Avast WEBforum
Other => Viruses and worms => Topic started by: MWassef on November 20, 2007, 03:17:51 PM
-
http://www.pcwelt.de/start/software_os/sicherheit/news/81346/index2.html
-
Not on the page you gave the link to it isn't.
avast! is in 8th, avg is in 9th, see image. There are also some other strange results in this listing symantec is in 5th, but more interestingly is, bitdefender in 11th and nod32 in 16th
-
if you checked the results here:
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcwelt.de%2Fstart%2Fsoftware_os%2Fsicherheit%2Fnews%2F81346%2Findex2.html&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
AVG is better detecting Backdoors, Bots (zombies) & Troj. Horses. Avast is only better in detecting worms.
IMO, AVG is getting better & better.. ???
-
IMO, AVG is getting better & better.. ???
All serious program gets better and better. AVG is not an exception.
As usual, testing with a particular malware pattern will give you different results. avast won't be the best in all of them, or even in the majority of them. I think there is room to improve avast detection so far. I've thought Kaspersky would have a better position...
-
The image is the collation of all the different malware types and to me that is the figure that should be looked at. You can't be selective in a particular area of malware as you haven't a clue as to what you will be attacked with/by.
I didn't see what version of avg it was perhaps the AVG Anti-Malware that included the anti-spyware (which is a paid option), in any case there is nothing to stop you using avg-as as a back-up or SuperAntiSpyware to improve overall detection, as you are doing having installed SpywareTerminator.
-
AVG Anti-Malware that included the anti-spyware (which is a paid option), in any case there is nothing to stop you using avg-as as a back-up
David, I think ewido is avgas and it's reported later in that list... so, AVG seems to be only the antivirus. But I'm not sure. Maybe you read something different.
-
I don't know why call it ewido something which changed over a year ago to avg-as.
-
I don't know why call it ewido something which changed over a year ago to avg-as.
Neither do I... but it's there.
Does it say anything about the reliability of the test itself? ???
-
I wouldn't bet the odds off just yet. Why i'm always returning from others to avast! are minor details in free edition.
avast! can check for updates every hour. Antivir and AVG can do that only once per day. Imagine the 24 hour time window without any possibility of getting new urgent update (unless by clicking Update button all day long, but i have other more important things to do than this). Just check 18.11.2007 day. 3 updates in few hours timeframe. You'd have to wait for the rest till monday with AVG or AntiVir.
Second is spyware detection. Antivir and AVG free have no such capability while avast! doesn't make any difference between free and payable. Third is configurability. AntiVir is the only here that comes near avast!, AVG is just too limited.
There is also no nag popups in avast!. That annoying popup has turned me away from AntiVir regardless of how superior detection it has.
And lets don't forget tech support and ALWIL guys constantly in contact with their regular users (having loyal users, be it free or payable certanly can pay off greatly i think). ALWIL team also takes very good care for regular users that help here. And best of all, we can actually shape the product, give new ideas and so on (quiet some of them implimented are mine and from users like Tech, SasH and DavidR and few others). It's really a pleasure to use product that has features that fit your needs and wishes.
-
I couldn't agree more RejZoR, the on-demand scanning test is only one aspect of selecting an AV. Yes if it were rubbish then that would be a huge negative factor, but avast is far from rubbish as this and many other tests show.
-
I have been the user and technician in one of the computer centre...
as i know and in my exprience....avg is the worst...
i suggest to take avast as 4 the av....
avg still bad in removing the virus....
look in avast...it have the boot scan program...
all virus can be romove by it...
-
I dont't agree with the subject.Avast is different from AVG on many antivirus functions.
Even much more.Sometimes,I feel AVG In some virus detection rate no higher avast.
So,there's not many comparability between them.
-
Hi,
avast! can check for updates every hour. Antivir and AVG can do that only once per day. Imagine the 24 hour time window without any possibility of getting new urgent update (unless by clicking Update button all day long, but i have other more important things to do than this).
Hmm... Ok. Let's now see what the update holds..
For AntiVir, the threats are quickly injected in database, even if the update is done once a day.
For Avast!... the threats are injected in database between 8 - 15 days after detected (i.e.: just scan files at VirusTotal).
So.. perhaps the updates are done frequently. But they don't get the last protection... because the main Avast! database isn't update yet.
A few examples: Bagle, Virut, Vundo (security toolbar variant), MSN & WL messenger worms (I'm helper in french security forums for a year now, and never seen avast! founing this kind worms).
Sorry for bad english. By the way, I know i'm on Avast! forum.. Just wanna tell the truth, the facts..
-
Hmm... Ok. Let's now see what the update holds..
For AntiVir, the threats are quickly injected in database, even if the update is done once a day.
For Avast!... the threats are injected in database between 8 - 15 days after detected (i.e.: just scan files at VirusTotal). So.. perhaps the updates are done frequently. But they don't get the last protection... because the main Avast! database isn't update yet. A few examples: Bagle, Virut, Vundo (security toolbar variant), MSN & WL messenger worms (I'm helper in french security forums for a year now, and never seen avast! founing this kind worms).
You're right. I agree.
Sorry for bad english.
Why?
-
I have the lovely privilege of maintaining our computers at the office, 4 Win towers in house, 4 Win laptops and 1 Linux server. We were using AVG free, then I got my U3 drive that ran Avast and upon insertion, Avast found infections. After many months of chasing the infections I have found that no one program does it all or platform (anti-virus vs anti-spyware, etc). One computer was running Norton IS along with WebRoot and still had an infection. So, I have an arsenal of removal tools now and I try to check all once a month, very hard with the laptop people. Things are better now but I will still find an infection every now and then. So I have three rules, 1. check with multiple platforms, 2. check regularly, 3. don't trust anyone or anything fully because nothing is perfect and people lie or just don't know.
A wish of healthy computers to you all! And good luck to all that maintain them. ;)
-
Hi,
3. don't trust anyone or anything fully because nothing is perfect and people lie or just don't know.
Just true !
By the way, I'd say that there's no "best protection" when you're talking about viruses, trojans ... cause they "change" too much.
It's getting difficult to have a really good "black list", and we must count on other abilities of software (e.g.: heuristic detection, HIPS).
The main solution I found is to be on the Net with a securised explorator (e.g.: Mozilla Firefox + NoScript + AdblockPlus + CookieSafe plug-in), a firewall, and an antivirus guard up-to-date. I think (only my point of view), that an AntiSpyware is not required if you don't click everywhere.
Good night everyone !
-
I used it have Avg Free edition and it did absolutely nothing, not even protect my system when it was infected with multiple Trojans and worms.But on the other hand Avast detected almost everything that Avg missed.
Let's look at how many shields Avg free has:
*Resident shield
*Mail scanner
Let's look at how many shields Avast home has:
*Resident shield
*Mail shield
*P2p shield
*Network shield
*Im shield
*Web shield
*Outlook shield
Avast also has more effective heuristics than Avg's ineffective heuristics.
The only reason many people choose Avg free is that it's light on memory and easier to use compared to Avast.
-
And the memory thing isn't as clear cut as avg has elements running at kernel level and that doesn't show up in the memory used. As you also mentioned avast has more providers so would use more memory. Memory really is a poor indication as RAM is so cheap and most people have reasonable amounts of RAM not to be unduly concerned about the small amount avast uses, which when compared to many major AVs is relatively light.
-
I have the lovely privilege of maintaining our computers at the office, 4 Win towers in house, 4 Win laptops and 1 Linux server. We were using AVG free, then I got my U3 drive that ran Avast and upon insertion, Avast found infections.
Sounds like you were in breach of the "AVG Free" licensing T&Cs! Hope you aren't using Avast Home for commercial purposes as that would be another breach.
Additionally, AVG Free doesn't scan to the same depth as the paid for version. We should always remember that the free versions of many security apps are cutdown versions.
It is also possible that people who run with Avast could switch over to AVG or another antivirus and see viruses being detected. No security product is 100%!
-
I got my U3 drive that ran Avast and upon insertion, Avast found infections.
Hope you aren't using Avast Home for commercial purposes as that would be another breach. [/quote]
Seems that only avast U3 that is not free... ;)
-
I just need to know one thing. Is avast and AVG as good as norton and other non free antivirus?
-
I just need to know one thing. Is avast and AVG as good as norton and other non free antivirus?
In few words, yes. Why not?
All of them have advantages and disadvantages...
-
I just need to know one thing. Is avast and AVG as good as norton and other non free antivirus?
In few words, yes. Why not?
All of them have advantages and disadvantages...
Ok thank you. I wasn't sure coz, I was thinking of getting a paid antivirus or something. But now since you told me .... I'll stick on to the free ones and save my money for something else.
:)
-
I just need to know one thing. Is avast and AVG as good as norton and other non free antivirus?
I for one would have reservations about Symantec being used as a "gold standard". I also have reservations about the implication that "free" AV's are possible in a league below AV's with no free version.
Let's just say I rate AVG above Symantec and leave it at that.
-
I would tend to agree with Frank on that.
But, if you feel the need for the reassurance of a paid version you can always buy the avast Pro version; D
-
I would tend to agree with Frank on that.
But, if you feel the need for the reassurance of a paid version you can always buy the avast Pro version; D
If only avast! Pro were competitively priced here in the UK. ::)
-
The reassurance of a paid version comment was directed to 'jase' and I don't know where in the World he is.
Anyway Frank there is a Home Pro version kicking its heels at the moment, I don't know the full details, price or restrictions. Vlk mentioned it recently when all the other new products were released, WHS and MAC versions of avast. I think there was something like 10 licenses in the Home Pro version.
I think avast should take a look at a number of other paid AV options have a license for 3 systems would seem a reasonable option, not to mention a single user Home Pro version.
As you say a single Pro license renewed each year isn't competitive.
-
antivir classic vs avast home vs avg free: http://www.chip.de/artikel/Test-Gratis-Virenscanner-im-Vergleich-6_28174177.html
Ad- and spyware detection: antivir classic 14,05 % - avast home 87,13 % - avg free 14,50 % :o
-
antivir classic vs avast home vs avg free: http://www.chip.de/artikel/Test-Gratis-Virenscanner-im-Vergleich-6_28174177.html
Ad- and spyware detection: antivir classic 14,05 % - avast home 87,13 % - avg free 14,50 % :o
If you want adware/spyware detection with Antivir or AVG, you have to get the paid version.
-
If you want adware/spyware detection with Antivir or AVG, you have to get the paid version.
So avast is better. Period.
-
So avast is better. Period.
I also think so ;D