Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Mac Security => Topic started by: Lisandro on April 06, 2009, 01:23:20 AM
-
It's becoming boring to update avast on Kubuntu... it takes ages...
Can't be more servers or use a better download method to achieve a little better results?
It takes molasses to update... :P :(
-
Until the Mac and Linux versions get incremental updates its always going to be slow.
-
No Mac, it's not the volume (size) only. I can download many Mb and the time I take to do it is not as big as it takes to avast to download the updates. I know that incremental updates will make it easier, but until there they could think about server balance and number of servers that deploy the updates. Well, at least, is my hope.
-
Just by interest (because I wish to install Ubuntu on an older comp) how long does it take to do the avast update Tech?
-
Long enough to say "oh, @#!% it" and uninstall.
But don't let that put you off Ubuntu- you don't really need avast! on Ubuntu- you don't really need any anti-virus.
-
It's becoming boring to update avast on Kubuntu... it takes ages...
Can't be more servers or use a better download method to achieve a little better results?
It takes molasses to update... :P :(
i put an incremental downloader here, months ago - and response was 0, zero, nothing... thus, maybe it's time to try this beta package, and report how it fits/doesn\'t fit your needs :).
regards,
pc
-
i put an incremental downloader here, months ago - and response was 0, zero, nothing... thus, maybe it's time to try this beta package, and report how it fits/doesn\'t fit your needs :).
A link please... I missed that one.
-
i put an incremental downloader here, months ago - and response was 0, zero, nothing... thus, maybe it's time to try this beta package, and report how it fits/doesn\'t fit your needs :).
A link please... I missed that one.
this one? :)
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=37582.msg314511#msg314511
regards,
pc
-
Thanks, posted there.
-
It's becoming boring to update avast on Kubuntu... it takes ages...
Can't be more servers or use a better download method to achieve a little better results?
It takes molasses to update... :P :(
i put an incremental downloader here, months ago - and response was 0, zero, nothing... thus, maybe it's time to try this beta package, and report how it fits/doesn\'t fit your needs :).
regards,
pc
I saw this (http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=42057.msg354242#msg354242) post...
Well,
it was Linux a beta, later it was incorporated into the Mac daemon. Just untar it, read the instructions, and try it. It's really nothing more than making a directory, and running a binary with proper switches there. the result is fresh new 400.vps, avastvpsreload-able to the engine.
regards,
pc
uhm, the link? here: http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=37582.0
...but I really don't have a clue about "running a binary with proper switches", nor do I want to learn.
I doubt many users who have come to Linux in the last few years will either.
-
I agree with FreewheelinFrank
I consider my computer knowledge to be close to medium level. I would like to learn about "running a binary with proper switches" but time is less and less available. I agree with Tech's comment in the other thread
As far I could understand, the update can't be performed by avast interface, but need to be invoked by terminal. Am I wrong?
Well, seems I'll wait for next avast Linux version... ::)
As Ubuntu peeks up in popularity and in attention Avast will provide a bit more support and versatility for the Linux platform.
-
>> ...but I really don't have a clue about "running a binary with proper switches", nor do I want to learn.
I doubt many users who have come to Linux in the last few years will either.
Hmm,
linux is (and always was, and hopefully will be:) ... about commandline, no way :).
there's a detailed README + binary (just run it with -h or --h or even /h switch :).
regards,
pc
-
>> ...but I really don't have a clue about "running a binary with proper switches", nor do I want to learn.
I doubt many users who have come to Linux in the last few years will either.
Hmm,
linux is (and always was, and hopefully will be:) ... about commandline, no way :).
there's a detailed README + binary (just run it with -h or --h or even /h switch :).
regards,
pc
I agree Linux is all about the command line. But now that its shipping on millions of computers (Netbooks) It will have to be much more user friendly.
-
I do wish something more user friendly for sure...
-
>> ...but I really don't have a clue about "running a binary with proper switches", nor do I want to learn.
I doubt many users who have come to Linux in the last few years will either.
Hmm,
linux is (and always was, and hopefully will be:) ... about commandline, no way :).
there's a detailed README + binary (just run it with -h or --h or even /h switch :).
regards,
pc
I agree Linux is all about the command line. But now that its shipping on millions of computers (Netbooks) It will have to be much more user friendly.
In the same way that Windows is all about DOS.
-
In the same way that Windows is all about DOS.
Nope, there's big difference. DOS was running in inferior real-mode (or vm86 mode), with limited addressing sizes etc, and DOS application has nothing to do with Win32 API. Linux's commandline apps use the very same interface to the kernel (~ int 0x80) as any other application. GUI widgets/frameworks are changingf year by year, still far from efficinecy/perfection/usability, but commandline is here 40 years with minor changes only - and I pretty understand why :>.
regards,
pc, the commandline advocate :>
-
In the same way that Windows is all about DOS.
Nope, there's big difference. DOS was running in inferior real-mode (or vm86 mode), with limited addressing sizes etc, and DOS application has nothing to do with Win32 API. Linux's commandline apps use the very same interface to the kernel (~ int 0x80) as any other application. GUI widgets/frameworks are changingf year by year, still far from efficinecy/perfection/usability, but commandline is here 40 years with minor changes only - and I pretty understand why :>.
regards,
pc, the commandline advocate :>
Back in the day you could hear the same thing -command line advocacy- from Windows people. (Talking about the late 80's/early 90's here obviously.)
Obviously I'm not making a direct comparison here, but a general point. The new generation of Linux users are as much interested in using the command line as today's Windows users are in going back to the days of DOS.
Even people of my age who used to use DOS aren't interested in going back to using the same commands in Linux- we want a GUI!!
Maybe there's no market for an AV for Linux home users. I don't know anything about other markets, but home users represent a useful testing bed for the Linux product. At the moment slow updates are a huge disincentive to using it. Even having to do a manual install is a disincentive.
By contrast, Bitdefender for Linux has a repository- making installation a doddle- and fast incremental updates.
If you want Ubuntu/Linux users to try out avast! for Linux, that's the way to go. If you're not bothered, that's your prerogative.