What's your opinions of AVG7

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by TheSeeker, Jan 29, 2005.

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

    TheSeeker Guest

    Any opinions on this latest version of AVG? Do you think it is better than version 6? Would you rely on it as your main and perhaps only AV? Or better as a backup AV? Thanks for any replies.
     
  2. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I trialed AVG7 and I did like it better than version #6 To me it just seemed to work better. But to answer the other part of your question. I would never trust the security of my computer to a free antivirus as my primary source of an antivirus. If I used a back up av I would seriously consider AVG7

    bigc
     
  3. TheSeeker

    TheSeeker Guest

    Thanks for the reply Bigc. If you don't mind me asking, why wouldn't you rely on AVG7 foréÅfS8'XýB:”
    æ8â`cause if you go to sites like Spywareinfo.com, they seem to highly recommend it, even over the pay version AVs. If fact I would say it is so popular over at SWI that it practically has a cult following. It just seems somewhat confusing when one site recommends it so highly, yet here it doesn't seem have that- better than any other AV on the planet "cult status".
     
  4. drake456

    drake456 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Posts:
    23
    Well i dont konw if its better then any other, but i started useing avg6 and thought it was good enough to use as my only AV, only problem i have with avg7 is the update manager doesnt always work.
     
  5. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I had a computer repair business for a lot of years and at least 65% of the infected computers that we had to clean and restore back to a working state were running either Antivir or Avg. In my educated opinion from real world experience not results from some test site useing controled conditions. Avg and Antivir are just not up to the quality of the paid commercial Av's They don't have the detection rate or the ability to clean and repair damage done by malware.

    bigc
     
  6. drake456

    drake456 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Posts:
    23
    Of course not they're Free, free cant always be perfect can it?
    i guess some of us are to cheap to buy a good one ;)

    it does its job for me though.
     
  7. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    well I look at it this way I have a lot of $$ invested in this comp and I wont skimp on the security I depend on to keep it protected. But that is what is nice about computers there is enough software available that anyone can find the programs they like and depend on to work for them. ;)

    bigc
     
  8. Mr2cents

    Mr2cents Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Posts:
    497
    I totally agree with bigc. I installed avg 7 edition last night as an on demand scanner only. I'm trialing bitdefender standard right now as resident. There are just so many good deals on good antivius software. Heres a link that will help.
    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/downloads/default.mspx :cool:
     
  9. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Why don't you trust free antivirus? All current reputable free AVs are based on their big PAYABLE brothers. AVG uses same engine and virus defs as AVG7 Pro,AntiVir 6 Personal is using the same engine and defs as AntiVir 6 Pro,avast! 4.5 Home Edition is using exactly the same scan engine and virus defs as avast! 4.5 Professional. Why do you doubt about their effectiveness?
    I'm running avast! 4.5 Home Edition and i completely trust it as primary (and only) antivirus scanner.
     
  10. Mr2cents

    Mr2cents Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Posts:
    497
    Hi RejZoR. I used to use avast 4.5 home edition as my primary antivirus. It's a great antivirus. However,Everytime I would do a scan with it. There would always be some files it said it was unable to scan. This made me uncomfortable. I would then go do online scans with trendmicro and panda...Just to make sure I didn't have a virus. This got old for me. That's the only thing about avast that I didn't like.

    Theres no doubt that it's good in catching viruses. I downloaded a trial of a paid for antivirus.. My computer was running horrible. The paid for antivirus was updated. :D I did a scan, and nothing was found. This went on for a couple of days. Computer was running horrible, but the paid for antivirus said my system was clean.

    I uninstalled this famous antivirus, and reinstalled avast free. I did a scan, and avast found a virus. avast deleted the virus and the computer started running like new. Avast is better at detecting viruses than some paid for versions. However, it not being able to scan some files always had me on edge. I just wasn't comfortable with it. Also the word free scares me.lol.

    I don't have much experience with avg and antivir. I am running avg as an on demand scanner. I just downloaded it last night. I'm running bitdefender standard as resident. I'm sure that avg and antivir are also good at catching viruses. However, if I remember correctly. They score pretty low at av- comparatives.org on trojan and backdoor protection. This shouldn't concern me to much as I run boclean, but it does.

    I guess it's kind of a psychological thing. I just don't want to run a free antivirus resident. I have no problen in running them as on demand. Bitdefender scored pretty high over at av-comparatives. If I decide to keep it. I think it only costs $29.00
     
  11. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Those cannot be scanned files are usually archives that are password protected and files used by system itself (pagefile,registry hive files,user profile files and few others). There is nothing to worry about that.
    For example NOD32 will show you the same "errors" with note that those are system files which are currently locked by OS so they cannot be scanned.
    Most of other AVs won't even tell you that they couldn't scan some files :p
     
  12. Mr2cents

    Mr2cents Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Posts:
    497
    I didn't know that RejZoR. I did have password protected files on my computer. So, the other antiviruses can't scan them either. They just don't tell you :eek: I also didn't know that the free version antiviruses use the same engines as there paid for versions. I do like avast free. I like watching the little blue ball spin :D I like trying out different antivirus products. It's kinda like a hobby for me. If I don't buy bitdefender, I have a few others I'm going to try out. I went to av-comparatives. AVG isn't even listed in the test. avast and bitdefender scored pretty much the same. Bitdefender scored just a little higher. I'm just trying to find a good antivirus that runs good on my system, and has excellent detection rates. Avast did run good on my system. So does kav 5.0, mcafee, trend micro, panda, but had a firewall problem with panda. Bitdefender is using more system resources on my computer than any one I've trialed yet. Norton is about the only antivirus I can't run...that I've used so far. Nod32, can't run it. it starts winmgmt in my computer, and slows it down to a crawl.

    With That said. I may be back with avast after trying a few more antivirus products :D I forgot about f-prot. It used the least system resources of any antivirus I've tried
     
  13. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    In my opinion the AVG 7.0 is a good improvement of AVG 6.0.

    This version support more things and have a better detection, the configuration was improved but still lacks in some aspects...

    It's a good AV for who want to have, at least, a good protection...
     
  14. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    Fellow Creatures,
    First as to BigC's comments. I pretty much agree with him. Just look in my signature below. Also I am no expert in security for your machine, but I will tell you this, my life experience tells me trust the advice of those who have "work" experience real life story to tell. Much more weight should be given to these opinions rather then some test or other such stuff. BigC...I have taken his advice on an occassion or two when offered even when asked by someone else. It has never gone wrong. ;)

    AVG 7 is being used as a backup on one machine and primary on the other. The one that it is primary is a machine that is used less risk sites only known sites, my machine, not used by family. I went with AVG 7 when my research indicated that it was better then CA EZ AV 12 month trial (the one in the link above).
    It has worked on this machine with out any problem. I do hope it's detection and clean rates are as good as it's operational aspects, based on my useage. I do not trust AVG 7 to catch trojans BoClean is in charge there and Bitdefender Free on demand scans once a week as backup.

    I did have a problem with AVG update on the Emachine family PC (on demand backup only on this machine). Minor problem on AVG end by end of day it was fixed and got the update with no problem. See other thread that is on going.

    Command VA on family machine is primary this is cheap good AV. Support stinks, but it has operated flawlessly for me too. And reports on my machine indicated captures and kills in the virus and trojan area :cool:. Hope this helps you. Bottom line: I like AVG 7, but as BigC says use with care there is some risk, it is just not as good as most not all of the payware AV's. Also my advice is to give more weight to these real life hands on users less weight to the tests.
     
  15. Beefcarver

    Beefcarver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    263
    Location:
    michigan
    It found viruses but failed to remove them. I have to rely on my spyware stopping programs or other resources to remove the nasties.

    But I do like the Email Scanner.
     
  16. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    that is true but if they were the same (free and pay) why does one cost$$ and one is free. They are not the same, look at the options available in a free version and the pay version. Anyway I don't want to start a long winded discussion that could get ugly :D I will never tell anyone what programs to run I will just give advice based on experience and what information I pick up along the way and make suggestions based on that. And the individual can then make their own decision based on all they have learned in their search on the question at the time.

    bigc
     
  17. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    It's just the matter of functionality. But lets go back to engine and signatures.
    All 3 free scanners use EXACTLY the SAME engine as payble version and they use EXACTLY the SAME virus database. Other features are just extra tweaks so user can really set antivirus as he/she wants. avast! uses a bit better update approach for Pro version,but Home edition isn't far behind and it's better than McAfee or Norton updater. In the end free version will catch the same malware as payble version.
     
  18. Firefoxguy

    Firefoxguy Guest

    That's because they are popular, so you see them being used. since most users have no idea how to use them properly, most of them will mess up. You won't know if the same thing wouldnt happen if they used other paid commerical AVs.

    You really need to see an equal number running say Nod, KAV and see that they are not infected to really compare. And the skill levels of such users will probably be different anyway.

    Similarly if I look at most of the HJT logs posted, most of them are running Norton. Does that mean Norton sucks? Never mind, forget I asked :)
     
  19. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    AntiVir and AVG have disabled Heuristics by default. And i know AntiVir has quiet good heuristics (if you set on Highest setting) so it's shame that they have them turned off by default.
     
  20. mikel108

    mikel108 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Posts:
    1,057
    Location:
    SW Ontario, Canada
    I found AVG 7 Pro (paid) to be a vary stable well laid out program. However its detection rate was not on par with what I wanted. It was a shame, because if it had been on par with even tha average AV I would have been more than happy to pay double for it. I should mention that when I surf the web I am not the safest person, and because of work I absolutely have to have a scanner that will stop email viruses as close to 100% as possible.

    I would also like to disagree with mercurie as to AVG compared to EZ Antivirus. I found EZ just as stable as AVG, but with a much improved detection rate. Could you maybe post the info you have with respect to AVG detection compared to others??
     
  21. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,779
    Location:
    Texas
    A little reading on AVG here.
     
  22. mikel108

    mikel108 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Posts:
    1,057
    Location:
    SW Ontario, Canada
    Thanks for the link, but I already have been there before. If I go by their results EZ is much, much better than AVG. Personally the easiest way I have for testing a product is to ask opinions, read articles and then I take it out on the web and go to the nastiest places I can find. I then do an on demand scan. Afterwards I go to Trend and Bitdefender for online scans, if they come back clean I find I can trust the AV(of course I do this several times over the trial period). To me this is real life testing! If it can't pass this I don't want the product.
     
  23. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,779
    Location:
    Texas
    Sounds like a good plan. :)
     
  24. INTERESTING

    INTERESTING Guest

    The posts knocking AVG7 because it's free are just wrong. AVG Free is exactly the same thing as it's paid big brother. It has the same scan engine and definition updates. To say you won't trust a free AV may be true if it's not based on something that is generating big money for the company. Grisoft's bread and butter is the enterprise version of AVG which is very profitable. The company can more than afford to offer the free home version with fewer features as its big brother is paying the freight.

    The post saying 65% of the computers with virus troubles coming into his shop were running Antivir or AVG sounds suspect to me. They just aren't that popular with mainstream users.

    AVG7 is highly recommended by many. Many in this thread just aren't thinking logically concerning Grisoft and its free offering.
     
  25. Ianb

    Ianb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    Posts:
    232
    Location:
    UK
    Would anybody pay for it ?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.