Considering switching...some questions

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by kdm31091, Aug 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kdm31091

    kdm31091 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Posts:
    365
    I currently use Antivir free. However, I dislike some aspects of it like false positives (to be fair, they respond quickly to submission of these) and this is just on my computer, but it tends to crash and disable sometimes, and I realize I've been surfing unprotected for hours. This is more then I could take, so I'm going to switch AVs.

    I know that AVG Free is well, pretty cruddy. However, is it going in an uphill direction? Is it improving? Will there be a new version eventually with a better GUI? Better detection, etc? Basically, is AVG improving or getting worse as time goes on, and should I trust it?

    I've also considered avast. I liked it in the past, but all indications seem to be that the product is going DOWNhill, both in detection and in responsiveness (i.e. they don't respond to false positives etc for a long time).

    On the avast forum some users have switched to Comdo. Is Comdo is a good antivirus? I know their firewall is decent but how is their antivirus, and is it improving as well?

    Sorry if these questions are weird, but I want to pick an AV and know it's improving constantly, not stagnanting, or at LEAST not getting worse. Help much appreciated!
     
  2. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    i wouldnt use AVG for the time being but i dont consider avast as going dowhill. its a good antivirus IMO.
     
  3. TAP

    TAP Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Posts:
    344
    As far as I've seen, avast! has been actively improved all the time, the new version of avast! has been released quite often and its detection rates have also been improved, e.g. avast! gets "ADVANED rate" in the both latest on-demand/Retrospective tests at AV-Comparatives.org and also continuously gets VB100% Awards/ICSA certification.

    The new avast! 5 has also been developed: http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=22184.0

    In my opinion, Comodo Antivirus is not ready yet, it doesn't even come close to avast! and other mature AV in term of detection rates.
     
  4. kdm31091

    kdm31091 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Posts:
    365
    I do know that Avast does not have the False Positive problems as much as Antivir. But in any case, does Alwil respond to, or at least fix, problems quickly?

    He could be a fanboy, but one person on the Avast forums bragged that Comodo is more actively improving its detection, adding spyware etc.
     
  5. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    hi,
    antivir does detect some false-positives(like it detected foobar's un-installer as some malware),but in my opinion its has good detection-rates and they are very serious about what they are doing...
    avast is good,but i am not sure whether they have been very frequent with their updates or not..version 4.7 has been around for some time and its good to know that avast 5 is slowly going public.
    Comodo is still in beta and it doesn't have very good detection rates,but they are trying their best to add more signatures...and it is very actively developed...
     
  6. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Are these false positives sig based or by heuristics. If by heuristics, u can adjust the heuristics to lower level.
     
  7. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    Well, Avira is the only Free AV out of these that is improving constantly. I suggest you to keep it ;)
     
  8. ellison64

    ellison64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Posts:
    2,499
    A lot of choices for an av doesnt (imo) just depend on detection ,or in some cases percieved improvement,but in how they react and function on your particular system and what your surfing habits are.Antivir "improved" to version 7 with the result that i couldnt trust it to function correctly on my 98se system,and it looks like you have found this out too.I think its false to suggest that avira is the only free AV to "improve",(has the notifier improved the classic version?)though its probably correct (imo) that it offers the best detection.Ive been using AVG plus firewall (firewall module not installed now though ,so its basically pro version)for about 2 months now and its a revelation on how smooth it runs.It just works with no problems or headaches.Is it improving?..well i contacted tech support about the firewall (when i had the module installed) and a problem with windows restart.That has been fixed recently in an update.....and this is for a 98/se/me system.The fix took about 3 weeks from reporting it which isnt bad.Personally i like the gui and it opens with ease ,unlike some flashier guis which seem to suck resources when opening.I would say the 3 avs you mention are improving continually and its down to personal choice,and more importantly how they react on your system ,which is more important to me personally than detection rates.
     
  9. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I wouldn't really say that avast! is going down.
    They're adding packers, lately they even started adding generic signatures for lots of stuff and it appears they are really good at it. Have seen excellent results with Ardamax generic detection. Also after some time of slow samples adding they finally accelerated the process with new virus analysts that certanly are doing their job now. I've sent like 300 samples and they've added most of them in like 3 days period. Some obviously high priority were added in just few hours, other took a bit longer. So they certanly are improving compared to waiting times before. Also check out their VPS History page. They are pretty active...
    I just hope they'll get web submission form online soon as it would be far better to submit samples through there than through email (for example because GMail blocks all suspicious filetypes).
    I also have to say a good word regarding false positives fixing. They always respond very fast to FP's. Not to mention avast! 5, which will be surprise for all of us :)
     
  10. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    Of the three free AVs I would choose Avast. I have used it, and have installed it on friends' computers plus my daughter's machine. None have had problems.

    It seems to have few conflicts and is very good to install and forget. I do like to manually update it.

    Jerry
     
  11. kdm31091

    kdm31091 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Posts:
    365
    Thanks guys. I have installed avast for now. I know antivir is better in detection but I don't like knowing it had been crashed for the past 20 minutes...I need one that's stable. But I'll re-test antivir soon
     
  12. Mongol

    Mongol Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Posts:
    1,581
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    How is Avast doing resource wise?. I tried it when Version 4 first came out and boy it seemed heavy on my computer...:eek: :)
     
  13. kdm31091

    kdm31091 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Posts:
    365
    All of Avast's services combined use about 25,000k on my machine. No noticable slowdown except for an extra 10 seconds or so on boot time.
     
  14. Mongol

    Mongol Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Posts:
    1,581
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Thats not bad at all. I seem to remember it was using close to 60K when version 4 first came out. Guess they smoothed it out quite a bit. I may have to give it another try...:thumb: :)
     
  15. kdm31091

    kdm31091 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Posts:
    365
    Yes, I've noticed the memory usage has dropped since last time I used it. Also despite the lower detection then Antivir, Avast did manage to clean my mom's horribly infected computer last month, it cleaned almost 100%. While Antivir might be better for exotic viruses and stuff, as I think about it, the whole point of them being "exotic" is that you shouldn't get them if you're careful. So basically, I think Avast is just as good as antivir.
     
  16. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    Never tried Avast. Would be interesting to know what is making Antivir crash, but I understand not everyone has a burning desire to know these things just want stuff to work.

    I also am waiting on better Comodo AV, but am very satisfied with Antivir :thumb:
     
  17. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    I've tried CA, AVG Free, Avast, and am currently using Antivir PE. The thing is, I liked something about each one, and had to narrow it down to these things. Resource usage, how well my PC ran with it installed, detection rates, and finally it's over all appearance. (Yes this was a factor for me) CA was probably the lightest and ran smoothly, but I didn't like the design of it. AVG Free kind of grew on me with it's looks, also ran light and very well on my PC, but unfortunately if you believe what you read both of these two have low detection rates. Avast on the other hand is improving on it's detection, but had the highest resource usage out of the four, and although I can't say there was a major slow down of my PC, it still seemed to make my applications open a bit slower than usual. I did liked the spinning ball, but not the User Interface. Finally, Antivir which I have installed now, is currently only running between 8MB and 12MB on my particular PC, doesn't slow it down at all, has even better detection than Avast, and I truly like the way the User Interface is designed. I do think heuristics also make a difference, and Antivir did better than most paid Antiviruses in the May AV Comparitives On Demand Tests. Anyway, this is only my two dollars, (it use to be two cents, but now with inflation so high. LOLOL) so don't anyone get mad.
     
  18. Arin

    Arin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Posts:
    997
    Location:
    India
    A forum is a place where everyone donates their two cents ;-). If someone
    gets mad then the mods will take care of it.

    I have the same experience duke1959, but everytime I come back to AntiVir.
    CA is light, has good detection rate, good scanning engine and it is also
    good in cleaning infections. Believe it or not, some AVs are very good in
    detecting viruses but when it comes to cleaning, they fail. When my PC
    was bugged by blaster, noddy failed to clean it but AntiVir did the trick. This
    by no way claims that AntiVir is better than noddy as its only one example.

    Avast has good detection rate with only signature scanning and generic
    detection, but somehow it slows down my PC. It is feature rich but a
    skinnable AV? Come on give me a break, I already have Winamp. I also don't
    like their attitude of blaming Panda. Pav.sig IS ENCRYPTED and all the other
    files detected as virus ARE FALSE ALARMS. But somehow it goes on. I'd love
    Avast if it adds heuristics.

    AVG is light and feature rich but detection rate is low. Here in India its very
    famous with cyber cafes or Internet cafes (whichever you call it) for some
    obscure reason.

    AntiVir is the right AV for me and its not crash prone, atleast not on my
    computer. It has got superv heuristics, its light with no non sense interface,
    it has got a quick reacting support team and its free!
     
  19. duke1959

    duke1959 Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Posts:
    1,238
    Hello AMRX, glad to hear your response. I also like being able to set Antivir to update at least twice a day. Once in the morning and again late evening. AVG Free doesn't have this ability. I also like the Reports Tab in Antivir, with the way you can check on the dates and times of ALL the updates Antivir has. Finally I like how everything is in one place in the GUI. I could go on, but I need to remember it is only an Antivirus.LOLOL
     
  20. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Like someone forces you with gun to use avast! with skins or something?

    Skinless interface is simple and does the job done just fine. Besides, if someone doesn't like the skin he/she can always download another one. Or even make their own. There is lots of features that make every skin unique.
    Sure there is lots of funky ones but there are also those that are state of the art skins. MacLover OS X will go nicely with every MacOS windows theme. I also used one trick for resident scanner sensitivity. Then you have techy Silhouette 4 in 1 with same design as Alwil Software webpage. It looks as authentic as it would be made by Alwil team. It's also using quiet few advanced menu goodies. In my opinion one of the best skins there is for avast!. You prefer plain and simple XP Luna interface? RejZoR-Sharp skin is the answer. So it's all about what user wants. So what can you do when you notice that you don't liek Norton's interface? Nothing really except change the AV... Thats the whole point of skins. BitDefender is also skinnable and no one is making a big deal. Why? :cautious:
     
  21. Arin

    Arin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Posts:
    997
    Location:
    India
    Because BD has good detection rate and has powerful heuristics. So I don't
    mind if it want to be pretty. Same goes for KAV6. But an AV which doesn't
    have something that it should have, shouldn't try to be Winamp. Thats my
    two cents, love it or leave it.

    No one forces me but people still sing songs about skins. LOL.
     
  22. ellison64

    ellison64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Posts:
    2,499
    Actually i believe i used one of your skins yesterday.The mac lover OS.I installed avast (again.....used it for quite a while a few years ago).I only installed the standard shield and email scanner and Chat messenger module.I was a little disappointed noticing that gaim only works on an XP machine (now why is that?) in that module..The original avast skin isnt to my liking at all.The one that you have made(?) is superb,and clearly set out.Avast should use that one as standard IMO.Anyway i ve gone back to AVG ...not because of any problems (though setting up the mail for a non default account with # and 127.0.0.1 is much more awkward than AVGs approach) ,but because im just more comfortable with it.
    ellison
     
  23. kdm31091

    kdm31091 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Posts:
    365
    AMRX: Just a point, you can turn off Avast skins and it will take on a very vanilla, comprehensible appearance. I didn't even install the skins whatsoever, and it looks great. Nice and functional.

    All I wish avast had is a "completed %" indicator during scans so I know how much longer it'll be.
     
  24. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Actually you don't have to set anything for queit long now in avast! for it to scan your mail. The process is completelly transparent. All you need is avast! and POP3/IMAP mail client (and mail account thats not using SSL/TLS, even though this also isn't a problem). Though again only on Win2k/XP systems...
    As of specific features in avast!, yeah they are limited to XP only as i's more flexible OS and gives more freedom to developers. They could probably do the same on Win9x but they'd have to use some sort of "hack" to do that. It's just not worth the effort for almost decade old OS...
     
  25. ellison64

    ellison64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Posts:
    2,499
    Its true its an old system ,but automatic email setup has worked fine on my 98se system with current versions of kav,nod,antivir,avg,rising,and quite a few others,so avast is definitly the odd one out in my case.Maybe avast uses a different setup to the others?.I didnt have to alter anything in any of the above.That aside it is relatively easy to set up manually ,and i know from personal experience just how good the avst forums are for help.
    ellison
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.