So why did Avast do so poorly in the May comparisons?

The answer may be tucked away amongst the 130 posts in the comparison thread but I got burnt out searching for an objective, rational answer. Thank You!

 

0 day threats are not Avasts strength.

"Not all suites offer behavioral detection; Avast does, but it scored very poorly in detecting brand-new malware for which no signature file yet exists. It detected, disabled, and removed only around 27 percent of such samples. By comparison, our top performers detected all, or almost all, samples in this test."

http://www.pcworld.com/article/191904/maximum_security_2010_internet_security_suites.html

 

You may get a rational answer here but , I would not hold my breath . My guess would be that IBK and AV-Comparatives cheated ! Yeah , let's go with that

 

They have not been able to get the version five to rock as 4.8. It has multiple problems from slow network connections to various shield not working properly but still its a great anti virus and should not be judged by one test.I think they will bounce back after sometime.Every anti virus has its golden days.
It has always provided high quality security for free for home users so lets not be too critical because of one test.I trust and use them on my net book.

 

maybe because Avast v5 was quite new at that time. Now Avast has added further heuristic improvements, so let's see how it will score in next tests.

 

well that depends on what you mean by poorly. I mean on the on-demand detection test they beat Kaspersky and MSE. So a new product, which is free, did pretty good.

Now in this test it showed its lack of age, but like IB said, let it grow up a little and I will bet this wont happen again.

 

In the real world, AV is largely hit and miss. I would bet on a good day, Avast -- and any for-pay AV -- wouldn't recognize 40% of real-world threats at any one time. Run with SEHOP and DEP enabled, as a standard user, and supplement with common sense and maybe a light cloud-based product like Panda.

 

Avast showed a poor result because the latest test shows true 0-day detection.

But to be cliché, true user intelligence (meaning smart internet habits) and a decent AV will be sufficient for anyone.

 

I would say that Avast is a "conservative" AV. It was never a first frontier defender.

 

Bollox. They've detected loads of stuff first, but they never made a big deal out of it (unlike most of others). I agree that improvements are required in general but script malware is what's really on the move today and avast! was always very good at that.

 

I would have to disagree here. They have provided us with free anti virus for ever( home users) since a long time what have we given back to them guys. Just because of one lousy test lets not give it up.

 

Free AV is awesome, don't worry, they will improve, and continue to beat paid-for AV solutions like a lot of today's free AV products.

 

Agreed. But to be honest, Panda Cloud Antivirus would even outperform AVAST at this very moment. Hence, I keep myself to Prevx, which is IMO top-notch. The only application together with decent user intelligence and sandboxing, which can truly protect you.

 

In my view Avast has always been the overall best of the freebies. In addition, it has performed well, and is some cases better than most of the highly touted AVs.

No AV does really well in the retro tests. I would not consider 60% detection as giving me much protection. It is just better than nothing.

Although I wish Avast had done better, I don't really worry about the probability of becomiong infected with Avast. I intend to leave it on my laptop without any concern.

Of all the tests I believe the whole product dynamic test is the best real world. Avast tied for third with MSE, and better than some that we have always considered first rate.

I fail to see that "It was never a first frontier defender." In my view it is.

Regards,
Jerry

 

I agree 100% with shadek.

With my surfing habits I'm not worried at all by this test result.
Definitely not going to jump to another av because of one test result.

 

I'm sorry but I cannot understand about what you disagree. I have not said Avast is not good and actually I'm using it on 3 of my PCs (paid version). I have used the free version in the past too. Personally I agree with your post but still did not understand your disagreement with me or you did not explain it in your post. In any case I appreciate Avast's qualities.

 

No here in brazil because i have a lot of friends are infected with Spy/Bankers, this Avast always was bad against new Trojans and with version 5 no is different, the problem no is the software and yes in database very small for the reality.

Good product is one that is efficient in all parts.

 

aVast! has been the most stable with all my pc's at home. I love the quick update when you first login to your computer and the very low disk usage.

 

that sounds like a regional malware issue. some AV's do tend to excel in malware detection from particular regions, i guess brazil isnt one of those for avast

 

Just want to point out that in the past few weeks Avast! has been pushing out the behavior and heru engine rule databases.

 

Don't get me wrong but my disagreement was " It was never a first frontier defender" on this line.. maybe because English is not my first language , sorry if i couldn't understand you

 

No problem now it's clear. Thanks.

 

Yes, but the signatures for detecting malware are excellent

Do you mean the avast BB will wake up now?

 

They are using behavior analysis through virtual computer emulation. Similar to BitDefender B-HAVE or Norman Sandbox if you want. Behavior Shield is a completely different beast.

 

Until they do a big dynamic test, the same questions about valid testing apply.

Every 3 months a surprise happens usually some good and some bad, and then I see people changing and trying different software, questioning the software that has kept them virus free.

Avs do not change from great to bad in such a short time, so the testers really need to be questioned about what they are doing or trying to achieve.

I call BS on AVC and always have, but each to their own.