 5 months paid avast I lost!

 

Improving the protection = overextended , bloated
People getting jumpy for adding chrome
Maybe avast should add toolbars , nagware screens , and remove all the shields and then everyone will be happy

 

they already have nag screens & if you let one av add a browser where will it lead? all av's getting a few bucks to throw something on your system? nah this is suppose to protect your system not add/delete or otherwise change you system beyond what the av is suppose to do...

 

Maybe they aren't doing it for the money. They think Chrome is the safest browser and they are right. So they not just giving a very good antivirus but they also give you a very good browser.

 

i'll take opera myself but we're off topic...just give me the av thanks keep the other stuff off my machine...

 

Of course not.

Of course they do.

Of course...

 

The review @ PCMag, cited earlier in this thread, seems to indicate otherwise:

"By default, the avast! installer also installs Google Chrome and makes it your default browser. Bundling fees from Google also help fund avast!'s protection giveaway."

It also indicates that, BY DEFAULT, Chrome is installed and made the default browser.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401321,00.asp

And "what they think" about what's a good browser or not, is irrelevant. People don't install a/v software so the software can think for them in that way. In fact, reputable a/v software PREVENTS such decisions from being made by other programs. And therein lies the rub with this latest release. (One of the rubs, anyway.)