Avast WEBforum

Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: gordon451 on October 03, 2014, 02:34:06 PM

Title: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: gordon451 on October 03, 2014, 02:34:06 PM
I use v7, it used to be 7.0.1466.  I'm writing here because I know the devs read these forums.

This evening it decided (despite my Update Setting {PROGRAM>Manual}) to give me v9.0.2021.  It was uninstalled exactly 30 seconds after reboot.

I use v7 for a reason: it is the latest version of Avast that least offends me.  It is the latest version that can be described as "The virus-killer, the whole virus-killer, and NOTHING BUT the virus-killer".

I am not happy that despite using the installer for .1466 I now have .1506.  However, I am going to be more than unhappy if ever I am lumbered with a v9 as a program update again.  I do not want anything that looks like Symantec/Norton or MacAfee on my computer.  I have never seen any multi-function center that works as advertised, but I have lots of single/mono-function apps which not only work as advertised but also exceed all claimed performance benchmarks--and most of those are 32-bit legacy apps.

Devs, please listen.  I used to be an Opera fan...  Until Opera tried to be a multi-function center, and then decided to ditch their very pleasing Presto engine.  I used to use Adobe Reader until...  I used to use Windows Media Player/Center until...  I even tried MS Office until...  (I now use Lotus SmartSuite.) 

Look, I have nothing against current builds.  But I am a minimalist.  I like lean, fat-free performance-oriented programs.  You develop a Lite version that does NOTHING except find and kill viruses, worms and trojans*, and I'll install it.  The moment you add adware or PUPs or Kittens or Chickens, I uninstall.  Simple, yes?

* Rootkits are specialised types of Trojans.  They have the same delivery method, and the same activation method.

Gordon.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 03, 2014, 02:41:29 PM
Looks like nearly the same thing that happened a few minutes ago to me, with the exception that you received a newer version. I bet that was the Emergency Updater that did that. I just finished by complaint about that damn thing here (https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=100291.msg1130891#msg1130891).
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 03, 2014, 02:57:09 PM
Version 7 is way outdated and not supported anymore.
No more vps updates, obsolete detection methods and such.
That is why the update to version 2014 takes place.
If you don't want your system to be protected in the best way possible, feel free to use something else.

You are wrong about Opera.
They still offer Version 12.17 Build 1863 and are supporting it.
And Opera has been a multi-function center as you call it right from the beginning.
Browser, Mail, IRC client etc.

avast hasn't added adware, or pups.
It detects and blocks them.

You are totally wrong about what a rootkit is.
Root refers to the all-powerful, "Administrator" account on Unix and Linux systems
Kit refers to a set of programs or utilities that allow someone to maintain root-level access to a computer.
The goal of a rootkit is that it tries to be undetectable.
A rootkit allows someone, either legitimate or malicious, to maintain command and control over a computer system,
without the the computer system user knowing about it.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: drake127 on October 03, 2014, 03:13:04 PM
We (sort of) support* only last builds of any major release, currently it's 1474 for v7, 1497 for v8 and obviously 2021 for v9. Any other builds are subject to be banned (which happened this week). We are still deciding what to do about remaining v5 (677, exceptionally not the last one) and v6 (1367). The updates set to manual are respected for these builds (and some other conditions apply) and you should be safe with them (as far as I can influence the decision).

*) take into consideration
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: gordon451 on October 03, 2014, 03:59:48 PM
Hi drake127 - thank you for your thoughtful and sympathetic reply.  As I say, if youse can come up with a Lite build, I'll be interested.  Ummm...  Due to what we can call "anomalous results" (like pinging Lotus modules) I now routinely switch off heuristics, they generate 'way too many false positives.  One of the good things about v7 is that when I tell it to exclude something, it obeys, like with my hosts file.

@Eddy.  I actually am very familiar with root-kits.  Please tell me how you think they get onto machines.  And then tell me how they are not trojans.

And Opera was not always a multi-function center.  I've used it since v4.  The bloat happened much later.

Gordon.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Pondus on October 03, 2014, 04:16:02 PM
Quote
Please tell me how you think they get onto machines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootkit
Quote
Rootkit installation can be automated, or an attacker can install it once they've obtained root or Administrator access. Obtaining this access is a result of direct attack on a system (i.e., exploiting a known vulnerability (such as privilege escalation) or a password (obtained by cracking or social engineering). Once installed, it becomes possible to hide the intrusion as well as to maintain privileged access. The key is the root or Administrator access. Full control over a system means that existing software can be modified, including software that might otherwise be used to detect or circumvent it.


Trojan   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_horse_(computing)
Quote
Malicious programs are classified as Trojans if they do not attempt to inject themselves into other files (computer virus) or otherwise propagate themselves (worm).[7] A computer may host a Trojan via a malicious program a user is duped into executing (often an e-mail attachment disguised to be unsuspicious, e.g., a routine form to be filled in) or by drive-by download.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 03, 2014, 04:19:13 PM
To say it real simple:
A trojan is trying to disguise itself as something that it is not.
A rootkit is itself and yes it canbe harmful, but doesn't have to be.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: JackPollack on October 03, 2014, 04:19:27 PM
I totally agree with gordon451. I also was using V7 as it is the last version I liked as well. I was totally horrified to see that my update setting were completely ignored. Really bad form! A pop-up or other message informing me that this version was not supported any longer and ASKING me if I would like to upgraded would be appropriate.

V9 was uninstalled, and I think I will be using another AV program, one from a company that I can trust, one that does not ignore settings that I specifically set.

PS When my business subscription expires I will not be renewing with Avast
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 03, 2014, 04:29:38 PM
Jack,

I agree with you that there should have been a pop-up, email (or whatever),
telling the user about the update and why it needs to take place.

With security software it doesn't really matter if you like it or not.
More important is if it does the job well.
Let's face it, you are not opening the user interface everyday just to look at it.
Let it run in the background and let it take care of things.

Don't be naive, other av vendors are doing the same.
If you don't trust avast, you should not trust any av vendor.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 05:37:29 PM
I use v7, it used to be 7.0.1466. [...]

I use v7 for a reason: it is the latest version of Avast that least offends me.  It is the latest version that can be described as "The virus-killer, the whole virus-killer, and NOTHING BUT the virus-killer".

Gordon, I could not agree with you more. And just said basically the same thing in this thread: https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=155917.0 (https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=155917.0)

And to the parrots who keep saying v7 doesn't detect as well as the newest version, that's bull. Any difference would be marginal at best, as they both use the same db so the only diff would be tweaked algorithms and tools designed more for marketing than anything else. The updated AVAST is mostly UI Win8 cr*p and bloat.  If a consumer is to be concerned about any perceived, alleged marginal difference, and they want the best protection they can possibly get, then they should not be using AVAST at all, as it is far from top of the heap at this point.

But we all know that in the real world it's the user who acts as his or her own strongest protection against infection by using common sense. So an AV is simply a safety net, and no AV is perfect. So if v7 of AVAST is 'good enough for me' and I like the UI and the ability to opt-out of info gathering and all the extra 'features' I don't want or use, then AVAST should be happy such customers are sticking with an old version of their program rather than going to a much higher scoring AV like BD or Kaspersky. (Which I might be doing since AVAST is now causing extended boot times after updating to SP1.)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 05:39:04 PM
We (sort of) support* only last builds of any major release, currently it's 1474 for v7, 1497 for v8 and obviously 2021 for v9. Any other builds are subject to be banned (which happened this week). We are still deciding what to do about remaining v5 (677, exceptionally not the last one) and v6 (1367). The updates set to manual are respected for these builds (and some other conditions apply) and you should be safe with them (as far as I can influence the decision).

*) take into consideration

What a refreshing reply!
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Asyn on October 03, 2014, 05:40:47 PM
Any difference would be marginal at best, as they both use the same db...
Nope, see: http://www.avast.com/download-update
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 05:58:53 PM
With security software it doesn't really matter if you like it or not.
More important is if it does the job well.

Are you high? You DO realize if people don't like the UI or features of a program they will go to a competitor. Regardless of how well a program does its job. (And AVAST is NOT currently one of the top rated AVs anyway!) Usability and configuration are key elements, ESPECIALLY in security software. It matters VERY MUCH if someone likes their AV or not, and it should matter *most* to AVAST.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: lakrsrool on October 03, 2014, 06:13:49 PM
We (sort of) support* only last builds of any major release, currently it's 1474 for v7, 1497 for v8 and obviously 2021 for v9. Any other builds are subject to be banned (which happened this week). We are still deciding what to do about remaining v5 (677, exceptionally not the last one) and v6 (1367). The updates set to manual are respected for these builds (and some other conditions apply) and you should be safe with them (as far as I can influence the decision).

*) take into consideration

Thanks for taking the time to provide this information.

However, I'm confused in that those builds you've referenced above do not appear to be the "last builds" for the "major" Avast versions you've mentioned above.

Here are two examples of what I'm saying; I am aware of build 1466 which would be later than build 1367 for major version 6 that you mentioned above and I'm aware of build 1506 which would be later than build 1497 for major version 8 that you mentioned above.

Is it more accurate to say that the builds that Avast respects when set to manual are not necessarily the "last" builds?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 06:18:16 PM
Any difference would be marginal at best, as they both use the same db...
Nope, see: http://www.avast.com/download-update

I clicked on this link and found nothing that says AVAST v7 is a poor AV compared to the newest version. Maybe scripts were blocking some relevant content. But FTR any company will always claim its newest product is better and improved. That's how marketing works. Whether it's improved or not. And maybe it is, and maybe it's not.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Asyn on October 03, 2014, 06:23:43 PM
Any difference would be marginal at best, as they both use the same db...
Nope, see: http://www.avast.com/download-update
I clicked on this link and found nothing that says AVAST v7 is a poor AV...
Never said so, just pointed out the fact that they don't use the same db. ;)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: drake127 on October 03, 2014, 06:31:54 PM
Guys, I understand you, respect your opinion and I share it with you. It is kinda rude to update software on your own computer and I would not like it either. There are even some compatibility risks involved no matter how hard we try to mitigate them (those are the other conditions I mentioned).

However, Avast is not one of those software that works on their own. It needs constant updates and our VPS is far from being a simple database. We have many users and even some obscure builds hit over 1 million of users. That's around three dozens builds which are not tested regularly or at all summing up to many millions of users. And there is ever increasing chance that one day one of those builds just break perhaps taking the Windows with it.

Considering that, there are always people on the scales. I am very well aware that some of you are rightfully upset, some of you don't care and most of you don't have any comments. Still, I believe that this policy is for good. You still have option to keep major version you want but helps us to test only one build for each major version. That's become a big deal for us and helps us a lot.

I agree that we should have give you some sort of advance notice but our options are limited. "Banning" is hardcoded feature without any UI and EmUpdate related to it served rather different purpose of switching whole file repository because there actually are major differences between v5-v8 and v9-v10 VPS.

As for the protection, we continuously improve (self-)protection of the Avast and underlying system making it harder for unknown malware to get in or disable Avast before its detection and this is becoming increasingly important. This cannot be done by just updating VPS and these updates are not usually backported.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: lakrsrool on October 03, 2014, 06:37:57 PM
Any difference would be marginal at best, as they both use the same db...
Nope, see: http://www.avast.com/download-update
I clicked on this link and found nothing that says AVAST v7 is a poor AV...
Never said so, just pointed out the fact that they don't use the same db. ;)

I'm not convinced that this web page tells us whether the actual db itself is actually different for those various stipulated version groups or not, it's still possible that the db itself is not different at all.  It very well could be that the application methods used to update the db are what is different for those designated versions that may actually by grouped because those versions require a different update process for purposes of application compatibility as opposed to whether or not any differences may exist in the db itself for each of those version groups hence the db may actually be the same in each case.  It would seem to me that we can't know either way if the db varies between versions that are grouped for db updates based on this website.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Asyn on October 03, 2014, 06:39:40 PM
I'm not convinced that this web page tells us whether the actual db itself is actually different for those various stipulated version groups or not, it's still possible that the db itself is not different at all.
See: Reply #16. ;)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: CraigB on October 03, 2014, 06:45:00 PM
Any difference would be marginal at best, as they both use the same db...
Nope, see: http://www.avast.com/download-update

I clicked on this link and found nothing that says AVAST v7 is a poor AV compared to the newest version. Maybe scripts were blocking some relevant content. But FTR any company will always claim its newest product is better and improved. That's how marketing works. Whether it's improved or not. And maybe it is, and maybe it's not.
What Asyn's link points to is the different vps updates used for 2014 as opposed to 5-8 so your statement about them all using the same database is wrong, companies claim their latest software to be better mainly on the fact that new versions are built with the latest features and technology to combat the latest attack strategies.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 03, 2014, 06:49:56 PM
http://www.avast.com/release-history

Bootsy, look there on what is improved.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 09:54:13 PM
Guys, I understand you, respect your opinion and I share it with you.

And I appreciate your responses, thank you.

Quote
However, Avast is not one of those software that works on their own. It needs constant updates and our VPS is far from being a simple database. We have many users and even some obscure builds hit over 1 million of users. That's around three dozens builds which are not tested regularly or at all summing up to many millions of users. And there is ever increasing chance that one day one of those builds just break perhaps taking the Windows with it.

Good points, but supporting the last major build of prior versions - particularly popular prior versions, like v7, is even more than I expected. And while you might not continue to test each build as Windows continues updating itself, most of us are using W7 (and some maybe XP) and those OSs are not exactly getting major overhauls anymore. So chances of a disaster are imo, small.

Quote
You still have option to keep major version you want but helps us to test only one build for each major version. That's become a big deal for us and helps us a lot.

And imo is more than fair and accomodating.

Quote
[...] "Banning" is hardcoded feature without any UI and EmUpdate related to it served rather different purpose of switching whole file repository because there actually are major differences between v5-v8 and v9-v10 VPS.

As for the protection, we continuously improve (self-)protection of the Avast and underlying system making it harder for unknown malware to get in or disable Avast before its detection and this is becoming increasingly important. This cannot be done by just updating VPS and these updates are not usually backported.

Understood but again I say, how much of a difference is this truly in the context of this conversation which is about v7 vs the newest version? I would bet any difference is marginal at best and would have no real world difference on my computer. Others who believe differently are free to use the new version. But to imply (as some here have) that v7 basically isn't effective anymore is a load of bull. If someone is that concerned about marginal differences then they should be using a top-rated AV anyway (like one of the top 3), which leaves even the newest version of AVAST out in the cold.

Again, appreciated your replies, thanks.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 10:16:11 PM
http://www.avast.com/release-history

Bootsy, look there on what is improved.

I am not arguing there are no changes to the program. I am only stating I prefer v7 for many reasons, and the 'improvements' are more marketing than anything. Proof is, AVAST has not scored all that well in the  independent lab tests the last couple of years. So how improved can it be? v7 scored much better in its class at the time.

Plus many so-called 'improvements' are simply bloat to me... I don't want or need phishing or ad-blocking or Web rep cr*p or any of that. And I don't want cloud services either. I also want a choice to opt-out of info-gathering. And I dislike the W8 GUI... this is not to mention that when I tried it despite all these things, it slowed my boot time by 30 secs or so, then hogged all my resources for 2 minutes.

In short, v7 has always worked well for me... until the SP1 update and now it slows boot time to 2min. Hence, I am now considering a different AV, and might as well pick one that scored higher in the labs. I only came here to see if someone had a solution to the slow boot after the Sp1 update, but it seems it doesn't happen on all machines, so there is not likely going to be an answer unless I can find one on MyDigitalLife or the Seven forums.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: 937carrera on October 03, 2014, 10:37:47 PM

I am not arguing there are no changes to the program. I am only stating I prefer v7 for many reasons, and the 'improvements' are more marketing than anything. Proof is, AVAST has not scored all that well in the  independent lab tests the last couple of years. So how improved can it be? v7 scored much better in its class at the time.

Plus many so-called 'improvements' are simply bloat to me... I don't want or need phishing or ad-blocking or Web rep cr*p or any of that. And I don't want cloud services either. I also want a choice to opt-out of info-gathering. And I dislike the W8 GUI... this is not to mention that when I tried it despite all these things, it slowed my boot time by 30 secs or so, then hogged all my resources for 2 minutes.

In short, v7 has always worked well for me... until the SP1 update and now it slows boot time to 2min. Hence, I am now considering a different AV, and might as well pick one that scored higher in the labs. I only came here to see if someone had a solution to the slow boot after the Sp1 update, but it seems it doesn't happen on all machines, so there is not likely going to be an answer unless I can find one on MyDigitalLife or the Seven forums.

I just joined the forum solely because one of my computers just updated itself and overrode my wishes.

What bootsy wrote sums up my feelings exactly. I want effective software, not bloatware, and Avast older editions always provided that.

The "EmergencyUpdate" process that has been flashing up in my Zonealarm firewall (yas, that's an old version too where I control exactly what I let in and out) has been popping up frequently over the past few weeks, each time I allowed it one time access to update whatever was deemed necessary. I made the mistake of not reading the pop up properly this afternoon and allowed the update process to run. I suspect it "upgraded" to V8 and then autoupdated to 2014 because I left the computer alone and didn't change the program update settings immediately

A system restore didn't fix the problem so I uninstalled Avast 2014, wound my clock back 3 years and reinstalled the earlier version in offline mode from my backups.

I'm happy again, and can now permanently deny AvastUpdate (not definitions) from accessing the internet through ZA.

Avast should have done a much better job of communicating with its users and informing them about what was going on. I have been concerned about the number of emergency updates recently

One final thought, top marks to drake127. He actually understands the position of his customers and is honest in expressing his views, rather than simply repeating the corporate line. That alone has stopped me from seeking out another AV product this evening.

   
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 03, 2014, 11:04:10 PM
I want effective software, not bloatware, and Avast older editions always provided that.

Agreed. Unfortunately there is a mindset in today's competitive software market that equates new features and more features with being able to distinguish your product from every other AV... and so no one is providing a simple, lightweight AV that just finds and cleans viruses, malware, rootkits, etc and does nothing else. I prefer the old school way of doing things (which I still find solid) to have one program that does one thing well... instead of trying to do 50 things, and worse, things I don't even WANT done. So I want my AV to be an AV only... and I have a different program for my FW, and ad-blocking and all that can be done with browser add-ons, etc.

And while many people like cloud services, I do not. I want an AV to work off my own computer and the only time it should phone home is to check for an updated virus db.

I wish AVAST would consider making such a program. AVAST FREE LITE, if you will. A barebones AV that does what an AV should do and no more. And please don't emulate the W8 UI... it's a mystery why companies are emulating the look of one of the least popular OSs of all time.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Pondus on October 03, 2014, 11:08:16 PM
Quote
So I want my AV to be an AV only 
You can remove modules you dont want


Quote
  And while many people like cloud services, I do not. I want an AV to work off my own computer and the only time it should phone home is to check for an updated virus db   
That is what the cloud service does     
Stream updates    http://blog.avast.com/2013/09/16/seeking-perfection/
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 04, 2014, 12:12:31 AM
You can remove modules you dont want

I do. Including disabling most 'features'.

Quote
  And while many people like cloud services, I do not. I want an AV to work off my own computer and the only time it should phone home is to check for an updated virus db   

Quote
That is what the cloud service does     
Stream updates    http://blog.avast.com/2013/09/16/seeking-perfection/

I didn't see any technical info about the cloud services on that link, but read about AVAST's cloud services the other day and my opinion about cloud services has not changed. Don't like them, don't want them. And it's not just used for streaming updates. From what I read AVAST generates sig files (from the client) it uploads to the cloud for scanning. Some ppl like this idea as it is supposed to save the client (PC) from using its own resources, but I prefer all the info on my computer to remain private and not be scanned for the purposes of creating sig files, copies or anything else to be uploaded anywhere. I want my computer self-contained and my AV working as well offline (with the full db and not just a cache of the most likely threats) as it does on. I prefer a hit to my personal resources to that end, as has been the traditional model. Streaming updates are also unnecessary imo. Updating once an hour or every 240 min is plenty good. (And yes, I disabled all these things in v7.)

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Pondus on October 04, 2014, 12:51:09 AM
Quote
Streaming updates are also unnecessary imo. Updating once an hour or every 240 min is plenty good. (And yes, I disabled all these things in v7.)   
Evryone is doing it now and it is the only way to handle the large amount of new malware found evry day

20% of all malware ever created appeared in 2013   http://press.pandasecurity.com/news/20-of-all-malware-ever-created-appeared-in-2013/

Malware statistic   http://www.av-test.org/en/statistics/malware/


Quote
Updating once an hour or every 240 min is plenty good. 
Why not go back to the 1980 when they sendt out virus signature updates once a month on floppydisk

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: polonus on October 04, 2014, 12:58:42 AM
Hi Pondus,

Or get the latest CD version that comes with your computer magazine.
That was how it used to be.

polonus
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Dch48 on October 04, 2014, 01:13:44 AM
Just my two cents for what it's worth since I no longer use Avast. One of the main reasons why I decided not to use the versions of the free Avast newer than v7 was what I consider to be needless bloat. I mean the new features like the software updater, browser cleaner, grimefighter, and all the other things that have been added on top of what used to be a very good and light AV. I just think the company is headed in the wrong direction and possibly losing users and potential users because of it.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 04, 2014, 01:26:06 AM
Hello Dch48? How's it going? We haven't seen you in this forum for a very long time. Thought you just dissapeared? There's an custom installation for Avast to choose which feature(s) you want and don't want? Anyways, it's all up to the user's choice. I am still using Avast! 2014 Free and I am proud of it  :)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: gordon451 on October 04, 2014, 02:02:19 AM
G'day all - I had suspected I might be tapping into a well of discontent here.  Having said that, I do wonder how much is generated by a fairly major change in the UI, similar to the fuss over the W7->W8 interface?  I know I have major problems moving away from the old W9x/W2K "classical" desktop, and that sometimes expresses itself by doubts over the "functionality" of the OS.  Certainly I got used to the UI in Avast! v7, it is easy to work with and I've found some GUIdance in it, showing me where to go for certain tasks.

And I do agree that just as W8 and W10 are... "better"?... OSes than their predecessors, so are v8 and v9.  Well, I hope they are!  But maybe some thought should be given to continuity of GUI look-and-feel so the update shock can be minimised.

And I'll reiterate my call for a Lite version.  Having worked through more than a few "multi-function" programs, I can state definitively that you cannot "remove modules you don't want".  Even when the unwanted module is actually not copied to disk in the install (which is unusual), all the hooks are still present, dangling in the breeze.  It really is exactly equal to buying a "printer" that copies, prints, scans and faxes.  It does everything, but none of those tasks are performed well: and if one function breaks, the whole lot falls over like a tree in a storm.

bootsy mentioned "old school".  The concept is one of rock-solid performance, usually at the expense of "convenience", and always with the thought of spending time evaluating each quality separately and with a view to long-term investment.

Ummm.  Oh yes.  Trojans vs Root-kits.  There's only one way either of them get onto any box.  The user has to install them.  There is no recorded instance of any malware ever having climbed up through the modem or router and installing itself.  Not that the user doesn't have to explicitly double-click the exe.  Some very major software was designed--one might think deliberately--to do this task for us.  We don't appreciate that email "preview" is merely a different terminology for "open it briefly when I hover".  And when a major major software house decides to save us the effort of opening that attachment by ourselves...  And then there is scripting.  When users are unaware of what a script can do, and very happy they can make their emails so beautiful, why should anyone be surprised that the romantic message contains poison?  But the result is--at least implicitly--that the User has decided to open the attachment and install the contents.  There is a difference between Trojans and Root-kits: Trojans contain a "pay-load" which may be a Root-kit.  Root-kits do not usually organise their own transport...  But both have to be installed by the user.

I guess that's all I have to say.  Except, drake127: "Gotta Lite?"

Gordon.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 04, 2014, 07:15:32 AM
Quote
Streaming updates are also unnecessary imo. Updating once an hour or every 240 min is plenty good. (And yes, I disabled all these things in v7.)   
Evryone is doing it now and it is the only way to handle the large amount of new malware found evry day

No, it's not. It's a new(er) option. And 'everyone is doing it' is not an argument.

Quote
20% of all malware ever created appeared in 2013   http://press.pandasecurity.com/news/20-of-all-malware-ever-created-appeared-in-2013/ [...]

We have been over this. More than once.

Quote
Updating once an hour or every 240 min is plenty good. 
Quote
Why not go back to the 1980 when they sendt out virus signature updates once a month on floppydisk

Some members here need to learn how to put on their big boy pants.

So what if you get an updated db an hour or two before I do, because I am checking once every two hours and you are having them streamed? What are the chances that in that 2-hr window (the longest window possible in this context) you are going to get one of the exact viruses included in that particular update, in that 2hr window?  Close to ZERO. Especially if you are a savvy user who does not engage in unsafe behaviors.

There is certainly nothing wrong with streaming updates if someone prefers them, but if you think that makes you significantly safer than checking every 2 hours, you must be constantly courting disaster.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 04, 2014, 07:19:07 AM
Just my two cents for what it's worth since I no longer use Avast. One of the main reasons why I decided not to use the versions of the free Avast newer than v7 was what I consider to be needless bloat. I mean the new features like the software updater, browser cleaner, grimefighter, and all the other things that have been added on top of what used to be a very good and light AV. I just think the company is headed in the wrong direction and possibly losing users and potential users because of it.

Sadly, I agree. (I tried to PM to ask what AV you are using but apparently I don't have the creds to do that yet.) If you can PM me, I'd appreciate it.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 04, 2014, 08:08:18 AM
G'day all - I had suspected I might be tapping into a well of discontent here.  Having said that, I do wonder how much is generated by a fairly major change in the UI, similar to the fuss over the W7->W8 interface?

While I agree people are resistant to change in a UI in general, there are some important points that play into accepting or rejecting that change. When a new UI makes a program easier to use and more intuitive, people quickly get used to the new UI and end up preferring it in a short time. When the changes create a less-friendly, less intuitive UI, it's a different story.

But in this case (i.e. thread and context) the UI has not been the top complaint. It's been nearly anecdotal. The top complaint has been... well, 'everything else'. :)

Quote
And I do agree that just as W8 and W10 are... "better"?... OSes than their predecessors, so are v8 and v9.  Well, I hope they are!  But maybe some thought should be given to continuity of GUI look-and-feel so the update shock can be minimised.

It was the functionality of the newer versions that kept me (and others here, judging from their posts) from using them. The changed UIs over time was just an added annoyance. 

And FTR the general reception of W8 has been poor. It is not considered a better OS than W7 except on touchscreen devices, and only because W7 is not a touchscreen OS; not because W8 is great. So while W8 might be handier than W7 on a tablet it's certainly not better on a laptop.

I understand the market is headed away from PCs and into handhelds, so touchscreen interfaces are familiar to people, and even if we are using AVAST on a laptop or DT, they might have thought a W8-style UI looked more ... contemporary. I prefer the v7 UI (not even 8 or 9). Though the UI alone will not turn me from a great program. But bloat will.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Pondus on October 04, 2014, 12:24:45 PM
Quote
So what if you get an updated db an hour or two before I do, because I am checking once every two hours and you are having them streamed? What are the chances that in that 2-hr window (the longest window possible in this context) you are going to get one of the exact viruses included in that particular update, in that 2hr window?  Close to ZERO. Especially if you are a savvy user who does not engage in unsafe behaviors.

There is certainly nothing wrong with streaming updates if someone prefers them, but if you think that makes you significantly safer than checking every 2 hours, you must be constantly courting disaster.   
When the bad guys start spread malware with mail / facebook it goes fast, and then evry infected computer start spreading the malware, so it goes faster and faster.....that 2 hour window can be the difference of infected/not infected when that mail arrive in your inbox

Mydom   http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mydoom


Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 04, 2014, 12:39:58 PM
As far as i remember, version 7 doesn't have same cloud capabilities and Auto Sandbox is a lot more primitive compared to DeepScreen in latest version. Besides, i can't understand why people use old outdated versions of antiviruses where being up to date at all times is top priority above anything else. Otherwise you may just as well not use any antivirus...
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 04, 2014, 01:02:46 PM
RejZor I completely agree with you. They don't want to install up-to-date antivirus software and will stick to using very old aged out-dated antivirus and complain about these things and even they are worried about the sort of data collected and usage by Avast! via Avast Privacy Policy. Now I can't be bothered reading these sorts of things anymore.

I have been using Avast! since the 1st very 1st version of version 7 till now and I know what Avast is doing and always works to keep Avast! antivirus software the best it can be and I will be forever sticking to them. Avast is by far the most awesome and best product I have ever known.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 04, 2014, 03:16:18 PM
Quote
Especially if you are a savvy user who does not engage in unsafe behaviors.
A "savvy" user will not be using outdated security software.
Quote
There is no recorded instance of any malware ever having climbed up through the modem or router and installing itself.
You are totally wrong. I can't recall the names (CIH / Tjsernobil?) because last time I've seen them is 15-20 years ago. But there where (are?) several that do.
Quote
Ummm.  Oh yes.  Trojans vs Root-kits.  There's only one way either of them get onto any box.  The user has to install them.
Wrong again. A admin can do it for legitimate reasons.
Quote
The changed UIs over time was just an added annoyance.
It was for you. Most other people don't have a problem with it. If someone like how it looks or not is always a matter of personal taste. Main thing is that it is working.

Idea for avast:
Let users set their own colors, or create themes where people can choose from.
Personally I liked the Star Trek theme in the older version.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: gordon451 on October 04, 2014, 05:10:00 PM
Quote
Quote
There is no recorded instance of any malware ever having climbed up through the modem or router and installing itself.
You are totally wrong. I can't recall the names (CIH / Tjsernobil?) because last time I've seen them is 15-20 years ago. But there where (are?) several that do.

CIH couldn't even climb a ladder.  It is a virus, limited (ATM) to W9x.  However I did see one day Nimda "climbing up the modem", but the computer owners had IIS installed and running.  The clean-up tech didn't bother to check the machine as he cleaned it...  Even without a NAT router, if the invitation isn't there, the malware cannot forge an entry permit.  It needs something like a server with active solicitation, or a browser on a hostile page.  So I stand by my statement.  There is no recorded instance of any malware ever having climbed up through the modem or router and installing itself.

Quote
Quote
Ummm.  Oh yes.  Trojans vs Root-kits.  There's only one way either of them get onto any box.  The user has to install them.
Wrong again. A admin can do it for legitimate reasons.

Ummmm...  So an Admin is not a user?  Er...   ???   :'(  Where's the Face-Palm smiley?  Seriously, When Nimda reponded to the invitation from IIS, that was a user deliberately installing it.  The deliberation arose from both the owners not advising the techie, and the techie not checking what was running.  Remember that IIS can run as a service, so is not immediately visible.

I'm not a system sanitiser, for some very good reasons that don't concern anybody here.  However, I have been once--and may be again--a system admin.  That means I worked at, and got paid for, the sharp end.  The very sharp end.

@RejZoR - I totally sympathise with your opinion on v7 sandbox.  I'm running W7HP SP1, and I am constantly amazed at the number of times I would expect some software to be sandboxed but it isn't.  I have told both Java and Avast! to let me know when the sandbox is in use.  It has never been used.

Avast! IMHO is still the premier AV package.  Unfortunately, some of the design team have this idea that we are all incompetent, and that causes us to think that maybe they're pointing the finger 180 degrees out of phase.  We find a version that offers the protection we want, with the functionality we look for, then the next version goes does a Microsoft on us.  Those who have had to clean the Outlook cesspit will know what I'm talking about: when menus are changed so comprehensively in new versions you need a manual to find what used to be intuitive; when functionality changes so fundamentally that you have to go back to school again...

Just for example, it is essential that users have the ability to quarantine some files from surveillance.  I have mentioned (https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=151078.msg1097792#msg1097792) my problems with Avast v7 interfering with my hosts file: this simply should never have happened.  I understand that the hosts file can be targeted, and there are certainly vectors that could overcome the read-only file attribute--but that is no reason for Avast! to throw it into the Chest.  The file is there for a purpose, and removing it severely compromises the system.  And I have not yet figured what Avast! saw there in the first place, unless it thought I shouldn't have "ssl.google-analytics.com" redirected to 127.0.0.1!  If any new version of Avast! makes exclusions difficult, then we find using that version difficult.  It's easy, really.  We just roll back to a version with the functionality we need.

OK, tomorrow's Sunday, it's very close and I have dogs to work out.

Edit: Eddy has a point.  Can we has skins?

Gordon.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 04, 2014, 05:22:37 PM
I did put a question mark after CIH for a reason.
As I said, I can't remember the names.

I do recall that after a clean installation of windows your system immediately got infected at the moment you connected to your ISP if you had no av installed.
You would get the message "Windows is shutting down in 60 seconds"

hmm wasn't it Blaster or something?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: iroc9555 on October 04, 2014, 05:34:28 PM
I did put a question mark after CIH for a reason.
As I said, I can't remember the names.

I do recall that after a clean installation of windows your system immediately got infected at the moment you connected to your ISP if you had no av installed.
You would get the message "Windows is shutting down in 60 seconds"

hmm wasn't it Blaster or something?

Indeed. Blaster it was and still is.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 04, 2014, 06:10:53 PM
You still have option to keep major version you want but helps us to test only one build for each major version. That's become a big deal for us and helps us a lot.

And imo is more than fair and accomodating.

Bootsy, you do realize that is bull, right?

If a user had an older minor version of v7, and AVAST was worried about keeping one build for each major version, then why were users forced to update to a higher major version? Instead of the way it was done, they could have just forced the last minor version and accomplished their goal.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 04, 2014, 06:21:38 PM
The fact is, out of 200 million users, only a small percentage is competent. The rest has to be treated as if they have no clue what so ever and product has to be fool proof. You have extra tweaks available if you want to fiddle with them but they aren't enabled out of the box.

As for the updating of program, backend architecture sometimes demands that. I'm suprised they still support avast! 4.8 (or have they finally discontinued it?). I mean, think of how many backward compatible services they have to run in parallel if they want to support versions all the way back to version 5. It will be 6 with this years release. That's very costly and ineffective. Now imagine if they'd have to support not just the latest version from each major release but also all minor builds in between. That's why they have the policy explained by avast! team member.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: sjesme2 on October 04, 2014, 08:25:12 PM
Hello,
On my computer the update was also done this morning without my permission (I was with Version 7.0.2021).
As for various reasons I'm still working on windows xp, this update made ​​my computer much slower, and internet browsing very painful.
Either avast find a solution to allow me to stay with the old version, or I'll leave for competitors

I have to chime in on this topic as the above situation is exactly my experience (replete with xp). Unlike others who may be unwilling to deal with the newer version's look, bloat, UI etc., I am willing to hate all that (and I vehemently do hate all that) as long as Avast! 2014 does not bog down my computer and make access to the internet impossible.

As of today I cannot uninstall/reinstall any older version of Avast! (I was using v8.0.2021) without the unwanted program update immediately taking place (despite my preference for program updates being set to "manual") so that if I reboot I am once again stuck with a version of Avast! that renders my computer virtually unusable.

Aside from feeling as though the Avast! devs became tyrannical in taking away my choice in the matter ... it strikes me as utterly irresponsible to force-feed a version that so many have issues with in terms of its (dys)functionality (problems and complaints fill a variety of forums).

I can tell you if MS forced Windows 8 on me without my permission and gave me no choice but to use it, I would go back to reading books and be done with it.

If someone can tell me how to regain use of my computer whilst using Avast! 2014 I will continue to hate the look of it so long as it does the job I've always trusted it to do. I'm using XP Pro SP3, FF v30 with no add-ons.

I've been an avid proponent of Avast! for many, many years and have referred countless friends and business associates. I actually do want to make this new version work. Any help will be appreciated.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Asyn on October 04, 2014, 08:38:24 PM
If someone can tell me how to regain use of my computer whilst using Avast! 2014 I will continue to hate the look of it so long as it does the job I've always trusted it to do. I'm using XP Pro SP3, FF v30 with no add-ons.
Start a new topic, we'll help you there.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: iroc9555 on October 04, 2014, 08:43:40 PM
If someone can tell me how to regain use of my computer whilst using Avast! 2014 I will continue to hate the look of it so long as it does the job I've always trusted it to do. I'm using XP Pro SP3, FF v30 with no add-ons.
Start a new topic, we'll help you there.

Stating all your problems in a new topic might help us figure out what is the matter with your sis. As you can see Asyn and I are running the latest and the Beta version of avast! with XP spk 3 with no problems at all.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 05, 2014, 01:04:08 AM
That's like intentionally turning off your passengers airbag in a car, basically...

Why on Earth you hate v2014 so much that you want to stick with an outdated WORSE version from 2 years ago? People keep on raging about it yet i'm still waiting for a logical answer. Because not using the very latest AV version is the most illogical thing you can imagine...
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: gordon451 on October 05, 2014, 01:38:42 AM
I do recall that after a clean installation of windows your system immediately got infected at the moment you connected to your ISP if you had no av installed.
You would get the message "Windows is shutting down in 60 seconds"

hmm wasn't it Blaster or something?

Da.  iroc9555 pinged it.

But see https://ixquick.com/do/metasearch.pl?query=Windows+is+shutting+down+in+60+seconds+malware&cat=web&pl=ie&language=english and https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Windows%20is%20shutting%20down%20in%2060%20seconds%20malware.

In every hit, we see (usually) Blaster picked up from some vector--web page, email, whatever.  I do recall several noteworthy people saying things like "The only virus on this disk is Windows"  :D  It wouldn't be the first time people have compiled dodgy media to pirate Windows and... accidentally?... included some malware  :o

Anyhow, it looks like this thread is nearly exhausted, I'm feeling very pleased with myself, and some gardening awaits.

@drake127 - gotta lite, and can I has skins?

Gordon.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: pmstewartt on October 05, 2014, 02:29:21 PM
I don't normally take time to post petty objections to software updates. But the forced update to Avast 2014 is absolutely worth time to comment.

Reading every reply in this thread I agree with most every viewpoint expressed! Bloat, difficult, ugly, unsightly, worthless and not the leader of the pack! Wow if I were
a developer my feelings would be trashed at this point. I looked everywhere to find nice comments about 9.0.2021 but none to be found.

Lets face it - over the last few years Avast (trusted and relied upon by millions) has fallen short of the goal of protection in favor of what appears to be changes which
will allow for increased revenue generation whereby pop up adds may start showing up in our system tray. Coupled with hiding all settings deep within dialog boxes
nested in dialog  boxes. Even going so far as to assume we want all actions to be automatic by default when something is found and not asking for user input at all.
Wrap it all up in 1 dimensional Windows 8 UI and it doesn't take 30 seconds after the upgrade to realize you've been bamboozeled!! We cannot turn off individual services anymore given the choice of ALL or NOTHING.

My personal interest is motivated by the hundreds of computers I manage for small businesses and personal customers who I've been recommending and installing
Avast for over 10 years. 1 computer to 10 computers at a time and now I will spend hours reconfiguring this software for each customer on each computer for FREE!
Not that I want to mind you but I cannot charge for each hour or so per computer to configure Avast individually. Not to mention the 8 computers at my business which
will take more than a day to uninstall all the things others complained about. Grime Fighter, Browser Integration, etc., and change all the settings to ask what should be
done.

As many have stated before we have looked for previous version installers which met our needs. Version 7.0.1464 seemed to be my all around savior. Yes I could jump
ship and move to a different product. Many antivirus products have come and gone over the years. Some have become integrated nightmares offering firewalls,
dishwashers, and "gee let me help you with that cuz you know nothing about computers" crap! Avast has remained within the top 3 rated products for years until
recently with streamlined precision. Why jump ship when over time using Avast is an investment in saving our bacon.

My plea to the developers as well as everyone who has posted in this thread is clear - if you expect to survive this rather large oversight in your development prowess several things MUST change. If a much superior product is being offered to us you really wouldn't have to underhandedly force this update! Instead what looks like a ploy to force all of us onto your new pop-up advertising campaign must stop and an apology offered. Along with the following three items addressed:

1. Allow all users who are forced to upgrade to have control over advanced install options so we can feel like the bloat is minimized.
2. GUI options must be offered to those running touch screens or desktops as well as Windows 8 or previous Windows versions. On size does NOT fit all!
3. Stop nesting simple program settings within dialog box after dialog box. If I want to turn off sound for automatic updates I shouldn't have to search all day for the
answer or watch a youtube video to help entering a simple global exclusion for scanning. Allow turning on and off of certain modules individually is a must when developing apps. We are not asking for
something we didn't already have.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 05, 2014, 10:58:15 PM
Quote
So what if you get an updated db an hour or two before I do, because I am checking once every two hours and you are having them streamed? What are the chances that in that 2-hr window (the longest window possible in this context) you are going to get one of the exact viruses included in that particular update, in that 2hr window?  Close to ZERO. Especially if you are a savvy user who does not engage in unsafe behaviors.

There is certainly nothing wrong with streaming updates if someone prefers them, but if you think that makes you significantly safer than checking every 2 hours, you must be constantly courting disaster.   
When the bad guys start spread malware with mail / facebook it goes fast, and then evry infected computer start spreading the malware, so it goes faster and faster.....that 2 hour window can be the difference of infected/not infected when that mail arrive in your inbox

If you are engaging in FB and other social networking, and using Web-based HTML-enabled email, then anything is possible because those ARE risky behaviors courting disaster. I don't do social networking and I use a stand alone email client config'd to text mode only... and always have. I don't even use the Mail shield in AVAST as I don't need it.

 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 05, 2014, 11:24:37 PM
I don't normally take time to post petty objections to software updates. But the forced update to Avast 2014 is absolutely worth time to comment.

Reading every reply in this thread I agree with most every viewpoint expressed! Bloat, difficult, ugly, unsightly, worthless and not the leader of the pack! [...]

Thought i would repeat this since a handful of fanboys here can't seem to keep track of all the reasons some users dislike the new AVAST and want to stick with v7. So boys.... read it all one more time. And the next few paragraphs I snipped for brevity, too.

Quote
As many have stated before we have looked for previous version installers which met our needs. Version 7.0.1464 seemed to be my all around savior.

It hit the sweet spot for sure, given the alternatives...

Quote
Yes I could jump
ship and move to a different product. [...] Some have become integrated nightmares offering firewalls,
dishwashers, and "gee let me help you with that cuz you know nothing about computers" crap!

I feel your pain.

Quote
Avast has remained within the top 3 rated products for years until
recently with streamlined precision. Why jump ship when over time using Avast is an investment in saving our bacon.

I got so frustrated I tried out a few others just this morning... two of the current 'top three' ...but I like v7 of AVAST and am going to stick with it for now.

Quote
My plea to the developers as well as everyone who has posted in this thread is clear -[...]

1. Allow all users who are forced to upgrade to have control over advanced install options so we can feel like the bloat is minimized.
2. GUI options must be offered to those running touch screens or desktops as well as Windows 8 or previous Windows versions. On size does NOT fit all!
3. Stop nesting simple program settings within dialog box after dialog box. If I want to turn off sound for automatic updates I shouldn't have to search all day for the
answer or watch a youtube video to help entering a simple global exclusion for scanning. Allow turning on and off of certain modules individually is a must when developing apps. We are not asking for
something we didn't already have.

+1 And

1. Please put back the OPT-OUT option still included in v7, for those privacy-conscious users who do not want information gathered and submitted anywhere, for any reason, anonymous or not. (The notice one could opt-out of data collection was missing from the installation screen of v8, so unless it's been included in later versions...)

2. Make cloud services optional with the ability to have at least the basic File scanner done on-premise if one so chooses (i.e. the traditional model), for those who do not want to use cloud services. If certain features require cloud services, make those features optional (such as Web rep which is the kind of bloat I disable anyway).


Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 05, 2014, 11:32:22 PM
[...] i can't understand why people use old outdated versions of antiviruses where being up to date at all times is top priority above anything else. Otherwise you may just as well not use any antivirus...

The db is up to date. If you think using AVAST v7 is no different than not using any AV at all, imagine any of the independent labs testing a machine with no AV, and one with AVAST v7.... (noodle that a minute).

Now imagine them testing a machine running AVAST v7 and AVAST v10.

If you think the difference would be anything but marginal, then by all means use v10.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 05, 2014, 11:42:10 PM
Quote
Especially if you are a savvy user who does not engage in unsafe behaviors.
A "savvy" user will not be using outdated security software.

Someone who uses the newest version of any software just because it's new, even if it doesn't meet their needs, is not savvy, but foolish. Maybe v10 meets your needs. It doesn't meet mine. Nor any vers since 7.

And an AV is only a safety net to a savvy user, not their primary security. Primary security is always user-minimized risk.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Dch48 on October 06, 2014, 03:40:27 AM
Quote
So what if you get an updated db an hour or two before I do, because I am checking once every two hours and you are having them streamed? What are the chances that in that 2-hr window (the longest window possible in this context) you are going to get one of the exact viruses included in that particular update, in that 2hr window?  Close to ZERO. Especially if you are a savvy user who does not engage in unsafe behaviors.

There is certainly nothing wrong with streaming updates if someone prefers them, but if you think that makes you significantly safer than checking every 2 hours, you must be constantly courting disaster.   
When the bad guys start spread malware with mail / facebook it goes fast, and then evry infected computer start spreading the malware, so it goes faster and faster.....that 2 hour window can be the difference of infected/not infected when that mail arrive in your inbox

If you are engaging in FB and other social networking, and using Web-based HTML-enabled email, then anything is possible because those ARE risky behaviors courting disaster. I don't do social networking and I use a stand alone email client config'd to text mode only... and always have. I don't even use the Mail shield in AVAST as I don't need it.
I use all those things,  including HTML email (I couldn't stand it any other way), and have never been infected by anything in 15 years on line. No matter what AV I was using all the attempts were prevented.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 06, 2014, 03:55:53 AM
For all those that are whining about version 2014 being slow on XP, look at my system specs.
2014 is running very smoothly, just like previous versions did.
If it doesn't on your system, you should get your system/software setup properly.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 06, 2014, 05:14:19 AM

Re: FB, social networking, HTML-enabled mail, etc.

Quote
I use all those things,  including HTML email (I couldn't stand it any other way), and have never been infected by anything in 15 years on line. No matter what AV I was using all the attempts were prevented.

You are either really lucky or just plain old exceptional. :) I would never want HTML-enabled mail (funny how we all have our preferences ;) ) even if it wasn't risky.

I have been online since 1988, when everyone used 300 baud modems and the hottest ticket in town were privatized services like Prodigy, CompuServ and AOL... plus the local bulletin boards. :) Then when the Internet went graphic in 1994-5 Netcruiser came out, the first Windows-based software and browser for cruising the net. Yahoo! was the search engine and the entire contents of the Internet was indexed on the main homepage like a book index with categories. 

In those early days viruses were famous for erasing the hard drive (all 20MB ... yes that's *MB*) ...or wiping certain critical files. Screwing up your system somehow so you'd have to reinstall everything... which back then took about 45 minutes, and that's if you had a lot of tweaks and stuff you'd do afterward (hello Win for Workgroups, 3.11). But while I reinstalled plenty of times it was never due to a virus.

My AVs found a few low-grade infections here or there over the years though. Nothing serious and could have even been false positives. But nothing for quite a few years now. Though I don't leave myself open so it it's not surprising. But overall my record, while not clean like yours, is pretty darn good for 26yrs online!


Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 06, 2014, 11:51:29 PM
Nothing wrong with using HTML email or Facebook or Skype and any other popular social media.
Remember that there are also safeguards to be set up in social media.
Beside, avast! also has your back while your on social media.
Using outdated software is dangerous enough. Using an outdated AV is flirting with disaster.
It's your machine so it's your choice. I've made mine. :) 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: 937carrera on October 07, 2014, 12:44:25 AM
Hello,
As I refuse on principle that anyone changes the contents of my computer without my permission, I made this operations to continue to operate under older version of Avast:
- Delete the updated 2014 version with the uninstall utility
- Install Zone Alarm firewall in manual / learning mode
- Download the installation soft of the chosen old version of Avast
- Disconnect the computer from internet
- Install the old version and parameter updates to manual
- Reconnect the computer to the internet
- Supervise Zone Alarm popups : Allow everything EXCEPT "EMERGENCY UPDATE" which must be banned / memorize the ban.

For now it works, I hope this will help.

That's pretty much what I did except that I allow the "emergency update" but stop the "avast_upd" I think it was that actually dowloads the new version.

FWIW I use an old version of ZA because it gives me much more control over what comes in and goes out through the firewall. They unfortunately went down the same bloatware route about 5 years ago.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 07, 2014, 12:50:58 AM
Hello,
As I refuse on principle that anyone changes the contents of my computer without my permission, I made this operations to continue to operate under older version of Avast:
- Delete the updated 2014 version with the uninstall utility
- Install Zone Alarm firewall in manual / learning mode
- Download the installation soft of the chosen old version of Avast
- Disconnect the computer from internet
- Install the old version and parameter updates to manual
- Reconnect the computer to the internet
- Supervise Zone Alarm popups : Allow everything EXCEPT "EMERGENCY UPDATE" which must be banned / memorize the ban.

For now it works, I hope this will help.

That's pretty much what I did except that I allow the "emergency update" but stop the "avast_upd" I think it was that actually dowloads the new version.

FWIW I use an old version of ZA because it gives me much more control over what comes in and goes out through the firewall. They unfortunately went down the same bloatware route about 5 years ago.
So you removed your protection and then went to the internet to download the older version of avast! ???
Going on the internet without any protection is pretty risky business.
If you insist on using the older version, then at least download all of the programs you need
to remove what you currently have and the installer for the version you intend to use.
Once that's done, you can disconnect from the internet and do the changeover in a safe environment.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: 937carrera on October 07, 2014, 12:58:01 AM
Fair point, I did actually download the old version 7 before uninstalling in offline mode.

I did reinstall version 6 which I already had saved, but that got "upgraded" so it was probably not the final build
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: CraigB on October 08, 2014, 11:38:04 AM
You should care how old the program is as the older the version the less protection you'll be receiving and version 5 quite frankly doesn't cut it in todays AV requirements and your extended family should be looking for another member who'll take better care of there systems ::)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 08, 2014, 01:16:02 PM
Quote
(all running W7)
So you use a fairly modern OS and protect it with a totally outdated AV ???
Even you have to admit that doesn't sound like the smartest thing to do.
There also isn't any compatibility problems in Windows 7 that would force you to use an outdated version of avast!.
Again, your computer(s), your choice. Certainly not a choice I would make for mine or those that depend on me to keep them safe.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 09, 2014, 12:40:46 AM
There's a big difference between compatible and capable.
The older version you want to use isn't as capable to give you the protection you could have.
Your computer, your choice.
Also my last comment since some folks have a preformed opinion and nothing will ever get them to change that opinion.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Dch48 on October 09, 2014, 01:41:34 AM
I note that the simple question, which forms the basis of my reluctance to update, is yet to be directly addressed: As long as the definitions are updated, who cares how old the program is?

If and when I hear a convincing argument as to why the updated versions are better – strictly in terms of defining/finding/blocking/destroying viruses – I'll consider updating, but not before.

I expected some level of devotion from members of the software provider's own forum, but it still seems like some of you guys have drunk the Kool-Aid and are asking for refills.  I would append that comment with "... no offence" but it seems ad hominem is the name of the game, on this thread at least; "another member who'll take better care of there [sic] systems", my eye.

There also isn't any compatibility problems in Windows 7 that would force you to use an outdated version of avast!.
My point was not that newer versions aren't compatible; it was this specific older version is compatible.
What's in the newer versions isn't just what you, and others, consider to be needless bloat. There are also improved detection and removal methods in each succeeding version. This is coming from someone who has not "drunk the Kool-Aid" because I don't even use Avast. It's pretty much true of all AV solutions. They have to keep getting better to try and keep up. The malware authors are continually looking for ways (and finding them) to get around detection methods so those methods have to evolve.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 09, 2014, 03:39:53 AM
We (sort of) support* only last builds of any major release, currently it's 1474 for v7, 1497 for v8 and obviously 2021 for v9. Any other builds are subject to be banned (which happened this week). We are still deciding what to do about remaining v5 (677, exceptionally not the last one) and v6 (1367). The updates set to manual are respected for these builds (and some other conditions apply) and you should be safe with them (as far as I can influence the decision).

*) take into consideration

Well, two out of my four home PCs (W7 64 bit Home Premium) just had a reboot sometime last night or today and new V9 was trying to install. I had V8 1497 on all my PCs.  I thought V8.1497 is a valid (supported, wink-wink, nod) install ?
Also, why on earth would you force a reboot and install of latest......this is just not right !!!!!!!! 
I've read the thread and if Avast is SO worried about compatibility then instead of the emergency update rebooting a PC and installing new software you should instead just put up constant warning messages that "this version/build is no longer supported, etc."  .....doing the other is just down right without consideration to your users....flat out wrong.

I am now restoring these PCs to early point back to V8.
Avast, will this heavy-handed intrusion to my PC(s) happen again or do I need to disable the emergency updater in the W7 Scheduler ?
So much time out of my day I cannot recover....I'm not a happy camper   >:(
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 09, 2014, 09:58:02 AM
If avast! is such an "intrusion", why don't you just move to some other solution and use that in an outdated form? Hating a security company just because they want to protect YOU in the best way possible is just silly. And keeping software up to date is a priority to achieve that. For what? For the fact you want to use outdated software to protect PC? It just makes zero sense.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 09, 2014, 10:33:03 AM
Okay! Just assume that Avast always notifies the user and the message says something like this. "The current Avast version 4,5, 6,7,8 is currently an outdated version of avast. Please upgrade immediately to get the latest updates/program/features" and they may have two options "upgrade later" or "Now". Just like windows update notifies users after it installed updates and requires restart.

It is also recommended to have not only update programs and software but also add-ons just as shockwave and flash. When ever a user has an outdated program of flash or shockwave a dialog box comes up saying that an upgrade is available for flash/shockwave. Here's the funny thing and I have seen many people do it, still at present. They just press "upgrade later" no matter how many times the dialog box appears.

I am sure the avast users that have a very outdated version of avast they will apply the same principle like it does for shockwave player and flash and if they do upgrade and they don't like the new GUI and etc etc they will just uninstall the new upgrade and keep using the old version for good. "UNBELIEVABLE".

WHAT AVAST! TEAM AND DEVELOPERS NEEDS TO DO IS TO STOP ALL NEW DOWNLOADS AND INSTALLATIONS OF OUTDATED VERSION OF AVAST! JUST LIKE MICROSOFT DID THEY STOPPED ALL NEW DOWNLOADS OF MICROSOFT SECURITY ESSENTIALS FOR UNSUPPORTED WINDOWS XP AND WINDOWS VISTA.

For Educational purposes they can decide when ever they want to upgrade.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 09, 2014, 11:13:06 AM
And people will just click "Update later" forever. Been there, seen that way too many times...
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 09, 2014, 11:51:38 AM
And people will just click "Update later" forever. Been there, seen that way too many times...

Yeah many years ago I even used to do that, until I found out what is the purpose for doing it. What Avast! needs to do is to take actions as per my bold writing that I mentioned! When avast! does that users (except for educational purposes) with old outdated version of avast will no longer be able to download or install old outdated version of avast. All they need to do is to install the latest version of avast, get used to the GUI, ask questions and help to and from us, get assistance for us. All it takes is just an effort from them? How hard can that be? That's what this forum is for! As threats grows and increase so does antivirus programs. There's are reasons why antivirus vendors change GUI (for quick and easy access to options and features) and increase and make protection features better than before.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 09, 2014, 01:02:30 PM
Yeah, obsession to change GUI every year is a bit annoying. When features require drastic redesign fine, but not just for the sake of changing it. This way they could keep it always forced updated to latest version and users wouldn't even know about it.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 09, 2014, 05:08:43 PM
You guys are missing the point........you think Avast knows what is best for evey user....that is total BS.
My point and others on this thread is that the PC is owned by the user NOT Avast.
The "Manual" selection should mean something....else why is it there ?.....MS allows you to choose what/when to install.
Avast 9 may be solid now but it was a POS of stability when it came out.
I've been on this forum for a year watching people have issues....many their own, some Avast.
So, like a good PC user I want new software....especially one that is by nature intrusive to the PC....to have some time to have some stability revs before I jump in the deep end.
Other people have their reasons for their decisions.......the point it is not Avast's decision to force a install and reboot !!!!!

I do agree with the point, if Avast does not want to support a version then the solution is to stop doing the database updates.
This will force the users to make a decision.  For me I was on V8 build 1497 which Avast Team says is "supported"...but their happy feet to heavy hand a force install mucked up two of my PCs which I am not happy about.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: DavidR on October 09, 2014, 05:51:05 PM
<snip>
This will force the users to make a decision.  For me I was on V8 build 1497 which Avast Team says is "supported"...but their happy feet to heavy hand a force install mucked up two of my PCs which I am not happy about.


A comment from an avast team member was that they supported (sort of) the last build of the major numerals - that wouldn't include your 8.0 build 1497 as the last 8.0 build was 7.0.8.0.1506

There were three builds after your build though they were considered as 'Support version for migration to AVAST 2014.' I don't know if because of these 'Support version for migration to AVAST 2014' builds somehow the update checking function is looking at build 1497 and saying it isn't the last build in avast 8.0, etc.

However, more to the point of this build 7.0.1474 topic, that too wasn't the last build in avast 7.0, build 7.0.1474 was. So again there may be issues when checking for the last build being supported, but that support would only extend to the virus definition updates, not fixing any bugs in that build - these would likely have been resolved in the 8.0 and or 9.0 versions.

http://www.avast.com/en-gb/release-history
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 09, 2014, 07:14:55 PM
Quote
You guys are missing the point.......
Actually the ones missing the point are those who have no problems running the latest version but still
insist on running something outdated.
You installed the product to keep your system and information safe and then tie it's hands by attempting
to continue the use of old versions.
I have to admit, it at least gives some a reason to argue. Not much else but it's a good topic for getting some things off your chest.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 09, 2014, 08:33:57 PM
A comment from an avast team member was that they supported (sort of) the last build of the major numerals - that wouldn't include your 8.0 build 1497 as the last 8.0 build was 7.0.8.0.1506

I think that build was pulled because of issues....the last "solid" build was 1497...hence the Avast Team post:
We (sort of) support* only last builds of any major release, currently it's 1474 for v7, 1497 for v8 and obviously 2021 for v9
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 09, 2014, 08:39:09 PM
Quote
You guys are missing the point.......
Actually the ones missing the point are those who have no problems running the latest version but still
insist on running something outdated.
You installed the product to keep your system and information safe and then tie it's hands by attempting
to continue the use of old versions.
I have to admit, it at least gives some a reason to argue. Not much else but it's a good topic for getting some things off your chest.

My "point" is that Avast has no right to brute force an install.
Let's take this a step further.......lets say V9 is 100% rock solid...great.....wow, no argument.
My "point" is that I set my update to manual for a reason, some others may as well.
For Microsoft and every other flippin company out there when things are set this way the software doesn't reboot and install on its own.
The risk ?..........I remember last Fall when V9 came out and the combo of stability and Bloatware made it a POS...a liability.  So, for "me" I want to wait until I feel comfortable to make the change.....perhaps I'm more conservative or slower than you....no argument.  The "point" is it should be up to the user to decide when/how/if they upgrade software on their (not Avast's) PC.
Again, if Avast is worried about "compatibility"....but more likely having to support.....just stop the database updates.

So, this thread is about "forced updates".....mine just happens to be V8, OP was V7.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 09, 2014, 09:51:53 PM
What's in the newer versions isn't just what you, and others, consider to be needless bloat. There are also improved detection and removal methods in each succeeding version. [...] It's pretty much true of all AV solutions. They have to keep getting better to try and keep up. The malware authors are continually looking for ways (and finding them) to get around detection methods so those methods have to evolve.

Hey Dch. I think anyone who has used computers for any length of time realizes this, not just about AVs, but all programs. The thing is (and what The Guard here refuses to understand, present company excepted), is that some of us are of the opinion any difference in real world performance between the version we prefer (7.0.1474 from 2012) and today's version would be marginal at best. IOW, v7 still does a good job and some of us are satisfied with any potential trade-off that might exist. If any. In fact, if you could quantify the actual difference in detection and cleaning rate, then weigh that against the chances of getting the exact types of infection(s) where that marginal improvement would make a difference... well that doesn't mean too much to people who never get infected anyway.

I understand the drive for some people to keep their software updated at all times. But not everyone feels that way. And it's funny that at least one of the staunchest supporters and most outspoken members here who have been attacking people who prefer to use a 3yr old version of AVAST, is himself using XP... an OS that is much less safe than W764, and extremely outdated. Yet it must serve his purposes and he must prefer it for his own reasons. And who am I to care if that choice ends up serving him or biting him in the behind? Fact is, I don't. It's his business what sftw he runs, and it's my business which sftw I run. But funny how he can't understand wanting to use older sftw for whatever reasons, when he himself does it.

Regardless, (and it's been said many times now)... AVAST has no right to update sftw when a user has the config set to manual only. If they want to stop supporting a version, the user should get a popup saying it will no longer receive db updates starting on a certain date. But it shouldn't be replaced by AVAST against a user's wishes.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 09, 2014, 09:58:29 PM
The real question is...
Do people want the best possible protection/detection or not?

If not, install Windows 95 (or something like that) and put a pure dos av on it.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 09, 2014, 10:16:38 PM
The real question is...
Do people want the best possible protection/detection or not?

And the very clear and self-evident answer for ALL the people on *this* forum is No, They Don't (because AVAST is not the top-rated AV by ANY independent lab tests, not even in the top 3). But what people understand is there is no perfect AV, so they pick the one they like best, that does a good *enough* job... and many people have traditionally liked the AVAST interface, it's boot time scanner, and configurability. So there is a bit of a trade-off between people picking the absolute highest rated AV program, and one that does a good enough job and appeals more personally for whatever reasons... including the fact it's free.

So you see, it isn't all about getting "the best possible protection/detection" ... or none of us would be using AVAST. It's about finding a balance between protection and convenience, compatibility, and many other factors. And those exact factors are different for each user.

Quote
If not, install Windows 95 (or something like that) and put a pure dos av on it.

Apparently you are the one who should take your own advice, if this is how you feel, because you are not using the best protection/detection out there.

The rest of us are fine with simply using a good enough program.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 09, 2014, 10:27:20 PM
Quote
And the very clear and self-evident answer for ALL the people on *this* forum is No
And you are all people?
Quote
because AVAST is not the top-rated AV by ANY independent lab tests
Since when are you able to know how tests are actually performed and how to look at the results? Guess what, avast did not get over 220 million users just by it looks.
Quote
Apparently you are the one who should take your own advice, if this is how you feel, because you are not using the best protection/detection out there.
Wow, you must be physic or something if not how do you know what protection I have... :P
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 09, 2014, 10:46:08 PM
Quote
And the very clear and self-evident answer for ALL the people on *this* forum is No
And you are all people?

99.9% on this forum are AVAST users... and read the rest.

Quote
because AVAST is not the top-rated AV by ANY independent lab tests
Quote
Since when are you able to know how tests are actually performed and how to look at the results?

Please. Are you implying there is a conspiracy among the independent labs to pull AVAST out and test it unfairly to attain a skewed negative result? Why not just admit you're wrong, and you DON'T use the "best possible protection" because like the rest of is, good enough is good enough? (Oh yeah, b/c you put your foot in your mouth with that one since that's exactly how those of us feel who use v7 vs 9 or 10.)
 
BTW you don't have to go all the way back to Win95 to suggest an unsafe, outdated OS... XP will do. Oh wait, you use XP, so I guess that's why you didn't want to suggest that one.

Like I said... we all have our reasons for using the sftw we do.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 09, 2014, 11:00:52 PM
The real question is...
Do people want the best possible protection/detection or not?

No, that is not the question or even the subject of the thread.
It is not up to Avast to decide what people want.
They have the choice to support what they want and do not want and people can make decisions based on those trade-offs.
Avast has absolutely zero right to force a reboot and install.
Show me in the EULA where the user has given up this right to Avast ?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 09, 2014, 11:08:53 PM
The real question is...
Do people want the best possible protection/detection or not?

No, that is not the question or even the subject of the thread.

No, but it is ironic that Eddy brought that up when he himself does not use the best possible protection, since AVAST is not the best possible AV. Plus he uses XP, according to his posts, which means he also chooses to use an old and outdated OS - yet he is chastising people here for wanting to use an older version of AVAST. Go figure.

Quote
It is not up to Avast to decide what people want.
They have the choice to support what they want and do not want and people can make decisions based on those trade-offs.
Avast has absolutely zero right to force a reboot and install.
Show me in the EULA where the user has given up this right to Avast ?

It will be interesting to see if AVAST learned anything from this. Let's hope so.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 09, 2014, 11:22:08 PM
Quote
No, but it is ironic that Eddy brought that up when he himself does not use the best possible protection
I just say one thing. You don't have any clue at all about how and with what I have setup the security. So either prove what you say or shut up.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 09, 2014, 11:23:50 PM
It will be interesting to see if AVAST learned anything from this. Let's hope so.

I truly hope so.....I DO have tremendous respect for the people on this forum who spend countless hours helping.
I also DO like Avast and want them to provide the best solution as possible.
I'm hyper sensitive to this subject because many, many, moons ago AVG upgraded from V8 to V9 overnight and bricked countless PCs...it was horrific. 

I truly think Avast can accomplish their goal of migration by "softer" tactics that ultimately have the same end result.
I hope they are listening.  8) 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 09, 2014, 11:45:15 PM
Quote
No, but it is ironic that Eddy brought that up when he himself does not use the best possible protection
I just say one thing. You don't have any clue at all about how and with what I have setup the security. So either prove what you say or shut up.

Eddy, do you not use AVAST? ... and XP?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 09, 2014, 11:59:28 PM

Quote
My "point" is that Avast has no right to brute force an install.
@thekochs,
Actually, they have every right. You also have rights.
If you don't like what they rightfully did to keep your system safe, you can always exercise your right.
Turning this into another one of your novels isn't going to change the facts. :)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 12:24:11 AM

Quote
My "point" is that Avast has no right to brute force an install.
@thekochs,
Actually, they have every right. You also have rights.
If you don't like what they rightfully did to keep your system safe, you can always exercise your right.
Turning this into another one of your novels isn't going to change the facts. :)

No, they didn't have the right to do that, regardless of the reason. One could make the case that supplying the user with a choice to update manually is the equivalent (in the eyes of the law) of a binding agreement that AVAST broke when it forced an update that was in direct opposition with the user's stated choices for using that software. If a CEO whose computers became inoperable due to said update decided to sue AVAST for breach of contract, lost productivity and revenue, it would be interesting to see how it would play out in court. Especially when the proper remedy would have been even more easily deployed than a series of forced updates... a simple popup informing the user that version of AVAST was at end-of-life and would no longer receive db updates. An optional button to let AVAST update the machine could have been made available, if AVAST saw fit, along with a button to DECLINE, letting the user/admin decide his or her best course of action. And AVAST would've kept its user-base happy. No one loses. No one would be complaining [about this anyway]. A win/win.

 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 12:33:29 AM
@bootsy,
You have the same right as everyone else. If you aren't happy, .....

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 01:12:50 AM
@bootsy,
You have the same right as everyone else. If you aren't happy, .....

Walking away from a breach of contract is a right, but addressing said breach is a right too. You seem to be overlooking that one.

Users have the right of expectation that when a supposedly reputable company gives them choices about how they can use that company's software, those choices will be honored unless the company alerts them otherwise, first. If people installed AVAST and it warned them that the program might update to a newer version willy nilly against their wishes, even if they chose manual updates, you can bet those users who need or want manual updates would have looked elsewhere for an AV. It is not a trivial configuration setting that AVAST ignored. And users have every right to respond to that breach, whether they ALSO choose to walk away or not. Hopefully instead of losing users AVAST will re-think it's move in light of the RESPONSES... which it why it IS important users respond... so that AVAST can improve its customer support by NOT doing that in the future. If the company doesn't respond to its user base, then 'walking away' will no doubt be the next right people exercise.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 10, 2014, 02:32:19 AM
@bootsy: Read my reply#71 and RejZor reply #72 of page 5. Let me know what you think?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 10, 2014, 03:34:36 AM

Quote
My "point" is that Avast has no right to brute force an install.
@thekochs,
Actually, they have every right. You also have rights.
If you don't like what they rightfully did to keep your system safe, you can always exercise your right.
Turning this into another one of your novels isn't going to change the facts. :)

Sorry, you & Avast are wrong on this one....flat out....I'm not sure what subsidy they provide you to defend them but money/perks well spent I see. So show me in the EULA where I signed my rights away to allow them to install without notice new software ? http://files.avast.com/files/legal/eula-avast-free-2014.pdf

If they truly want to "protect" their customers they will inform them of major changes and allow for the customer to decide. You know, I think they actually do this......my fault...it is called "manual setting" for updates. BUT, Avast ignores this unlike every credible software package of merit out there that honors this.  I get it, Avast doesn't want to support all these versions..........fine, just stop providing the database updates.  People will upgrade or change....done.  However, the point is doing a force install and reboot to a machine for "upgrade" purposes is wrong....plain and simple.  I truly hope Avast listens and does the right policy going forward.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 04:12:40 AM
@bootsy: Read my reply#71 and RejZor reply #72 of page 5. Let me know what you think?

First, I appreciate the fact that you suggested a fix rather than just criticize people who have pointed out the problem.

Before I comment, we are talking about (I assume) not just an old version, but an old version that AVAST is retiring. A version that will no longer be receiving updated viral databases. B/c (separately?) it sounded like you were trying to make the point AVAST should not make ANY older versions available, and I disagree with that (if that's what you were saying). AVAST understands they will keep more users if they maintain the last x-number of versions. 

So as to the versions they retire, before it gets to the point where your suggestion would kick in, it would be nice if AVAST sent a popup alerting the user to the fact that the version of AVAST they are using will be reaching it's end-of-life "in 30 days" (60 would be better for admins, but 30 at least gives them some time) and will no longer be receiving viral updates after that date. That an update will be offered and required in order to remain protected. (edit: IOW to remain protected they need to choose to upgrade... not that AVAST would force it.)

Then in the last 2 weeks or so, an "Update Now" or "Update Later" button would be fine... if someone wanted to use an older version that is still supported, they could always click "Update Later" then uninstall the software at their leisure and install the version they want, manually. (As I certainly would, even if I installed the newest version... I never let a software company or the Web install programs for me.)

Now the question in this hypothetical is, does AVAST care if people choose to be lazy and run an old version that is not getting viral updates until they get around to installing a new AV, whether it be AVAST or a different AV? If AVAST wants to terminate all use of a retired version, they can make it unusable at the end-of-life date, as long as the original popup states it will no longer function after said date [and AVAST gives the user plenty of notice (min 30 days)]. That's fair, it's their software (esp the free versions), if that's what they want. And the user will have to update through the UI or manually, or look elsewhere for an AV at that point.

If, OTOH AVAST hopes the longer a user sticks with AVAST the greater the chance they will upgrade to it again when they finally get around to upgrading, then after that end-of-life date passes a popup could continue to remind the user they are no longer protected and need to update. A nag. The longer the user sticks with the retired version, the more frequent the nag might appear. That's fair too. And will remind the user their AV is no longer providing adequate protection against new malware.

As for the second post commenting people will just keep clicking Update Later button... an AV is not something users will ignore forever once it is no longer getting viral updates. And that part of it is really up to AVAST. Whether they want to make retired sftw stop functioning or not. As long as they give the user plenty of notice and don't update the user against their will... the user will eventually either click the update button or install something else on their own.

And if AVAST allows the sftw to continue to function and the user does not upgrade, that's on the user. But I can't see too many people continuing to use an AV that is not getting viral updates.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 10, 2014, 04:44:23 AM
It's not even that complicated. AVAST stated that they wanted to maintain the last minor in several major versions. As I pointed out way back in post #43, "If a user had an older minor version of v7, and AVAST was worried about keeping one build for each major version, then why were users forced to update to a higher major version? Instead of the way it was done, they could have just forced the last minor version and accomplished their goal".
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 05:18:53 AM
It's not even that complicated. AVAST stated that they wanted to maintain the last minor in several major versions. As I pointed out way back in post #43, "If a user had an older minor version of v7, and AVAST was worried about keeping one build for each major version, then why were users forced to update to a higher major version? Instead of the way it was done, they could have just forced the last minor version and accomplished their goal".

I happen to agree with you 100% that this would have been the best solution for users in such a situation. But some people were using major versions they were retiring from what I understand, like version 4. (And Drake made it sound like retiring v5 may not be far behind, though that 5 and 6 were safe for the time being whatever that means, relatively speaking... I got the impression the decision to retire major versions was happening without much planning and spur of the moment, but that was just my impression.)

And software companies don't generally update software to old versions, even when they are still supported. The more common model is to update users to the newest possible version available, thinking it will have fewer bugs and be more effective. The problem is, people who stick with older versions have reasons for that... sometimes hardware, sometimes other things... so while it would be nice if they had offered to upgrade v4 users to v5 to at least keep it as close as possible, that kind of thing isn't likely to happen. (And certainly they won't bother to write programs to designate updating to a supported build of the same [old] version.) If a user wants to use an older version of ANY software they generally have to track it down and manually install it.

And many would have if they would have known 2 things:

1. that they had to ... and
2. which build of their chosen version was still being supported

I had no idea the last build of each major version was the only build supported until Drake said it here. I just HAPPENED to be using the last major build of v7 and lucked out. Again, AVAST needs to communicate these things to users.


Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 05:41:19 AM
I should add that I do understand AVAST has to streamline maintenance, esp on its free programs... so I don't expect them to write a gazillion different upgrade programs to please everyone. I understand the one size fits all approach is virtually necessary ... but since one size DOESN'T fit all, that's why they cannot force updates against a user's settings. And it would be nice if they communicated to users which versions/builds are supported, and when the end-of-life dates will be. This could even be an update of the website info with a popup telling people to check there.

Then users could take the necessary steps so that AVAST would not HAVE to update people against their will b/c they already would have done the updating themselves. We all want to be in compliance after all! Just don't pull the rug out from under us... give us info and let us help ourselves.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Dch48 on October 10, 2014, 06:04:06 AM
This is how I see this thread. Nobody is saying that v9 is not better than any older version. The crux of the complaint is that people who have turned auto updates off in older versions were still apparently force fed v9. After reading all the posts on all the various sides of the issue, I have come to the conclusion that they have the right to be upset with the forced updating. They should have been presented with some form of notice recommending the update and giving the reasons for it. It should also be a choice.

Sometimes there are advantages to keeping older versions of software. Compatibility with an older Windows version is just one. Personal preference is another valid one. In a different, but related context, drivers very often do not need to be updated and in many cases shouldn't be if no problems are being experienced. Some newer drivers also have bugs and you need to roll back to the previous version. For those reasons, hardware vendors do not force driver updates on anyone.

The bottom line is that people should be able to use whatever they want if it is still supported by the vendor and works sufficiently well for their needs.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 10, 2014, 06:06:07 AM
Bootsy! So how long/how many years you will keep using Avast! 7? Let's say for example Avast! gives users with old aged outdated avast! users advance notices saying that they will completely drop support and drop VPS support for avast! 4,,5,6, & 7 start of next year and only Avast! 8,9, 2015 (soon to be released as final) will be supported? Will move straight away to Avast! 2015 or move to Avast! 8 or 9?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 10:26:38 AM
So we have now reached page 3 of a topic devoted to 'Crying over spilled milk".
That milk by now has been stirred so many times it's starting to turn into butter.
Soon, we'll have buttermilk. When you consider a user base of 220 M, the number of
those participating in this thread, is minuscule.
Since the few apparently have nothing better to do with their lives, the sage continues.
The end result was already spelled out in reply #3 but it wasn't what those that are dragging out this thread
wanted to hear.
So we'll apparently continue with more meaningless chatter. I hope to live long enough to see reason prevail and
those that wanted to keep their computer less protected, realize that there eventually needs to be an update to your program.
Even Microsoft realized that XP couldn't be supported for ever.
Get real and realize that there are times when change is for the better and holding on to something old isn't the best thing to do.
The current version of your anti virus program should never turn into an antique.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 07:20:27 PM
Bootsy! So how long/how many years you will keep using Avast! 7? Let's say for example Avast! gives users with old aged outdated avast! users advance notices saying that they will completely drop support and drop VPS support for avast! 4,,5,6, & 7 start of next year and only Avast! 8,9, 2015 (soon to be released as final) will be supported? Will move straight away to Avast! 2015 or move to Avast! 8 or 9?

If the notice was that v7 would reach end-of-life in Jan 2015, I would continue using AVAST until last week or so of Dec, giving AVAST as much time as possible to work bugs out of the current, newest version. Then I would try it one more time to see if anything changed. If I was still unhappy with it my 1st choice would be one of the 2 leading AV's (I won't mention by name out of deference to the fact I am on an AVAST forum), but the one I like doesn't work with Comodo FW and I like my Comodo FW. So I would either do more research to see if anyone has been successful at marrying those two,  or go with my 2nd choice, which I know works with CFW, but I did not like the UI/configuration choices as much as I like AVAST v7.

But by the last few days of Dec I would be using a different AV, one way or another.  It may not be AVAST, however.

And btw, I plan to try the newest version of AVAST regardless in maybe a year, as I don't like using an AV that is TOO far out of date. For others, too far out might be v7 now... for me I am willing to ride it another year, unless I start having problems and my secondary OD scanner starts finding things v7 starts missing. But as long as it's doing a good job, no need to fix what ain't broke.

@Dch - agreed completely.

@bob3160 - It's funny how you complain about the subject matter of this thread being a waste of everyone's time... as if someone is holding a gun to your head forcing you to read it. Referring to the views on this thread as being "miniscule compared to the # of users" is a lame attempt at minimizing the obvious interest in this thread... we know only a small portion of users participate in the forums at all, and the sheer number of views proves the subject IS of interest to MANY people, even if not you....  So read it and weep. Or stop reading it. But your complaints about it are the only parts of this thread that are truly useless to AVAST in terms of feedback, and to the other readers who would like to see this resolved in the future, hoping that perhaps some of the suggestions here might be taken into consideration by AVAST in the future. So feel free to continue to bluster and blow, but you are only blowing all over yourself.
 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 10, 2014, 07:31:25 PM
They don't have the right to force update it? Who are you? King of the world? They designed it and if they feel force updating it to provide best protection, they have every single right to do so. And despite several pages of whining i still haven't got a reasonable reply on why the hell you'd want to use outdated versions.

I've installed v2014 to prehistoric Pentium 4 systems with 1GB RAM and it worked just fine. Using it on Window 8 tablet. Working just fine. using it on weak AMD E-450 laptop. Guess what, works just fine. Using it on ancient AMD Turion laptop, yep, works fine. So, what's your excuse? I'll also not get people who complain over interface. All settings that were available 5 years ago are still there + more. The fact that you really rarely open AV's interface makes its design rather unimportant. They change it, you'll just have to get used to it like with billion other things in life that change over time. v2014 was a huge step forward and v2015 will be just a tiny update of it as far as interface goes. And considering i've been tracking avast since version 4.1 nearly a decade ago, interface has onyl evolved to the better. v2014 was in my opinion the biggest step forward by dropping all the old remnants of the interface architecture that has been trailing over since version 5.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 07:34:41 PM
Since the few apparently have nothing better to do with their lives, the sage continues.

Funny thing though, the 'few' you refer to want to be here to see this resolved in the future, so they have a vested interest in reading and participating in this thread. You have no reason by your own admission, yet continue to read (AND post!). So who is the one with nothing better to do?  Looks like you from where I stand.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Pondus on October 10, 2014, 07:38:19 PM
Quote
   The fact that you really rarely open AV's interface makes its design rather unimportant.     
+1   
 i install and forget so for me it could look like something from win 3.11 time   ;)
The only thing i want is easy to navigate when i look at it

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 07:51:52 PM
Since the few apparently have nothing better to do with their lives, the sage continues.

Funny thing though, the 'few' you refer to want to be here to see this resolved in the future, so they have a vested interest in reading and participating in this thread. You have no reason by your own admission, yet continue to read (AND post!). So who is the one with nothing better to do?  Looks like you from where I stand.
So now you not only continue to post in this mute topic but you also have the gall to tell others not to participate ???
I suggest you find something better to occupy your time.
Maybe help some of the people in here that have legitimate concerns and/or problems. :) 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 07:54:30 PM
They don't have the right to force update it? [...] They designed it

Yes, and they designed it to allow the user to OPT OUT OF FORCED AUTO UPDATES and so have no right to override that setting without prior notice, especially since the default is to allow updates so a user must specifically change that setting to prevent them. It is bad business at best and could also be seen as breach of contract. Considering the remedy would have been a simple popup giving notice, to argue against that is to be unreasonable for the sake of being unreasonable. 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 07:58:33 PM
Since the few apparently have nothing better to do with their lives, the sage continues.

Funny thing though, the 'few' you refer to want to be here to see this resolved in the future, so they have a vested interest in reading and participating in this thread. You have no reason by your own admission, yet continue to read (AND post!). So who is the one with nothing better to do?  Looks like you from where I stand.
So now you not only continue to post in this mute topic but you also have the gall to tell others not to participate ???

You can participate all you want, bob, but it's YOU that is complaining about the thread.

Quote
I suggest you find something better to occupy your time.
Maybe help some of the people in here that have legitimate concerns and/or problems. :)

That sounds like excellent advice for you... since you believe the problems here are not legitimate and you have 25k posts under your belt, why not spend your time helping people you have determined need help. Your determination in this thread, by your own admission, is that it should have been over several pages ago. Right? Isn't that what you yourself said?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 08:16:31 PM
I am already helping others. Are you not capable of doing the same ?
Is arguing in this thread really that important ?
You seem to forget who's product this is. If it were yours, then you could decided what you can and can't do.
As long as you still continue to argue your 'point'. You'll also need to accept the views of others.
By now you should have gotten the message that your viewpoint isn't the prevailing one.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 08:39:39 PM
As long as you still continue to argue your 'point'. You'll also need to accept the views of others.

And your viewpoint, as you yourself said, was that this thread was "crying over spilled milk" and 'should have been over pages ago' which in affect was rejecting everyone's POV who disagreed with YOU, telling the entire thread that NO ONE should be posting here anymore... (unless of course it was to agree with you...). A sentiment I *don't* share. If YOU were accepting of other people's POVs, you would be passing by this thread without telling everyone here it is a waste of time and should have been over.

Devotees of software can do a lot of good on forums like this one... spending hours upon hours helping people... but with some people, the more they post to a forum the more they begin to think of it as their private sandbox and their ego's become inflated and soon they become intolerant of differing points of view. And there is certainly a lot of that here from the sandbox boys. Attempting to belittle and attack people. You have done it in this thread. Eddy has done it, Sheep has done it... several of you. That doesn't mean you have the prevailing viewpoint. It just means you are the most outspoken bullies on the forum. Or at least on this thread. Imho.  Luckily bullies don't bother me.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Techknow on October 10, 2014, 08:50:46 PM
Devotees of software can do a lot of good on forums like this one... spending hours upon hours helping people... but with some people, the more they post to a forum the more they begin to think of it as their private sandbox and their ego's become inflated and soon they become intolerant of differing points of view. ... That doesn't mean you have the prevailing viewpoint. It just means you are the most outspoken bullies on the forum. ... Luckily bullies don't bother me.

Well said.  Bullies do bother me.  I haven't read most of this thread, so I have no idea if what you wrote applies here.  But your words above are so true in general that I had to take a moment to give it a +1.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 10, 2014, 08:53:41 PM
Quote
Devotees of software can do a lot of good on forums like this one
That is true, and Bob (and many others) are doing so.
Quote
but with some people, the more they post to a forum the more they begin to think of it as their private sandbox and their ego's become inflated and soon they become intolerant of differing points of view
Also true and you are a perfect example of it.
Quote
It just means you are the most outspoken bullies on the forum.
If there was a reward for it, you are sure the most favorite candidate to get it.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 08:59:31 PM
Quote
Devotees of software can do a lot of good on forums like this one
That is true, and Bob (and many others) are doing so.
Quote
but with some people, the more they post to a forum the more they begin to think of it as their private sandbox and their ego's become inflated and soon they become intolerant of differing points of view
Also true and you are a perfect example of it.
Quote
It just means you are the most outspoken bullies on the forum.
If there was a reward for it, you are sure the most favorite candidate to get it.

Please Eddy, quote one post of mine where I am bullying someone who disagrees with me. (Or anyone, for that matter.) I have been the focus of attack here because I am not intimidated by you. And because your arguments are false and empty and I am easily able to expose that.  If the bullies feel bullied because the intended victim reflects their ire back at them.... well.... that's what bullies get.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 10, 2014, 09:02:14 PM
Post #111

No, my arguments are not false and empty.
You just don't understand how things are working and how/why they are done.
That is something we can't help you with.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 09:18:57 PM
Post #111

Is this supposed to be reference to a post of mine? For some reason my interface does not show post #s, so please supply a link if this is supposed to be an example of my bullying someone. Or is post #111 the one right above?

Quote
No, my arguments are not false and empty.

Really? Earlier you chastised the people here who want to use v7 by saying everyone should use the "best defense possible" ... then I pointed out AVAST isn't a top rated AV, so you aren't using the "best defense possible" because like the rest of us, good enough is good enough, and we prefer AVAST. You replied that I don't know anything about what security you use, so I should "shut up." I answered by saying "Eddy, you use AVAST, do you not? And XP?" and you never answered, because of course you do, and of course AVAST is not "the best defense possible" and XP is an old and outdated OS no longer supported by MS and hasn't been for years.

So yes, Eddy, your arguments in this thread have been empty and false, and you don't like me b/c I pointed it out. But it's not my fault. I am not making your arguments, you are. It's too bad they're just so bad

Quote
You just don't understand how things are working and how/why they are done. That is something we can't help you with.

Right. OK, then, don't try. It's ok. Let the people here who were upset about the upgrade have their say without attacking them, and let AVAST (hopefully) review the posts and decide if there is anything of worth in this thread to take forward with them in order to help ensure future brand and user loyalty. Because after all, this is about AVAST, not about the egos on this board who just don't like some newbie disagreeing with them.

And BTW, I do help others as well, but on the MyDigitalLife and Seven forums. And I don't doubt the people who have been bullies in this thread have spent a great deal of time helping people in other threads. That doesn't excuse the behavior in this thread, however.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 10, 2014, 09:25:59 PM
They don't have the right to force update it? [...] They designed it

Yes, and they designed it to allow the user to OPT OUT OF FORCED AUTO UPDATES and so have no right to override that setting without prior notice, especially since the default is to allow updates so a user must specifically change that setting to prevent them. It is bad business at best and could also be seen as breach of contract. Considering the remedy would have been a simple popup giving notice, to argue against that is to be unreasonable for the sake of being unreasonable.

Bad business for what? Trying to keep you safe? Trust me, old outdated version is not doing that job too well compared to very latest versions. Which are released for that very reason and not just because they are bored. Just update the damn thing and let it go. I just don't get it why all this drama about a thing that is pretty much top priority to perform with security software. One thing is forcing a user to update a media player which, unless there is a critical security issue with it doesn't need updating. Antiviruses or security software in general HAS to be updated as often as possible to provide best protection. If you can't understand this, then we just can't help you in any other possible way...
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: 937carrera on October 10, 2014, 09:27:00 PM
Does nobody else find it ironic that the forum "Uberevangelists" (not my description, but the one granted by the forum software) have no room in their minds for any other perspective but their own, yet the representative of Avast understood that what the company has done goes against its previous methods of operation and values that Avast has held

I have probably been using Avast for longer than many others on here, having used it since at least version 4 when there were two icons. What was the reason I moved to Avast ?.............because Mcafee became bloated when that moved away from simple AV and each new improvement / feature meant it performed worse for me. More recently look at Windows 8 and what a poor success that has been. Newer isn't always better !

I am willing to accept that my preferences may not suit others, but they suit me and I'm not going to be an evangalist in imposing my view on others, all I will do is share my view, neither will I be converted or be a sheep.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Eddy on October 10, 2014, 09:27:07 PM
Bootsy, get out of that carousel.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 09:39:16 PM
They don't have the right to force update it? [...] They designed it

Yes, and they designed it to allow the user to OPT OUT OF FORCED AUTO UPDATES and so have no right to override that setting without prior notice, especially since the default is to allow updates so a user must specifically change that setting to prevent them. It is bad business at best and could also be seen as breach of contract. Considering the remedy would have been a simple popup giving notice, to argue against that is to be unreasonable for the sake of being unreasonable.

Bad business for what? Trying to keep you safe?

No, for trying to keep their user base. There are many choices for AVs, including other free ones. If AVAST wants to keep its user base, and more importantly - grow it - it needs to respect its user base by not pulling the rug out from under it and updating the program against the user's chosen settings.

If, OTOH, AVAST does not want to have to cater to the user's choices in this matter, then they need to remove the setting for manual updates and those who do not want forced updates can find another AV that allows for disabling auto-updates.

And btw, it does not keep a user safer to update them to an AV that crashes their entire system. All it does is cause preventable time loss and headaches for the user. In the instances it did NOT cause a problem and the user was ok with it, that's great. But that didn't happen in every case b/c one size does NOT fit all and that's why notice is required before doing such a thing.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 09:59:12 PM
Quote
There are many choices for AVs
There certainly are and most of those that leave from here aren't gone for very long.
You also have that choice after you received your answer in reply #3.
But, you're still here trying to convince others that staying with something old
is best. That statement is fine when I tell that to my wife. It isn't good when we're talking about keeping your computer safe.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 10:00:10 PM
Does nobody else find it ironic that the forum "Uberevangelists" (not my description, but the one granted by the forum software) have no room in their minds for any other perspective but their own, yet the representative of Avast understood that what the company has done goes against its previous methods of operation and values that Avast has held

Drake127 was the voice of reason and was 100% not defensive because he knows this is just business. And the first rule of business is, listen to your user base. It will lead a company to further improvements, more users, more success, etc. 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 10:13:53 PM
Quote
There are many choices for AVs
But, you're still here trying to convince others that staying with something old is best.

Please quote me where I say staying with something old is best, as an absolute statement across the board applied to everyone, as you are implying here? I have said no such thing.

In fact I have said several times if the newest version of AVAST suits you, great, use it. I have also said I will be trying the newest version again in the future, as I don't want to use v7 for longer than another year (and that's assuming my secondary scanner doesn't start finding things v7 starts missing before then.)

I have only said *some* people for their own reasons prefer or need an older version of AVAST, and that choice is also valid for those people.

If you are going to attempt to mischaracterize my posts, please provide a link. 
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 10:59:49 PM
Quote
There are many choices for AVs
But, you're still here trying to convince others that staying with something old is best.

Please quote me where I say staying with something old is best, as an absolute statement across the board applied to everyone, as you are implying here? I have said no such thing.

In fact I have said several times if the newest version of AVAST suits you, great, use it. I have also said I will be trying the newest version again in the future, as I don't want to use v7 for longer than another year (and that's assuming my secondary scanner doesn't start finding things v7 starts missing before then.)

I have only said *some* people for their own reasons prefer or need an older version of AVAST, and that choice is also valid for those people.

If you are going to attempt to mischaracterize my posts, please provide a link.
Pardon my ignorance but if that wasn't your intention then why are you still debating about retaining the old version ???
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 10, 2014, 11:07:49 PM
Quote
There are many choices for AVs
But, you're still here trying to convince others that staying with something old is best.

Please quote me where I say staying with something old is best, as an absolute statement across the board applied to everyone, as you are implying here? I have said no such thing.

In fact I have said several times if the newest version of AVAST suits you, great, use it. I have also said I will be trying the newest version again in the future, as I don't want to use v7 for longer than another year (and that's assuming my secondary scanner doesn't start finding things v7 starts missing before then.)

I have only said *some* people for their own reasons prefer or need an older version of AVAST, and that choice is also valid for those people.

If you are going to attempt to mischaracterize my posts, please provide a link.
Pardon my ignorance but if that wasn't your intention then why are you still debating about retaining the old version ???

Apparently you need to re-read the thread if you aren't even sure what it's about. 

(EDIT: Read the thread title for a hint. This was about AVAST updating users to the newest version when they were using an old version for a reason **and** had manual updates chosen. So when the OP complained about this he was attacked by the fanboys here for wanting to use an older version, and they never stopped attacking whoever was supporting the idea of using an older version of AVAST, even though AVAST itself STILL SUPPORTS MANY OLDER VERSIONS. The point was never that EVERYONE should use an older version -- as you tried to claim just now -- and no one here ever said that. But you already know that. So again, more BS.)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Staticguy on October 10, 2014, 11:15:42 PM
Users like me weren't starting a debate or such things! We simply telling users with old aged out-dated avast antivirus to upgrade to 2014. 2015 RC1 (just released & not to far away for the Official release). I agree with Rejzor reply#104 and Eddy's comments. Our job is to let users know that outdated programs not good enough and simply stating common sense. Rejozor comment on reply#104. Even though he has new/old system configuration and avast still works! Even though I had Windows Vista OS couple of years ago I had avast installed and at present Windows 7 SP1 installed Avast still running excellent as always! Simply complaining about Avast GUI is just a poor bad excuse and also I have read one of the comment made here is that they turned off the heurestics because too much false positive. Get over with... report to avast... false positive is common in antivirus softwares!!!!!
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 10, 2014, 11:39:05 PM
Enough bull I'm finished with this nonsense. The answer has already been given 100 times.
Continue your novel. Bye
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 11, 2014, 12:00:04 AM
Users like me weren't starting a debate or such things! We simply telling users with old aged out-dated avast antivirus to upgrade to 2014. [...] Our job is to let users know that outdated programs not good enough and simply stating common sense.

Did it ever occur to you that the people you are posting to are much older in many cases, with much more experience on computers than you have? That know better what's best for them (or their company) than you do? You don't have a job here, you have a hobby. On top of that most of the replies were not just "advice from well-meaning people trying to help steer users in the right direction" but posts that ridiculed and attacked the people who wanted to continue to use an older version for their own VALID reasons.

The entire emphasis here should never have been on attacking people for using older versions, but on what can be done going forward to help users that ARE using older versions remain in compliance with AVAST and it's schedule of retiring software, going forward, without getting updated against their will again. Because happy users will stay with AVAST, and unhappy users won't. And since this is an AVAST support forum that IS the point and purpose.

Quote
Simply complaining about Avast GUI is just a poor bad excuse

For the umpteenth time, the GUI is annoyance but it was never the sole reason people wanted to stick with an older version, from what I read... and I read the entire thread so far. However it IS important to have a UI one is comfortable with especially since this IS security software. And it's certainly a factor in judging how much one likes or dislikes a program, whether it be an AV or a word processing program. And AVAST needs to near what people think about its UIs, along with the rest of the program.

Quote
and also I have read one of the comment made here is that they turned off the heurestics because too much false positive.

Something I would not do, but that is certainly their choice and why it upsets YOU, I don't know.

The regulars here take everything far too personally. This is just an AV and people are just wanting to work out the best way to use it going forward, and if someone says they want to use an older version that is still being supported, that is just as acceptable as using the newest version from everyone ELSE'S POV as it's not up to YOU or ME to decide which supported, active version of AVAST someone should use. Sure, make a point, politely, that the newest version is best if it works out for them... but if they don't like or want it for WHATEVER reasons, LET IT GO.

Bob complained about the length of this thread, but if everyone would just have accepted some people want to use old versions, none of the 'fighting' would be here, and the thread would be about 1 or 2 pages long. Or actually, it might have been longer but more productive, b/c the actual SUBJECT of the thread might have been discussed and more people might have joined in if the atmosphere wasn't poisoned by attacks.

To your credit, StaticGuy, you are one of the only ones who, while opposed to anyone using an old version, at least put forth a proposed solution to not getting updated without notice again. THAT's the direction this thread SHOULD have taken, as that addressed the SUBJECT and OP's concern.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: dc10boy on October 11, 2014, 04:46:11 AM
I use v7, it used to be 7.0.1466.  I'm writing here because I know the devs read these forums.

This evening it decided (despite my Update Setting {PROGRAM>Manual}) to give me v9.0.2021.  It was uninstalled exactly 30 seconds after reboot.

The exact same thing happened to me!My XP 64 bit rig was running 7.0.1506, due to its lack of overhead and previous problems updating.All my updates were selected to manual (I NEVER selected update program) and it still force fed me an update on reboot.After reboot I was left with a hung machine with a black screen and a mouse pointer.My machine was a paperweight!After I called tech support they so graciously told me my operating sys was hosed and they could fix it for 179$.I went into safe mode and removed Avast, and all was well.I found a copy of v7.0.1474 and installed that. again all was well.All further attempts to update to the latest version both clean executable and program updates leave me with a black screen dead machine.This is a widespread problem, talk of it is all over the interwebs and this needs to be addressed now!

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: thekochs on October 11, 2014, 03:09:26 PM
Uber-Posters.........WE GET IT...old is bad, new is good.
Even if I can get by that BS and say OK.......the point of this thread is not which version of Avast is better and why you should or should not upgrade.....it is an argument not to be won.  Those who have not upgraded have their own reasons....if the ones that haven't because...."oooppppps I didn't realize" then they will.....but quit beating on the ones who clearly have their legit reasons......you want a novel from me on why I have not ?.........no, of course not......as pointed out some of the Ubers are still using XP......but are they attacked for that ?....no, they have their reasons.

The  flippin point of this thread is NOT, I repeat NOT the above.  It is the fact Avast does not have the right to and should not be re-booting peoples machines with forced upgrades when the user explicitly has said not to (via the Manual setting).
To your own "Uber Forum" rules.....stick to the OP subject.....
OP: "This evening it decided (despite my Update Setting {PROGRAM>Manual))......I am going to be more than unhappy if ever I am lumbered with a v9 as a program update again"
The emergency update is there to "protect" the user from a bad code or VBS update that Avast needs to backtrack on....it is NOT there to force updates especially when Avast on its own decision has put in a MANUAL setting for updates.  Every valid/reputable software company (which Avast is) puts this decision selection in for a reason....it is right thing to do.  Again, I get why Avast is pushing (and why the Ubers are pushing) for upgrading.  However, Avast can simply accomplish the same thing by just stopping the VBS updates.....LEAVE MY PC ALONE !!!!!!!!! Did I say that LOUD ENOUGH..........LEAVE MY PC ALONE.   >:(

So, to hopefully end this thread let me give a solution.
For those who want to stay on older version and delay upgrade.....set update to Manual and Disable/Delete the Emergency Update for Avast in the Windows Scheduler.......that'll do it.  It is a shame this has to be done.....but if Avast cannot be trusted with using heavy handed techniques then more drastic measures needed.

P.S. I will keep posting as long as folks want to argue.....I got no where to go but sit on this forum.  :P  ;D
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 11, 2014, 10:28:40 PM
My Comodo Firewall log was getting large amounts of "AvastEmUpdate.exe" traffic. Use at your own risk, but this is what I did to remedy the situation:

If AVAST will respect your file property settings, this will permanently kill the Emergency Updater.. Since making these changes the Comodo Firewall no longer has to contend with this traffic. BTW, all along I have had the "Task Scheduler" service disabled. As always, YMMV.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 11, 2014, 10:40:37 PM
My Comodo Firewall log was getting large amounts of "AvastEmUpdate.exe" traffic. Use at your own risk, but this is what I did to remedy the situation:
  • Go into the AVAST directory and rename "AvastEmUpdate.exe" to "AvastEmUpdate.exe.off".
  • Create a new blank text file and renamed the file to "AvastEmUpdate.exe".
  • Select the newly created "AvastEmUpdate.exe" file and change the file properties to 'Read-only'.

If AVAST will respect your file property settings, this will permanently kill the Emergency Updater.. Since making these changes the Comodo Firewall no longer has to contend with this traffic. BTW, all along I have had the "Task Scheduler" service disabled. As always, YMMV.

How fortuitous! I was just dealing with this last night. I thought I'd disabled it a long time ago, but noticed it had re-created itself. I happened to follow the same path you did, but forgot to set the text file to read only. D'oh! As to Task Scheduler, do you mean you disabled the entire TS service, or just the AVAST task? I tried the latter last night and AVAST just created a new task at reboot. I don't mind disabling the entire TS service, but wasn't sure if W7 uses it for anything important. It was late at that point and I shut down b/f looking into it further, putting is aside for today... then your post. :) Thanks, bud!
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: DavidR on October 11, 2014, 10:44:46 PM
@ Duran
Avast does have integrity checking, so it may check the integrity of this file replacement hack and replace it. Only time will tell.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 11, 2014, 10:50:04 PM
@ Duran
Avast does have integrity checking, so it may check the integrity of this file replacement hack and replace it. Only time will tell.

Good to know, David, and I saw that when I did not change the properties and my fake AvastEmUpdate was immediately replaced with the real thing.  ;D  "Curses! Foiled again!" ... actually... this is a good thing to add to the list of suggestions for the AVAST team... the ability to turn Emergency Update off.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 11, 2014, 11:08:10 PM
As to Task Scheduler, do you mean you disabled the entire TS service, or just the AVAST task?

I'm using Windows XP. In Windows XP the Task Scheduler service is not critical and can be disabled -- which I have had disabled for years.

Doing a cursory search for the Task Scheduler in Windows 7, I'm under the impression that Windows 7 depends greatly on the Task Scheduler set to automatic for "system-critical tasks". Funky!
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 11, 2014, 11:13:33 PM
@ Duran
Avast does have integrity checking, so it may check the integrity of this file replacement hack and replace it. Only time will tell.

Yeah, it's possible that AVAST would disregard my file property settings. However, I made this change on 2014-10-05 and the file has not been replaced. I wanted to wait a week before posting to see if that would happen. As you say, time will tell, but so far it is sticking.


Edit: Fixed the wrong year in date.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 11, 2014, 11:22:04 PM
Quote
the ability to turn Emergency Update off
Nice so that if there was a reason to reverse something that might be causing a problem, this function wouldn't work. ???

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: 937carrera on October 11, 2014, 11:23:42 PM
I'm using my ZoneAlarm firewall to prevent the updates. I believe thare are two types:

Avast EmergencyUpdate ; this does not seem to be the direct problem, I suspect it is downloading new detection methods, and is a new type of activity.

AvastUpd ; This seems to be the exe responsible for updating the program version.

I have mine setup to prompt every time Avast wants to do something other than definition updates. I can then decide on each occasion if I want the firewall to allow the traffic (My naming might not be precise above). This approach prevents auto updates and restores the control that we thought we had through the Avast config options.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 11, 2014, 11:49:51 PM
Quote
the ability to turn Emergency Update off
Nice so that if there was a reason to reverse something that might be causing a problem, this function wouldn't work. ???

Gee, bob... didn't you say you were leaving this thread several posts back?

As to the above, since there is no tinkering being done with the old versions, this isn't really a concern.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 11, 2014, 11:52:12 PM
Quote
the ability to turn Emergency Update off
Nice so that if there was a reason to reverse something that might be causing a problem, this function wouldn't work. ???

Gee, bob... didn't you say you were leaving this thread several posts back?

As to the above, since there is no tinkering being done with the old versions, this isn't really a concern.
Considering you've changed the topic, this required a reply.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 11, 2014, 11:59:59 PM
As to Task Scheduler, do you mean you disabled the entire TS service, or just the AVAST task?

I'm using Windows XP. In Windows XP the Task Scheduler service is not critical and can be disabled -- which I have had disabled for years.

Doing a cursory search for the Task Scheduler in Windows 7, I'm under the impression that Windows 7 depends greatly on the Task Scheduler set to automatic for "system-critical tasks". Funky!

Thanks, Duran. Wouldntyaknowit! A quick check seems to concur... it does run too many necessary Win services and it's not recommended to disable it. But I have some ideas... will try them out first. :)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 12, 2014, 12:11:14 AM
I'm using my ZoneAlarm firewall to prevent the updates. I believe thare are two types:

Avast EmergencyUpdate ; this does not seem to be the direct problem, I suspect it is downloading new detection methods, and is a new type of activity.

AvastUpd ; This seems to be the exe responsible for updating the program version.

It would certainly be handy to know exactly which file/process is responsible for what kind of update. Maybe if DavidR is still reading, he'll be able to shed some light on this.

Quote
I have mine setup to prompt every time Avast wants to do something other than definition updates. I can then decide on each occasion if I want the firewall to allow the traffic (My naming might not be precise above). This approach prevents auto updates and restores the control that we thought we had through the Avast config options.

A reasonable approach... only problem I see is still not knowing what it is they are asking to update (when ZA alerts you). A bug? OK. A definition? OK. A newer version??? In my case since AVAST doesn't provide that info, I'd just click NO every time... so I just as soon disable it, period, and continue getting def updates.

That said, I would like to know if EMUpd is the culprit or not. It will do no good to block the wrong process.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 12, 2014, 12:21:28 AM
Quote
the ability to turn Emergency Update off
Nice so that if there was a reason to reverse something that might be causing a problem, this function wouldn't work. ???

Gee, bob... didn't you say you were leaving this thread several posts back?

As to the above, since there is no tinkering being done with the old versions, this isn't really a concern.
Considering you've changed the topic, this required a reply.

I see. So you left but were lurking. And your "required reply" did not happen to apply to old versions. OK, thanks for clarifying.   
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: DavidR on October 12, 2014, 12:30:25 AM
I'm using my ZoneAlarm firewall to prevent the updates. I believe thare are two types:

Avast EmergencyUpdate ; this does not seem to be the direct problem, I suspect it is downloading new detection methods, and is a new type of activity.

AvastUpd ; This seems to be the exe responsible for updating the program version.

It would certainly be handy to know exactly which file/process is responsible for what kind of update. Maybe if DavidR is still reading, he'll be able to shed some light on this.
<snip>

Updates are handled by C:\Program Files\AVAST Software\Avast\Setup\instup.exe, but it handles all updates not just this initial VPS one - messing with that could cause more issues than it is likely to resolve. The mod to the .ini file is relatively easy and shouldn't come in for any integrity checking as files do.

Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 12, 2014, 12:40:48 AM

Updates are handled by C:\Program Files\AVAST Software\Avast\Setup\instup.exe, but it handles all updates not just this initial VPS one - messing with that could cause more issues than it is likely to resolve. The mod to the .ini file is relatively easy and shouldn't come in for any integrity checking as files do.

Thanks for that insight, David. I don't think anyone wants to mess with the instup file. But then what is the EmUpdate used for, if you know? Is it responsible for updating machines running retired versions (maybe among other things)?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: DavidR on October 12, 2014, 12:53:50 AM
Well as an avast user not employee I'm not privy to exactly what the emergency update function does now; it has changed a couple of times in avast program version updates. There have been occasions in the past after a VPS update that it cause some grief, not being able to get updates and the manual updates didn't/weren't able to resolve it. There was an impasse, catch 22 as such.

Its very name indicates that it shouldn't be that frequent, that an emergency update happens - but it checks for the presence of an emergency update on the avast servers to resolve anything like that.

That is why the emergency update check was initially introduced - I believe it could also be possible for it to resolve a program bug without the necessity to do a full program update.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 12, 2014, 04:54:18 AM
Well as an avast user not employee I'm not privy to exactly what the emergency update function does now; it has changed a couple of times in avast program version updates. There have been occasions in the past after a VPS update that it cause some grief, not being able to get updates and the manual updates didn't/weren't able to resolve it. There was an impasse, catch 22 as such.

Its very name indicates that it shouldn't be that frequent, that an emergency update happens - but it checks for the presence of an emergency update on the avast servers to resolve anything like that.

That is why the emergency update check was initially introduced - I believe it could also be possible for it to resolve a program bug without the necessity to do a full program update.

Now see, that's why we want to know because none of those things are what people are trying to avoid. That said, the ESU service does seem to create problems in some cases that end up manifesting as slowdowns / bottlenecks. And we'd still like to know [from an AVAST rep] if it wasn't also responsible for the involuntary version updates. There would be a whole lot more trust with regard to these services with more transparency. I know AVAST might think users don't care what all this stuff does, but yes, we do... especially when one of these update services overrode user settings for people using older versions. Those of us using v7.0.1474 (and v6/v5) don't want to find ourselves in the same boat a few klicks down the road. And for those using v5 it might be sooner rather than later. Possibly v6 too.

As a complete aside, I hate to play devil's advocate but I am not that crazy about a software model that has an emergency update service call at every boot. It sounds to me like a bad direction to go in, as it could potentially encourage sloppy coding by providing a safety net for it.

Yes, if used rarely as a true fallback position for when every precaution was taken but a mistake or oversight slipped through, that's one thing, but I would rather have to update to a new build on those rare occasions than have an Emergency Update service running at every boot. JMO. And all to say I myself don't mind disabling it at this point. If AVAST did without it before, it can do without it now AFAIC. (Of course I am using an old version no longer in development so the chances of needing an emergency update for any of the above is close to nil.)
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Techknow on October 12, 2014, 06:04:00 AM
... I am not that crazy about a software model that has an emergency update service call at every boot.

I agree, and was surprised when they added a scheduled task by default.

Perhaps instead of having a scheduled task, Avast could have a Start Menu shortcut called 'Fix Avast'.  If for some reason Avast is so messed up that it cannot heal itself, the user could click on that shortcut to fix any major problems.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 12, 2014, 07:23:36 AM
... I am not that crazy about a software model that has an emergency update service call at every boot.

I agree, and was surprised when they added a scheduled task by default.

Perhaps instead of having a scheduled task, Avast could have a Start Menu shortcut called 'Fix Avast'.  If for some reason Avast is so messed up that it cannot heal itself, the user could click on that shortcut to fix any major problems.

I really like the idea of a user-initiated action rather than a task, but unfortunately I can't see AVAST writing a diagnostic tool for each different [active] version/build... that would be costly on their end even for paid versions, and I would imagine most of their market or a good portion of it uses the free product.

However (while this will never happen) I like the idea of having the existing Emergency Update service (no rewrite necessary) as a button in the UI (ok, small rewrite), and if AVAST has determined an emergency update is necessary to fix a bad VPS update or the like, a popup could inform the user of the problem being fixed, and request they run the Emergency Update (button could be on the popup too - whatever is cheaper to code). Then we would know what is being updated before initiating it, and if it was an end-of-life update, we could just manually install whatever next supported version we choose to, instead of clicking the button.

But AVAST would see this as having to ask user-permission to maintain its own program which is unreasonable (and from their POV I agree), and using EmUpd without user knowledge or intervention is the most efficient and streamlined (read cost-effective) way to do it. 

It's just that their move to update sftw against the user's config settings has decreased the level of trust in the company, and that has the effect of compelling people to want to monitor everything they do to their PC because they didn't use common sense, and you have to ask yourself, when will they lapse in judgement again? So short of allowing the user to initiate any emergency update (armed with the knowledge of what's being updated), it would be nice if they admitted they were wrong to do what they did, promise to never do it again, and allow us to go back to trusting them.

But, uh... in the meantime I am disabling Emergency Update.  ;D
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Pondus on October 12, 2014, 09:58:44 AM
Quote
If for some reason Avast is so messed up that it cannot heal itself, the user could click on that shortcut to fix any major problems.
that option already exist

ad/remove programs > avast > uninstall/change > repair option......



Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 12, 2014, 11:40:14 AM
Emergency Update is when broken update takes down entire user access. So you can't really click through to the repair function... But emergency update can.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 12, 2014, 08:58:33 PM
Emergency Update is when broken update takes down entire user access. So you can't really click through to the repair function... But emergency update can.

Do you happen to know, RejZoR, if the Emergency Update is also the process used to force a program update, even when set to manual, when a build or version reaches end-of-life?
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Duran on October 13, 2014, 12:24:09 AM
Do you happen to know [...] if the Emergency Update is also the process used to force a program update, even when set to manual, when a build or version reaches end-of-life?
I believe AvastEmUpdate is responsible for the forced update. Moments after allowing AvastEmUpdate Internet access, my v7 install was forcibly updated to v8, not v9. About a day later AvastEmUpdate asked again for Internet access, that's when I permanently firewall blocked it, which resulted in many blocked entries in the log to various servers. And I mentioned above how I fixed that. Which, BTW, is still sticking.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 13, 2014, 01:19:20 AM
Do you happen to know [...] if the Emergency Update is also the process used to force a program update, even when set to manual, when a build or version reaches end-of-life?
I believe AvastEmUpdate is responsible for the forced update. Moments after allowing AvastEmUpdate Internet access, my v7 install was forcibly updated to v8, not v9. About a day later AvastEmUpdate asked again for Internet access, that's when I permanently firewall blocked it, which resulted in many blocked entries in the log to various servers. And I mentioned above how I fixed that. Which, BTW, is still sticking.

Good deal, Duran. I set the properties on the imposter text file to read only and this morning AVAST had created AvastEmUpdate.exe.temp that was 247kb just like the real file, but weird it was given the .temp extension. I then went into COMODO FW and waited several minutes for all the trusted files to load to see if AvastEmUpdate.exe was listed among them, and it was, so I moved it to blocked. The Task Scheduler task remains disabled. So we'll see how it goes.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: Michael207 on October 14, 2014, 08:38:00 AM
I am with pmstewartt and bootsy, agreeing with most of what they said.

I use Avast since years and if somebody asked me, which AV to use I suggested Avast.
But since the last updates, I am very unhappy.

Here in Germany we are not used to have inline ads all the time, pushing you to buy things you don't want at all.
I don't want to get notified that there are some MB that can be cleaned away, or some programs could be erased because they are slow.
I am a user from beginning on, more than 25 years now and I had my share of fails.

I don't mind the Win8 look of the GUI, but please give us some switches and control back, so we can switch off the constant telling of which program could be updated, which space I could save and stuff like that.
That might be good advise for rookies, but frankly said "I don't give a rats ass" for those notifications, they just annoy me.

It used to be a good software, doing what it's supposed to do, but now?
I am a mature and responsible citizen, I don't need them to tell me what might be good for my computer.

One example:
lately I went online to do some Online-banking stuff and went into Safe-Zone. There I did my deeds and saved some CSV and PDF files for further usage.
After getting out of the Save-Zone, my files were gone... what a shock !!!
There was no notification at all, giving you ideas how to reach your files.
Only after digging around I found out that these files will be left in the Zone and you are not at all able to get them out once the Zone is configured automatically by Avast the first time. It didn't ask me than, if I want to have some save place where I can reach the files.
You can reach them only when you boot in Admin mode, dig into some directory structure and get your files from there.
What was that??

This is supposed to keep people to stay with Avast? No, not with me.

Next year when the paid period is done, I will switch to something better.

This is just an example, how the whole concept of this software has changed.
They are only looking for profits, more profits than they did selling the paid versions.
Well they can do, but not with me.



Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: RejZoR on October 14, 2014, 08:42:52 AM
I don't know about what controls you're talking about, but they haven't taken any away, they have jjust added them. And you can remove GrimeFighter or Software Updater through Programs and Features and just remove them entirely. Or not install them in the first place the same way.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bootsy@mailinator.com on October 15, 2014, 05:45:54 AM
@Michael207... unfortunately if you let AVAST update for you (or if it did so without your permission) it will install all the modules -- that is, every feature -- by default. If you are not familiar with the modules or features which change somewhat with each new major version, you can read the website to see what they are. This will allow you to decide which ones you want, and which ones you don't.

Then, as RejZoR mentioned, you can go to Control Panel -> Programs and Features and dbl-click on AVAST then choose CHANGE in the left AVAST pane. You should be able to uninstall the modules you don't want.

In the future if installing AVAST from scratch manually, choosing the CUSTOM INSTALL option in the initial installation screen (which is somewhat hard to spot) will allow you to uncheck features you don't want, giving you control over the install. The "Express Install" option which is the easy one to spot will install everything by default.

Hope this helps... and btw in the settings of the version (v7.0.1474) I use there is a tick box that can be unchecked so I won't be offered  "AVAST recommended features" or "social networking features" ... if you are using a paid version (mine is free) it's hard to believe they are running ads through your interface, unless there is a way to turn them off. Maybe another user can help with that.
Title: Re: 7.0.1466 updated to 9.0.2021
Post by: bob3160 on October 15, 2014, 11:26:08 AM
Quote
In the future if installing AVAST from scratch manually, choosing the CUSTOM INSTALL option in the initial installation screen (which is somewhat hard to spot) will allow you to uncheck features you don't want, giving you control over the install. The "Express Install" option which is the easy one to spot will install everything by default.
If you still need further help or clarification, check this out:
https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=93544.msg1083374#msg1083374 (https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=93544.msg1083374#msg1083374)