Another antivirus comparison...

[Lisandro]

I'd like to bring to discussion some av comparison, reviews and tests, specially detection rates.

1. AV-comparatives.org
   Here avast was 'standard' in 2005 and becomes better (advanced) in 2006.
   Never reaches NOD32 in detection rates. Always better than AVG.
   Antivirus comparative results (February 2006) could be found for On-demand and Retrospective/ProActive.

2. Antivirus about
   They compare the free antivirus avast, AVG and Antivir to Zoo Detection, Response Times, Compressed/Archive Types, Adware and Spyware, Footprint, Support Options. The Final Scores are for detect traditional virus threats: AntiVir PersonalEdition (94/125.6), AVAST 4 Home Edition (89/125.6) and AVG Free Edition (66/125.6) and for adware/spyware removal: AVAST (66/125.6), AntiVir (58/125.6) and AVG (30/125.6).

3. avast is an ICSA Certified Anti-Virus Product
   avast passed the last ICSA Certified Anti-Virus test (April 2006).

4. Good words to avast at CNET Reviews: This is a solid and well-respected program to keep your computer virus-free.

5. Some tests disregards avast... it even exist for them:
   a. PC Magazine. Although, avast is reviewed by them here.
   b. CNET 2006 antivirus performance test scores. You'll be surprised that there are other antivirus that are even more resource hogs than Norton 
   They've tested: F-Secure 2006, Trend Micro PC-cillin 2006, Norton AntiVirus 2006, CA eTrust, AVG Anti-Virus 7.1 Professional Edition and McAfee VirusScan 2006.
   But they've also tested two important things: Scan speed and Boot speed. Take a look, worth.

[polonus]

Hi Tech,

AVG is still no comparison for avast. Avast still beats them on many respects, also in scanning methods. Kaspersky is the champion to look at. The big three also can be omitted, because of new malware being tested against their detection (vulnerability gap) makes them less of your first choice. (McAfee, Symantec, TrendMicro).
Avast has stayed an AV solution per se, and did not acquire specific anti-spyware & adware detection to an extent the others responded. But avast has going for it, that its scanning does not hurt your OS in any way, is solid, and reliable. The protection line is getting smaller 'though according to some here.

What is endangering computers lately is software incompatibility brought forward by hasty coding (dll conflicts, crashes that endanger memory and even can corrupt drivers. This is a thing that has happened more recently than ever seen before, and must be tackled. But how?

polonus

[Lisandro]

AVG is still no comparison for avast.

I'm just waiting for ewido signatures added to Grisoft antivirus database... avast will be left behind.

Kaspersky is the champion to look at.

Not free option for it. That's out of question for me now.

Avast has stayed an AV solution per se, and did not acquire specific anti-spyware & adware detection to an extent the others responded. But avast has going for it

To what? Spyware and adware detection? Why do you say so? Why doesn't avast detect as much as ewido does... avast is far behind it.

[polonus]

Hi Tech,

I think that they have come at some cross-roads here. Either be an AV solution like it is, top of the sub-range, or going unto a broader theater.
Others acquired these features, you discussed, elsewhere or in an earlier stage,, some used innovation techniques, like DrWeb's, but their heuristical scanners cannot compete with F-Prot, too many FP's. Yhat is why the full DrWeb for me is anathema.
But I really don't know what the plans for the future are for avast. If I could make a wish I'd like to see a mix of Avast and some aspects of the free ClamWin, a mix of solid AV solution pared to  enthusiasm.
Staying like this with smaller adaptions or a completer overhaul? What will it be?
I really say to you, Tech,  I haven't the greenest.

polonus

[Lisandro]

I'd like to see a mix of Avast and some aspects of the free ClamWin, a mix of solid AV solution pared to enthusiasm.

What aspects? Enthusiasm, you mean, because it's an open source? Sure... there will be enthusiasm.

[polonus]

Hi Tech,

And not only that. If you have the ClamWin on demand, you know the signatures updates, and how many (sometimes twice daily) You could check their protection range. The on demand is slow, the technology is not first class, but the people behind it sure want to make the best of it. That is what counts for me, don't you agree? I only say that as a recipee to thward the avast flaws.

polonus

[Lisandro]

But the people behind it sure want to make the best of it. That is what counts for me, don't you agree?

I agree but better than words I want facts.
avast detection in on judgement 

[TAP]

I'd like to bring to discussion some av comparison, reviews and tests, specially detection rates.

1. AV-comparatives.org
   Here avast was 'standard' in 2005 and becomes better (advanced) in 2006.
   Never reaches NOD32 in detection rates. Always better than AVG.
   Antivirus comparative results (February 2006) could be found for On-demand and Retrospective/ProActive.

I've found some interesting comments about AV-comparatives.org on AVG Free forum, it explains why AVG's overall detection rates may never be better than avast!, NOD32, AntiVir, Norton, McAfee and other antivirus software in some tests.

http://forum.grisoft.cz/freeforum/read.php?8,69641,70842#msg-70842