Avast WEBforum
Other => General Topics => Topic started by: Vladimyr on May 13, 2008, 05:39:23 AM
-
AVG will not support 7.5 after May 31, and version 8 has an email scanner that expires after 30 days.
I can't believe Grisoft is doing this s*it... Oh, no... It won't be a complete free solution as antivirus anymore. Congratulations Alwil team... you'll get tons of new users, ex-AVG like me...
Hi Tech. You would do well to trust your instincts. Regrettably (for Alwil) fidmas's sources aren't exactly reliable.
Official end of support for AVG 7.5 is 31/12/2008 http://freeforum.avg.com/read.php?1,123812,123812#msg-123812
30-day trial period for email scanner is a rumour started as a result of a mistake by a reviewer. http://www.download.com/8301-2007_4-9928087-12.html
I just found the AVG disclaimer at http://free.grisoft.com/ww.news.ndi-93837 . Sorry again for the bad info! I wonder if that is true for the Anti-Spyware part too... V7.5 Anti-Spyware was crippled (stopped updating and Real-Time scans after 30 days). Do they mean V8 got better? :-/
Hi fidmas
Don't feel bad about the misinformation. You weren't the only one. The "support ending 31 May" message seems to have been an "own goal" judging by the number of friends, colleagues, etc who've asked me about alternatives.
AVG Antispyware 7.5 did have a trial period for real-time scanning.
"As AVG Anti-Spyware and AVG Anti-Rootkit are now only included in commercial versions of AVG 8.0. Updates will soon be discontinued" (http://free.grisoft.com/ww.download-avg-anti-spyware-and-anti-rootkit)
-
So, what will we have? Just an antivirus with the antispyware just for 30 day trial?
Not that we recommend AVG that much, but we will have another argument to go away from it? (besides the poor support, the 'boxes' interface, etc.).
-
So, what will we have? Just an antivirus with the antispyware just for 30 day trial?
Not that we recommend AVG that much, but we will have another argument to go away from it? (besides the poor support, the 'boxes' interface, etc.).
God only knows! When I asked that question at the AVG forum http://freeforum.avg.com/read.php?12,125276,125288#msg-125288 I lied "a little" to not sound like an Ex-AVG-User. I asked "Just one Q before installing. Is the Anti-Spyware part of AVG AV Free 8 time-limited, as the 7.5 Anti-Spyware program is?" As you can see, my answer was kinda short. :-) No answer on the follow-up yet. :-|
I'm starting not to care any more. AVG was getting to be a pain anyway.
/fidmas
-
So, what will we have? Just an antivirus with the antispyware just for 30 day trial?
Not that we recommend AVG that much, but we will have another argument to go away from it? (besides the poor support, the 'boxes' interface, etc.).
Tech
None of AVG 8.0 Free features are timelimited in any way despite numerous rumours to contrary.
AVG 8.0 Free seems to be getting a hard time on the support forum, most complaining about:
High impact on PC speed, higher RAM footprint (which we know is partly an illusion because AVG 7.5 real-time scanner was "hidden" inside the Windows kernel),
Lack of choice of components to install and subsequent configurability,
Overall change of approach from light, fast, straightforward AVG 7.5, to cumbersome, slow, complicated & "dumbed-down" AVG 8.0,
Inclusion of "Security (Yahoo) Toolbar",
High bandwidth consumption and lag of Link Scanner.
Now it's hard to know how generally representative these responses are. It could be that the "silent majority" of AVG 7.5 users are satisfied with the impact that new AVG 8.0 is having on their PC use. Part of the panic seems to be caused by AVG "publicity". Many users have reported warning message that AVG Free 7.5 support will cease on 31/05/2008 when in fact the correct date is 31/12/2008.
Funny thing is, the few people I know who have the retail version, AVG 8.0 Pro (or Internet Security) are happy with it. Mind you, all but one are commercial users whose employees have no say in the choice of AV, and all have relatively current PC hardware. They like the idea that it checks so many areas that "nothing" will get through because if something did it means downtime and expense because they can't deal with it themselves. This is what started me thinking a little philosophically about why people might be complaining so strongly about a free product! :o
It seems to me that the components and configurability of AVG 8.0 Free have been decided based on the assumption that users of a free AV are not as discerning or are less-demanding in regard to security software than paid users, when I would argue than in many cases the opposite is true.
The key feature of AVG 7.5 that attracted discening users was its low system impact. That's gone in 8.0 and with it, the attraction for the PC enthusiast.
-
It did seem to slow my computer down when I tried it out briefly.
-
Now it's hard to know how generally representative these responses are. It could be that the "silent majority" of AVG 7.5 users are satisfied with the impact that new AVG 8.0 is having on their PC use. Part of the panic seems to be caused by AVG "publicity". Many users have reported warning message that AVG Free 7.5 support will cease on 31/05/2008 when in fact the correct date is 31/12/2008.
Funny thing is, the few people I know who have the retail version, AVG 8.0 Pro (or Internet Security) are happy with it. Mind you, all but one are commercial users whose employees have no say in the choice of AV, and all have relatively current PC hardware. They like the idea that it checks so many areas that "nothing" will get through because if something did it means downtime and expense because they can't deal with it themselves. This is what started me thinking a little philosophically about why people might be complaining so strongly about a free product! :o
It seems to me that the components and configurability of AVG 8.0 Free have been decided based on the assumption that users of a free AV are not as discerning or are less-demanding in regard to security software than paid users, when I would argue than in many cases the opposite is true.
I haven't touched AVG applications at all since, for speed and lightness, I took AntiVir, instead. I chose Avast for its high customizability. I'd like Avast to keep this tradition of high customizability since it would enable Alwil team to keep good communication with more knowledgeable users while the result of the communication can benefit less knowledgeable users with more automated and user-friendly functions and, of course, legitimate cost. The recent AVG update seems to have broken the community chain by paying their attention only to paid users. I hope Alwil team wouldn't make such a blander with upcoming Avast 5. Reading their responses, I think they understand the importance of the communication, though.
The key feature of AVG 7.5 that attracted discening users was its low system impact. That's gone in 8.0 and with it, the attraction for the PC enthusiast.
As for AVG 8 or other security apps getting bloatware, many functions almost inevitably leads to bloatware but, even this could be managed at least to some extent by giving the users to choose functions of their liking.
I wonder if AVG 8 can become commercially successful but I wouldn't like to see other security companies go after the same marketing strategy.
-
Overall change of approach from light, fast, straightforward AVG 7.5, to cumbersome, slow, complicated & "dumbed-down" AVG 8.0,
Exactly. Most of the complaints I'm getting are from Norton users. Most are complaining that the new Norton has added 2 or more minutes to Boot-up time that was already excessively slow with the old Norton. They all thought the only thing they could do though, was to pay the money and live with it. A 2-3GHz machine just isn't enough anymore. I was reccomending AVG. At least one took my advice and now seems agitated.
From now on, I'm recomending avast! without the "Web Shield". Spybot S&D Immunise seems to be more flexable and affective. Any thoughts are welcome, since I have my wife and a friend configured that way, but don't use either myself.
/fidmas
----
-
Tech
None of AVG 8.0 Free features are timelimited in any way despite numerous rumours to contrary.
Is there a link for the differences between Pro and free versions?
High impact on PC speed, higher RAM footprint (which we know is partly an illusion because AVG 7.5 real-time scanner was "hidden" inside the Windows kernel),
We warned about this after Vlk had pointed it out... so, no news... for AVG users, a deception.
Lack of choice of components to install and subsequent configurability,
It was always worse than avast.
Inclusion of "Security (Yahoo) Toolbar",
Bad movement imho.
High bandwidth consumption and lag of Link Scanner.
Eh, eh... becoming a bloatware ;D
based on the assumption that users of a free AV are not as discerning or are less-demanding in regard to security software than paid users, when I would argue than in many cases the opposite is true.
We think the same.
The key feature of AVG 7.5 that attracted discening users was its low system impact. That's gone in 8.0 and with it, the attraction for the PC enthusiast.
A see a movement toward avast ;D
-
From now on, I'm recomending avast! without the "Web Shield".
Why?
-
Is there a link for the differences between Pro and free versions?
Sure: http://free.grisoft.com/ww.download-avg-anti-virus-free-edition 2nd and 3rd columns what you mean?
-
From now on, I'm recomending avast! without the "Web Shield".
Why?
I have the same question. I let my family use Avast! and set Web Shield to silent mode, with which it automatically aborts connection when it finds suspicious files. On the computer SpywareBlaster is installed, which works similarly to Spybot immunize function, without any conflict with Web Shield. I don't see any reason for turning off Web Shield.
-
From now on, I'm recomending avast! without the "Web Shield".
Why?
Just that SpyBot Immunize seems quite nice on my wife's box, and SpyBot scans catch almost as much as AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 does. I honestly haven't tried the avast! Web Shield yet. Any arguments for or against either are welcome. :-)
/fidmas
-
Just that SpyBot Immunize seems quite nice on my wife's box, and SpyBot scans catch almost as much as AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 does. I honestly haven't tried the avast! Web Shield yet. Any arguments for or against either are welcome. :-)
I guess I am for Web Shield since I can only think of resource problem or possible conflicts to turn off Web Shield. What the reason for being against it, exactly?
-
From now on, I'm recomending avast! without the "Web Shield".
Why?
Just that SpyBot Immunize seems quite nice on my wife's box, and SpyBot scans catch almost as much as AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 does. I honestly haven't tried the avast! Web Shield yet. Any arguments for or against either are welcome. :-)
/fidmas
I can't see why you recommend avast but advocate not using the web shield yet you haven't tried it ???
The web shield scan http traffic using a localhost proxy so can intercept malware at source before it gets on to your system, prevention is much better than cure.
-
Sure: http://free.grisoft.com/ww.download-avg-anti-virus-free-edition 2nd and 3rd columns what you mean?
AVG Free limitations
* Basic protection only (comprehensive protection is available with AVG Internet Security): I miss the antirootkit module.
* Limited languages (multiple languages are available with any paid product) avast doesn't ;D
* No technical support (available with any paid product) We're glad to have avast forums...
But also, scanning of downloads and IM providers.
Another reasons to keep avast ;)
Just that SpyBot Immunize seems quite nice on my wife's box, and SpyBot scans catch almost as much as AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 does.
I think immunization is a very limited security feature nowadays. I use it, but do not put all my confidence on it.
I honestly haven't tried the avast! Web Shield yet.
WebShield scans HTTP traffic. It's not immunization. It's direct and very effective protection.
-
Just that SpyBot Immunize seems quite nice on my wife's box, and SpyBot scans catch almost as much as AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 does. I honestly haven't tried the avast! Web Shield yet. Any arguments for or against either are welcome. :-)
I guess I am for Web Shield since I can only think of resource problem or possible conflicts to turn off Web Shield. What the reason for being against it, exactly?
Maybe none. I haven't tried it yet since "I myself" use neither. I know if my my wife doesn't want to be yelled at for visiting Amazon with Tracking Cookies, she can Undo Immunize, and I can "Scan" for problems later. Avast! Have a scan for spyware feature?
/fIdmas
-
From now on, I'm recomending avast! without the "Web Shield".
Why?
Just that SpyBot Immunize seems quite nice on my wife's box, and SpyBot scans catch almost as much as AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 does. I honestly haven't tried the avast! Web Shield yet. Any arguments for or against either are welcome. :-)
/fidmas
I can't see why you recommend avast but advocate not using the web shield yet you haven't tried it ???
The web shield scan http traffic using a localhost proxy so can intercept malware at source before it gets on to your system, prevention is much better than cure.
Ok. Ok. :-) Most already have SpyBot Immunize and I figured making them un-learn Norton in favor of avast! was enough. I promice, I'll play with Web Shield. I'm not bad mouthing it to anyone. Just applying the K.I.S.S. principle. :-)
/fidmas
-
For me K.I.S.S. would be to leave avast at the default installation settings. The providers/shields are set to Normal and provide a good balance between protection and performance.
Only Terminate providers that the user doesn't use any software that that provider/shield is designed to protect, e.g. the P2P and Instant Messaging providers if they don't use any of that software then it could be Terminated, answer Yes to the question Persist the changes or it will restart on the next boot.
-
I know if my my wife doesn't want to be yelled at for visiting Amazon with Tracking Cookies, she can Undo Immunize, and I can "Scan" for problems later.
I'm terribly sorry to hear that. :P ;D
Avast! Have a scan for spyware feature?
Yes, it has from 4.8, even on Home edition different form some other *cough* free anti-virus application, and Web Shield prevent malicious files coming through browsers. We already have resident scanner but these files better off from our computers in the first place. However, don't rely on too much on the anti-spyware feature since multi-layered protections would be nicer.
PS Er...I see you have been already convinced and that DavidR has covered tips for resource management, too.
-
I know if my my wife doesn't want to be yelled at for visiting Amazon with Tracking Cookies, she can Undo Immunize, and I can "Scan" for problems later.
I'm terribly sorry to hear that. :P ;D
Avast! Have a scan for spyware feature?
Yes, it has from 4.8, even on Home edition different form some other *cough* free anti-virus application, and Web Shield prevent malicious files coming through browsers. We already have resident scanner but these files better off from our computers in the first place. However, don't rely on too much on the anti-spyware feature since multi-layered protections would be nicer.
PS Er...I see you have been already convinced and that DavidR has covered tips for resource management, too.
:-) I"ll try it soon. I've got a hospital procedure in an hour, so I'll probably not be in the mood for a while. Thanks for the info and advice.
P.S. "I'd" probably never use Web Shield "for myself", since I still have a copy of Netscape 4.7, with EVERYTHING turned off, for potentially sleazy sites. I doubt that Web Shield would like that. Am I wrong?
/fidmas
-
Web shield doesn't care much what browser you use, it is monitoring the port 80 (HTTP traffic) the only browsers it would effectively 'ignore' would be those it doesn't support, exotic/non-main stream browsers, but it wouldn't 'object' or "I doubt that Web Shield would like that."
The biggest issue is not the sleazy sites but the sites that have been hacked and have been injected with an iFrame tag that opens malicious content from a site your aren't even visiting. The web shield protects very well against these iFrame exploits.
-
"I'd" probably never use Web Shield "for myself", since I still have a copy of Netscape 4.7, with EVERYTHING turned off, for potentially sleazy sites.
You still have a copy of...what? :o
Generally speaking, it is not recommendable to use such old app but according to secunia advisories (http://secunia.com/product/83/?task=advisories), the browser appears to be quite safe.
The biggest issue is not the sleazy sites but the sites that have been hacked and have been injected with an iFrame tag that opens malicious content from a site your aren't even visiting. The web shield protects very well against these iFrame exploits.
I think Netscape 4.7 doesn't support Iframe...
I doubt that Web Shield would like that. Am I wrong?
As DavidR says, I think Web Shield wouldn't care and I even think Netscape is supported by Web Shield. You could check it with eicar test files (http://www.eicar.org/anti_virus_test_file.htm).
That said, you can choose whether to use Web Shield for further protection or just to be happy with your good old browser. I'm inclined to agree with you that the browser is quite safe if inconvenient at times but Web Shield wouldn't harm.
Just in case someone is interested, he/she can download the setup files of Netscapes from here (http://browser.netscape.com/releases).
-
I think the iframe HTML tag has be around for a long time, and I believe the iframe tag isn't proprietary (e.g. an MS IE option) or it wouldn't be supported by Opera and Firefox, standards compliant browsers.
Old browsers would probably still be vulnerable to the iframe exploit it is the newer browsers like the latest firefox that are less vulnerable, especially if it is also running noscript.
-
Avast! Have a scan for spyware feature?
Yes. Just scan, antivirus and antispyware are joined together in the same scanning.
-
i have just installed avg free 8.0 and my pc takes a lot longer to boot up im going back to 7.5
-
I think the iframe HTML tag has be around for a long time, and I believe the iframe tag isn't proprietary (e.g. an MS IE option) or it wouldn't be supported by Opera and Firefox, standards compliant browsers.
Old browsers would probably still be vulnerable to the iframe exploit it is the newer browsers like the latest firefox that are less vulnerable, especially if it is also running noscript.
I'm still kinda punchy, but I want to thank you all for the advice. I will give Web Shield a fair shot before recommending that anyone just keep their SpyBot. OK? :-) FYI: Netscape 4.7 is soooooooo old it doesn't support frames at all. With everything turned off, things just end up in cache, can't be used by the browser, and get deleted quickly.
BTW: We mostly use it while trying to find simple 8-bit ANSI word lists for foreign languages for one of our freeware products. The only good place to look is on hacker's sites. Of course, going there means taking your life in your hands. :-) AVG and Avast have caught several scripts being loaded into cache, but of course, Scripts are off anyway. If anyone knows where to find ANSI word lists for other languages, we're all ears. :-)
I'd plug the site here, but I suspect hackers monitor anti-virus forums regularly, and I don't need to give them any help. :-)
Thanks,
fidmas
---
-
Avast! Have a scan for spyware feature?
Yes. Just scan, antivirus and antispyware are joined together in the same scanning.
Good. :-)
-
i have just installed avg free 8.0 and my pc takes a lot longer to boot up im going back to 7.5
I guess I must have missed the bit where this became the avg support forum ???
What AV are you using ?
well i had the new version of avast and windows xp sp3 and had no problems
So of all your 7 posts in a little over an hour, none seem related to your using avast.
-
i am in the prosess of switching back to avast i used it awile ago
-
The biggest issue is not the sleazy sites but the sites that have been hacked and have been injected with an iFrame tag that opens malicious content from a site your aren't even visiting. The web shield protects very well against these iFrame exploits.
Yup! Found one with IE7 several days ago while trying to remember how I disabled WSH.
-
FYI: Web Shield *did* catch EICA.com.txt when Netscape 4.7 tried to display it. Cool. :-)
-
Yes, it has from 4.8, even on Home edition different form some other *cough* free anti-virus application,
Go on, you can say it, Avira ;D
Also on reflection, by using the word "hidden" in reference to the AVG 7.5 scanner being inside the Windows kernel in my earlier post (http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=35432.msg298095#msg298095), I did not mean to imply that there was anything wrong or deceitful on the part of AVG in constructing the program in this way. My intention was to highlight that what was once hidden and is now revealed is creating a bigger-than-appropriate fuss with disgruntled AVG users.
-
I can't see why you recommend avast but advocate not using the web shield yet you haven't tried it ???
The web shield scan http traffic using a localhost proxy so can intercept malware at source before it gets on to your system, prevention is much better than cure.
Anyone have any idea why "Web Shield disabled / SpyBot Immunize on" blocks some sites like iwon.com, but "SpyBot Immunize off / Web Shield Enabled" doesn't have any problem? Loads a couple Cookies that I assumed would be Tracking Cookies, but neither SpyBot nor AVG Anti-Spyware 7.5 gripe about them. :-/
/fidmas
-
Anyone have any idea why "Web Shield disabled / SpyBot Immunize on" blocks some sites like iwon.com, but "SpyBot Immunize off / Web Shield Enabled" doesn't have any problem?
<snip>
/fidmas
Yes I have an idea, the web shield isn't a blocker simple as that it scans http content. Unless you add a URL to the web shield URL Blocking it doesn't block, so no mystery it is the S&D Immunisation that is blocking.
-
Anyone have any idea why "Web Shield disabled / SpyBot Immunize on" blocks some sites like iwon.com, but "SpyBot Immunize off / Web Shield Enabled" doesn't have any problem?
<snip>
/fidmas
Yes I have an idea, the web shield isn't a blocker simple as that it scans http content. Unless you add a URL to the web shield URL Blocking it doesn't block, so no mystery it is the S&D Immunisation that is blocking.
As I more-or-less suspected. Thanks. One friend has a wife (not mine thankfully this time) who loves "get rich quick" sites. Whenever she convinces him to turn off SpyBot Immunize, I get the job of cleaning up the Spyware. Did you, or someone else, say SpyBot Immunize didn't play well with Web Shield?
-
I certainly didn't, there is zero interaction between S&D's immunisation and web shield.
-
I certainly didn't, there is zero interaction between S&D's immunisation and web shield.
Ok. I found the quote from Rumpelstiltskin way back on page 1.
On the computer SpywareBlaster is installed, which works similarly to Spybot immunize function, without any conflict with Web Shield. I don't see any reason for turning off Web Shield.
Not so, you say? I can let him use both?
Thanks,
fidmas
-
The quote doesn't say what you are implying a conflict between the S&D and web shield. it states "without" any conflict with Web Shield in your quoted text and "I don't see any reason for turning off Web Shield." in the same quote.
So there is no reason to disable either web shield or S&D's immunize function there is no interaction between them so no conflict.
-
The quote doesn't say what you are implying a conflict between the S&D and web shield. it states "without" any conflict with Web Shield in your quoted text and "I don't see any reason for turning off Web Shield." in the same quote.
So there is no reason to disable either web shield or S&D's immunize function there is no interaction between them so no conflict.
Yeah. Ain't English wonderful? I guess I read that quote as "works similarly to Spybot immunize function, without any of the conflict with Web Shield. ".
Thanks for making it clear.
/fidmas
-
You're welcome.
-
Bad movement from AVG :P
I generally does not post that long... but this one deserves reading for the ones which is thinking of moving from AVG to avast.
I wanted to discuss two things:
1) Why does he argue that avast has a tad less protection?
2) Why does he say that avast in resource hungry?
AVG Version 8 Free Released - quoted from Gizmo's Newsletter
In late February AVG Technologies announced AVG V8, the latest incarnation of their popular anti-virus scanner. Version 8 includes fully integrated spyware protection, rootkit protection and web link checking of search engine results. It is yet another example of a former anti-virus scanner transforming into an anti-malware scanner, a trend I noted in last month's editorial column.
On April 24 the free version of AVG V8 was released, and was promptly met with howls of derision. The free version excluded the rootkit scanner, active protection against hostile websites and a number of the other goodies added to the commercial V8 product. It also was proving to be very buggy.
Worse still, AVG announced that they would discontinue (at the end of May) the virus updates for the current V7.5 free version as well as their free anti-spyware and rootkit detection products.
I can fully understand user's disappointment with these announcements, but this is a perfectly normal commercial decision. AVG is, after all, a commercial organization, not a charity.
Their move does, however, present users of AVG's free software with a problem. Before the release of the V8, many AVG users employed an excellent security setup that combined the free version of AVG AV 7.5 with AVG's free anti-spyware scanner. With both these products being phased out, users are faced with a dilemma.
There are a couple of options:
Based on the evidence available as of today, I think the best route for free software users who want maximum protection is to switch to the free Avira AV [3] scanner and optionally, bolster this with the free Spyware Terminator program [4] or, less desirably, Windows Defender [5].
I say this because the free Avira product includes rootkit protection, while the free AVG does not. It is also more stable. Furthermore, Avira has better overall protection than AVG. Check out the AV Comparatives results [6] and you will see what I mean.
On the downside, Avira has limited active email protection, will nag you more than AVG free and the interface is somewhat more crude. But the overall level of protection is excellent.
Another option which offers a tad less protection but greater convenience is to switch to the free Avast! scanner. The latest version of Avast! is a major improvement on what was already an impressive product. And the free version includes anti-spyware, anti-rootkit and email protection, so you don't need to use it in concert with another product.
On the downside Avast! is resource hungry. Subscriber Basil Irwin pointed out that "not counting pseudo-drivers, Avast! consumes around 70MB of memory compared to 8MB for AntiVir. I didn't do any formal testing of CPU consumption or timing of various common operations, but there was no doubt in my mind that Avast! noticeably slowed several common operations, like program loading and file copying."
For average users with modern PCs I suggest the low hassle Avast! Option, while higher risk users may be better off going with Avira.
You could, of course, just stick with AVG 8 Free, and bolster your defenses with other products. However, there have been too many V8 "bug" reports to suggest this is an attractive option at this point in time.
[1] http://www.grisoft.com/ww.90627
[2] http://free.grisoft.com/ww.download-avg-anti-spyware-and-anti-rootkit
[3] http://www.free-av.com/en/products/1/avira_antivir_personal__free_antivirus.html
[4] http://www.spywareterminator.com
[5] http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/software/default.mspx
[6] http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2008_02.php
-
I somehow doubt he has used avast for some time and certainly not 4.8 with the additional protection. Even with 4.7 it was better than AVG 7.5 and when I guess he is comparing avg 8.0 against avast 4.7.
With the additional modules of 8.0 you could perhaps see why Gismo might say that, but when the free versions lose that additional protection it is back to level pegging against avast 4.7 perhaps, but no where close when compared to 4.8.
Unfortunately Gismo doesn't say which version of avast he is talking about.
-
I somehow doubt he has used avast for some time and certainly not 4.8 with the additional protection. Even with 4.7 it was better than AVG 7.5 and when I guess he is comparing avg 8.0 against avast 4.7.
I think he's saying that avast! has "a tad less protection" than Avira. Avira has an excellent detection record but I don't think it can stop and quarantine malware that's running in protected memory like avast! (and AVG for that matter). Also, I'm straining my memory but I think that last time I compared, Avira "used" about 12 to 15 MB RAM and AVG 7.5 20MB.
-
But we all know how accurate the AVG 7.5 memory use is when it is hidden in the Kernel total.
-
i have used avg free edition 8.0 and its a memory hog!
the updates download so slow and sometimes it freezes!
so i try avast and its good!