Avast or Antivir PE

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by redpower, Nov 7, 2006.

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

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    I have Avast! in this laptop since i bought it. I see no reason so far to replace it.

    Some comparatives say Antivir is better, and i don't argue with that. People who study that with a good and transparent method will know and infer a lot better than me.
    But the difference isn't that great, and Antivir's free version, well, it's the free version. There's one Avast! AFAIK, gets viruses and trojans, and i don't see any conflicts so far. And i don't change my AV because of 'statistically not so important' differences. Which can change in a year.

    Both are good enough to keep. I prefer Avast! because i already have it, it's in the top, it's free, comprehensive, and easy to use.
    You can't go wrong with either. If you have one of them, and you have no problems so far, don't change AV. Period.
     
  2. TAP

    TAP Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Posts:
    344
    FYI, avast! Home/Pro gets its beta version 4.7.925

    http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=25697.0

    I've been lucky for using avast! home more than 2 years with flawless results, never have any problems, my laptop and my home network (5 machines) have been protected very well so I don't have any reasons to changing to/or purchasing any other free/paid antivirus. avast! is extremely the overall-reliable antivirus solution, especially its superb update system.

    :D ;) :) :D :eek: :D
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2006
  3. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,304
    If Avira runs well on your system that would be my choice. However, my own esxperience is that Avira did not run well. Avast has never had a problem on my machines.

    While Avira has the better detection rate, I don't think that one is more likely get infected with Avast if you are a safe user, and use your head.

    Get the one that experience/trial shows runs best on your system.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  4. Arup

    Arup Guest

    All these years with Avast has not given me a single virus so I guess it works well, Anti Vir too is good but Avast gives you the extra layer of protection with its mail scanner, web scanner and other modules, also if your firewall gets dropped, you are still fully protected with Avast network scanner module.
     
  5. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Network Shield is NOT a substitution for firewall!
     
  6. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Never intended to be, its just a backup from getting infected through SMB and other typically vulnerable ports in case the firewall is compromised, has been discussed intensively at the Avast forum.
     
  7. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500
    I would choose Avira Antivir PE Classic. It has a stronger detection rate then Avast. It is the strongest single engine product... I think. It ueses less resources then Avast and you can disable the notifier. The lack of an email scanner is of little significance since Antivir can still detect files upon execution.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2007
  8. dw2108

    dw2108 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Posts:
    480
    Not only that, but AntiVir lives well with other PC security products; where-as, many other AV apps see such products incorrectly as viral in nature. I'm using one of these other AVs at present which tries to block something as "innocent" as SpyBot's TeaTimer.

    Dave
     
  9. cheater87

    cheater87 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Posts:
    3,220
    Location:
    Pennsylvania.
    Now i'm thinking of switching to Avira. *puppy*
     
  10. Jarmo P

    Jarmo P Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,207
    Avast and Antivir are both good antiviruses.

    A few days ago Antivir update again killed my right bottom umbrella icon. I was not worried since the guard was working. So I left my machine run and see if I get an update next day. Yes it did, cause also the sched.exe remained running.
    And that update again fixed that missing umbrella icon back.

    For people with slow phone modem connections, Avast is much better.
    For most of us, it is just a matter of choice. Antivir does not have those proxies, it is also lighter but not so much. Both are no memory hogs.

    To my current security setup Antivir suits better, but as told both are fine.
    And Avast is problem free.
     
  11. Ga1tar

    Ga1tar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Posts:
    118
    Location:
    U.K
    Sons machine is an old one so after trialing both packages for a month, Avira won purely due to the fact it had less impact on the resources.
     
  12. Londonbeat

    Londonbeat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Posts:
    350
    Antivir surpasses Avast! in many ways so I would go for Antivir, in particular Avast is poor in adding signatures that are submitted (well to be honest they've added a couple I've sent, out of dozens and dozens) and not that good at detecting fast-spreading either - an example of this; is the Stration/warezov worm (postcard.exe) that was spam mass mailed on Christmas day, 6 days later Avast is the only Antivirus (on virustotal) to still not detect this. Considering the thousands (if not millions) of people who will have been exposed this is poor. :(

    Londonbeat
     
  13. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Agreed. IME, updating the Classic version was very, very slow on dial-up.

    This was the main reason why I upgraded to the Avira Premium version ;)
     
  14. TAP

    TAP Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Posts:
    344

    Yeah. I totally agree, Avira AntiVir is way better than avast! when it comes to detection capability. IMHO

    Slow signature adding (especially non-urgent threats) has been complained for a very long time but it seems that this poor situation still doesn't get any better, and also a false positives have been reported at its support forum almost every releasing of signature. :( :doubt:
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2006
  15. pilotart

    pilotart Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Posts:
    377
    No doubt that Updating the Classic version to build 217 was slow, even on LAN, it could take ten minutes+ just to access a freeav server, this was true for four days and can be expected to re-occur every few months when there is a mass Update of the version.

    Normal Classic dial-up incremental signature updates normally consume well under one minute total, upon dialed connection.

    A 3.vdf (most common) file will be from less than 10Kb to nearly 100Kb or a couple seconds at 56K.

    Today,s Update also contained 2.vdf, which is usually issued weekly and this (815KB) took under three minutes from dial-up to completion.

    This was the first instance of Taskbar icon fail that I have seen in a week (eleventh Update) .
     
  16. Security Freak

    Security Freak Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Posts:
    83
    is always the same fight (discussion),the best way is use whatever AV you like most and then make occasional online free scans with others AV online scanners,some day one AV is better the other day another is the best,some AV are best for some virus or Trojans and others AV are best for another one new and etc,etc is a tough web word,use your head not your heart,and don,t rest in only one brand because you love or like their logo. :ninja:
     
  17. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Maybe things have improved of late.

    But about 6 months ago, this was not the behaviour that I saw in trying to update the Free version. It was the availability of the Classic Servers which was the major problem. Sometimes, here in the UK, the Servers simply timed out despite trying at various times during the day. This behaviour was also seen on fast cable connections. In both cases, this was seen on normal updating of the vdf files and not just on major version upgrades.

    Fortunately, as stated previously, this problem for me has receded with using the "exclusive" Premium Servers.
     
  18. vlk

    vlk AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Posts:
    621
    Avast is detecting this from the very beginning, but VirusTotal and Jotti's are currently experiencing difficulties updating avast virus database - and hence it's not being detected by their online services.

    That's another reason to take the online scanners with a grain of salt.

    The fabulation about the millions of poor users is not adequate in this case.;)
     
  19. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Good to know :thumb:
     
  20. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,161
    Hi, folks: Online scanners? I, often regard them as poorman's toys, why? I think every living body is capable of using any freewares, if one is not, he/she is a very poor person. Online scanners are very low piority on most vendors list, often are their dumping ground(unwanted, outdated stuff), their reliability are often(too) in big question marks. They deserve deep discount, then users shall feel much better.:) Avast has been deserved a relatively high mark. Just ask around, you will get a ear full.:D
     
  21. Londonbeat

    Londonbeat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Posts:
    350
    Virustotal is currently showing Avast as being updated yesterday 30/12/06 with version 4.7.892.0 :doubt: o_O
    I have copy of the file if you want it.

    Londonbeat
     
  22. Perman

    Perman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,161
    Hi, folks: hi, londonbeat, I fully respect you as AV expert and also share your feeling about that Avast did not implement all your findings into thier sig updates. As you may know it is not unusual for a corporation to pursue this path. Often we can find some big fat company pays out top $$$ for a consultant's report, and decides to shelf the whole thing or just implements a little. If you think your remarkable work is beneficial to general public, I urge you to continue and continue to submit to them, they will appreciate it very soon.:thumb:
     
  23. Londonbeat

    Londonbeat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Posts:
    350
    Hello
    I am not an AV expert :D

    Regards,
    Londonbeat
     
  24. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    I've said this before and I'll say it one more time before the new year. My son has used Avast with only Windows XP Firewall for around a year now, isn't the safest surfer, and has yet to have any Viruses or Spyware on his PC. Maybe he is tempting fate, but the way Avast updates, plus it's regular improvements, and it's helpful forum, makes it a good choice for most users in my opinion. He has installed it on my wife's new PC and I don't feel the least bit uncomfortable in her using it for Virus (and some spyware) protection. Although I may have chosen Antivir PE for myself because of the interface and the way it logs everything, I wouldn't put it on her PC and hear her complain about the Notifier Window or that something isn't right after it updated. My point is, I think they are close enough in the AV Comparatives to let the benefits of Avast out weigh the small drawbacks that Antivir has at this time, at least on my wife's PC.
     
  25. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Well avast! results are actually far from bad. It reached very good ADVANCED level on AV Comparatives and a very good score in proactive test considering it has no heuristics. They seem to keep that level with decent generic signatures.
    For me, taking it as a whole, not just detection rate it's a hard to beat winner.
    avast! 5 is in the works and they are most certanly working on better detection as well as better interface and other features. avast! is an install and forget while Avira requires lots of tweaking and hacks to get it up and running properly.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.