Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: Diazruanova on December 22, 2011, 03:09:01 PM
-
Interesting results, avast performing very bad :'(
-
If you are going to be a slave scan test results, instead of your own personal experience you are going to be changing AVs on a monthly basis.
You have read more than one of these tests and the responses to them, so why start another one, vote with your feet if you don't like it. It might help if you also have the latest avast version 6.0.1367 or update your signature.
-
I am using avast from almost two years and never had a virus problem. Occasional scan with MBAM and Hitman pro also detects nothing. But still it does not feel good to be at near bottom everytime. Hoping with version 7 avast will improve its detection and removing capacity. :-\
-
yeah!
dont worry we know avast is best for us....thats why we are its users...its matter of trust and faith in a AV :-*
-
Do you both honestly believe that avast doesn't strive to improve detections, that is the real question and if you don't then what are you still doing here; that really is the question.
I honestly couldn't give a stuff about various tests as they simply can't match real world use by a user.
I base conclusions on my personal experience of avast, on my real world use for over seven and a half years and not a single infection.
-
even i base conclusions on my personal use and experience sure avast can improve in test performance for me it is still a AWESOME and my BEST AV! I STILL LOVE AVAST! :) ;D :D
avast! has got excellent results in the lasts few tests this the first bad result so no worries we will have those good results back in 2012!
-
The reason i like avast is due to its lightness, i have never used a AV as light as avast ans since i am with a old laptop my priority is to have a light AV. As i said before avast is doing its job and i am not going to change AV solely based on some test but i must say AV comparative is a reputable testing organisation and a simple standard badge is not for avast. Avast can be much better than that. As a company i like avast and have full faith on the avast team i am sure with version 7 avast will definitely get advanced plus from AV comparative.
-
I'll stay with Avast anyway...rm
-
Stick with Avast, you can safely ignore most antivirus tests as they are all biased in favour of one or the other. Also, remember all the help you can get from this brilliant forum. Combine Avast with Malwarebytes and you've got an unbeatable combination. Your choice.
-
If you are going to be a slave scan test results, instead of your own personal experience you are going to be changing AVs on a monthly basis.
You have read more than one of these tests and the responses to them, so why start another one, vote with your feet if you don't like it. It might help if you also have the latest avast version 6.0.1367 or update your signature.
Relax dude, do not take it personally cause it makes you look as a fanboy. The fact about avast is that lately it is not doing so good on reputable tests as AV-comparatives and you´ll have to live with it, so do not get angry, relax and enjoy the Christmas holidays ;)
-
Just throwing in my two cents FWIW. Since having avast recommended to us by an IT guy in my husband's company several years ago, my family has had one virus on one of our three machines, and it was a result of my daughter unknowingly clicking on one of those pop ups that state a system is infected. My fault for not educating her on that particular scenario. I'm by no means a fangirly and although I'm impressed with the avast staff, I would migrate to another company in a heartbeat if I felt I wasn't dealing with a quality product. No matter how nice a company seems, I'm more interested in protecting my computers than going with blind loyalty :) I'm all for avast doing whatever they can to bring up their 'grade' in the AV comparative test, and I have no doubt they will, but overall, I couldn't be more pleased with their anti-virus. It hasn't cost us a dime to keep our computers clean. If things continue this way, I'll gladly be purchasing the full product.
-
Quote from Vlk on another recent thread regarding detection results:
First, let me say that the recent results (especially the Oct 2011 results) don't make me too happy. You're right that avast did quite poorly, and this needs to be fixed....
Enough said.
I believe avast is and will work to correct what they admit is a problem. This is why I would like to hear from avast! about how the new will improve such findings. This would encourage any who are thinking of paying for the products. Many people factor in such results (some too heavily to be sure--other just ignore them). Such results can cause avast! to lose it's market share of paying customers who are the ones actually making things possible.
Having said that, I will pay again in a couple of months to keep using AIS because I believe it's a great company with great people that offer a very good product worth actually paying for. Additionally, the great advice in this forum and the education than can be gained from some wise people is equally wonderfully helpful.
-
Quote from Vlk on another recent thread regarding detection results:
First, let me say that the recent results (especially the Oct 2011 results) don't make me too happy. You're right that avast did quite poorly, and this needs to be fixed....
Thanks for the info Dagrev its Good to know that avast is working on it
-
If you are going to be a slave scan test results, instead of your own personal experience you are going to be changing AVs on a monthly basis.
You have read more than one of these tests and the responses to them, so why start another one, vote with your feet if you don't like it. It might help if you also have the latest avast version 6.0.1367 or update your signature.
Relax dude, do not take it personally cause it makes you look as a fanboy. The fact about avast is that lately it is not doing so good on reputable tests as AV-comparatives and you´ll have to live with it, so do not get angry, relax and enjoy the Christmas holidays ;)
I couldn't be more relaxed, rather the opposite for you it seems, your the one getting emotional with the :'( crying icon.
I don't take it personal at all and if you were a regular on the forums you wouldn't be calling me a fanboy (the last resort of a failed argument), if I see something wrong with avast I raise my voice as loud as anyone else, fanboy or otherwise.
I use avast because it suits my needs, is very flexible, configurable and has protected my system for over seven and a half years, should that ever change (an I don' need reviews/tests for that), I'm not married to avast.
I don't have to live with the results as I don't bother about them, it seems you are the one bothered about them and as I said if you don't like them vote with your feet.
-
DavidR]
...I don't have to live with the results as I don't bother about them, it seems you are the one bothered about them and as I said if you don't like them vote with your feet.
Well my friend, it also seems that I am NOT the only one that gets bothered with lousy results from avast, but VLK too and in any case, why on earth should anyone submit their product to torture tests if they do NOT give a damn about the results???
avast has the final word on this, and it is NOT mandatory to participate on any of these tests, but it seems that avast cares about it and they keep on participating, don´t they? ...oh and in in any case, it also seems that you are in desperate need of reassuring your fanboyish position, but trying to disguise it, so I´ll give you that and this is my last post on this thread.
Have some terrific holidays and do not worry too much about defending avast, I understand you can not do anything about it but jump instead when some one is posting avast´s lousy results (so much for self criticism and analysis) and BTW, the crying icon was not accurate at all, you are totally right, it should be a happy face instead because Christmas is coming and why on earth should I worry about this issue? at the end, they are just AV programs! Merry Christmas for everyone!!!
-
Do you both honestly believe that avast doesn't strive to improve detections, that is the real question and if you don't then what are you still doing here; that really is the question.
I honestly couldn't give a stuff about various tests as they simply can't match real world use by a user.
I base conclusions on my personal experience of avast, on my real world use for over seven and a half years and not a single infection.
David R I agree with you 100% and second what you have said. I have been using Avast for years on 2 of my pcs and not 1..........repeat not 1 infection. Avast is the best IMO nothing better :)
-
I love avast cozz its effective for me and much better in my experience rather than KIS,NIS,ESET...light on system,always active and high level protection [as far i see],love the tHE GUI,web shiled,network shield 24*7 protection on web,file system shield gives effective protection on autorun viruses and havent seen so many autorun viruses in my chest file shiled always active and silent scanning of files,no slowdowns
due to these reasons i love avast!
-
Well I was reading the forum and I couldn't evade commenting over it, I used to use avast "version 5.1 I guess it was." then I switched to ESET, ESET was purely based on heuristics "No more than 2 updates per day" and I didn't like it, then I went for Emsisoft, nice IKarus engine, but lots of false positive, also behavior shield was annoying, so then I went for KIS 2011 "In that time" it was pretty cool but its heuristics was kind of poor, purely based on its virus definition updates, so after that I went for Bitdefender, great detection rate, but my computer couldn't handle its system requirements so I had to uninstall it from my computer, then I tried trying NIS and it was good, but its GUI was kind of complicated to use, to many settings and after a year I unistalled it, then I started to using underrated AV products, I tried Coranti, but its 4 engines were outdated, I went for Outpost 7 which was very good, but since it was based on Virusbuster engine, almost all of the detections came from behavior shield, not a very good av engine, then I tried Trustport and F-secure, Trustport was heavy as Bitdefender, it didn't feel my specs, and F-secure was doing good till I got a dropper who killed it and deleted my program files directory, then I started to miss Avast GUI and performance, its simple settings, etc. I installed it again and it was now on versión 6 or something, it was amazing, after testing many AVs I couldn't feel better than using Avast.
Anyway, now I'm using another av for security reasons, since I'm working in a dangerous environment I need a "Paranoid" behavior shield, I'm not telling the name of the AV of course, this is Avast's forum so I won't, but for real, Avast is the best for common and world use of the computer.
Happy Christmasm and sorry about my poor english...
-
Welcome NVM.
You took a long journey, but I'm glad you get happy with avast.
Good luck with your "paranoid" antivirus ;)
-
avast has consistently been high up on these sort of tests so to me it looks like a blip and I expect it to be reversed in their next test round.
-
yes this is the first time so no worries we will be back at our rank ;)
-
Good morning and Happy Holidays to everyone!
The are many unique and diverse opinions/comments regarding the recent Avast test results shown here...which I find quite interesting. Although, I may not be one of the more knowledgeable forum members about such issues, I would venture to say that there is probably NO AV on the market today which has not (at one time or another), had a less than satisfactory rating/review following a series of AV tests.
For myself, what matters is the company's track record at improving any deficiencies noted in their product(s), and what a computer user's preferences are, based on their own personal experiences with those product(s).
In closing, I again wish everyone a really nice holiday season! :)
-
I admit if avast doesn't really good in retrospective BUT avast really good if you always update your database, and i think all av not only avast must have latest database signature for securing PC. So i actually feel like wasting time for testing antivirus which has out of date virus database. And for avast detection with up to date signature you can check in on-demand test and you will see how avast beat other antivirus... :D
-
yes this is the first time so no worries we will be back at our rank ;)
Didn't realize it was your company ???
I know that Avast will most likely make a better showing in the next test but,
even if it doesn't, those are results based on a controlled environment.
I use avast! in the real world and haven't seen an infection in the past 8 years. :)
That to me is the real test. ;D
-
With all due respect to everyone here, I find this thread quite amusing.
If avast had received an Advanced+ rating, everyone would be saying this is one of the reasons they love it, and would be bragging all over the place about the results.
However, since it ended up near the bottom of the list instead, people question the findings, or say they don't care, it's still the best. And I'm not talking just in this forum, but this sort of response is coming from avast lovers in many other forums as well.
I have no doubt avast will climb to the top again, but for now, it is what it is.
Happy holidays. ;)
-
If avast had received an Advanced+ rating, everyone would be saying this is one of the reasons they love it, and would be bragging all over the place about the results.
Better get your facts straight before you make such a blanket statement. :)
Merry Christmas!
-
Yes even i havent been infected in a span of 1year having avast! :)
-
If I may...bob3160 is right. Like him I surf in the "real world".
That is why I wait for the "Real World Whole Product" tests. A hiccup now and then is to be expected.
Please don't blow things out of proportion. :)
I can hardly wait for 7.0! :)
-
Like many others here, I'm far less concerned about the results of test-comparisons (which, as already noted, are in many cases not exactly objective, and/or compare apples and oranges in the sense of some tested products being way out of date) than I am with avast's performance on MY system, which (for something like 14 years now) has been excellent.
And there's one major plus for avast which I suspect the "tests" don't even consider, the support factor. I don't think there's a single competitor which can come even close to the support forums here.
My current system, now about 8 years old, came with NIS pre-installed, which was relatively easy to remove cleanly compared with NAV. I quickly switched to avast, which I'd had on previous systems, and have stuck with it ever since. And if that makes me a "fanboy", so be it.
-
And there's one major plus for avast which I suspect the "tests" don't even consider, the support factor. I don't think there's a single competitor which can come even close to the support forums here.
+1 :)
-
And there's one major plus for avast which I suspect the "tests" don't even consider, the support factor. I don't think there's a single competitor which can come even close to the support forums here.
+1 :)
1000% agree with you. Unbelievable support from highly qualified, computer savy folks. 8)
-
I must say that I am a little worried to read that my favorite antivirus program is not protecting me.
-
It is protecting u this is just a sudden down fall in avast results they will be back at their position keep faith in avast! ;D
-
Even though I myself use Ubuntu, as far as I am concerned, AV Comparatives apparently do not have the certification to validate their test results. avast! has been good and always will be. Do not be fooled by this one-time bad result into thinking avast! has failed you. Comodo has also scored bad, but they're demanding AV Comparatives' test results to be audited by a third party auditor, and they're willing to even pay for the cost. For some reason, AV Comparatives is refusing to have the results audited. I don't know who is at fault here. It's either avast! and Comodo both did poorly, or AV Comparatives has something shady going on behind the closed doors. Comodo is complaining that AV Comparatives get funded by the AV vendors and therefore, the test results may be skewed or tampered. I do not think an independent testing company should receive its fundings from the vendors it's testing the products of. I personally think it does sound fishy. If they really need the money, they could run advertisements on their web site or stick the ads into their report as they always do. Nonetheless, I trust avast!, and that's why I installed it on my mom's computer. Unlike Comodo, avast! is very user friendly which puts it ahead of the other guys. Do not be tempted to switch!!!
-
thanks! eko_mn for your confirmation i trsut avast and not going to switch it with another ITS MY BEST AV!
-
I must say that I am a little worried to read that my favorite antivirus program is not protecting me.
Why do you say that ???
You have AIS 6.0.1367 SAS Pro, MBAM Pro, Spyware Blaster 4.5 protecting you. :)
-
It is protecting u this is just a sudden down fall in avast results they will be back at their position keep faith in avast! ;D
But a Antivus programm should protect u the whole year and a sometimes in the year or am i wrong ??? , if you make a antivirus then you should keep ure user protected the whole year and NOT put all the time in making the Mobile Security!
-
You have AIS 6.0.1367 SAS Pro, MBAM Pro, Spyware Blaster 4.5 protecting you. :)
1. AIS Failed at hxxp://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php ,
scoring only "15%/ 3 out of 10" on Firewall Leak Tests (allows data... to sneak by/transmit).
a. PC-Tools IS "firewall" scored well (9 of 10), but their anti-virus causes a Serious performance slowdown & low detection rate (cnet review).
2. SAS failed all 4 of their tests at another site/Compromised.
-
You have AIS 6.0.1367 SAS Pro, MBAM Pro, Spyware Blaster 4.5 protecting you. :)
1. AIS Failed at hxxp://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php ,
scoring only "15%/ 3 out of 10" on Firewall Leak Tests (allows data... to sneak by/transmit).
a. PC-Tools IS "firewall" scored well (9 of 10), but their anti-virus causes a Serious performance slowdown & low detection rate (cnet review).
2. SAS failed all 4 of their tests at another site/Compromised.
Thank you for citing truly irrelevant testing. However, this is about AV comparatives results.
-
Well, I won't blame AV comparatives, since I have tested many AV, they have very accurate results by the way I had similar results to theirs, but yes, they are just tests, and tests can't be accurate when we talk about day to day usage, world common use of the computer, but yes if you go to mdl, malc0de, scumware, malwareP, and you start testing zero day files, well you may get a different result than what you were expecting, where high heuristics will have advantage to signature based and etc. As I said, its all about usage, if you work at a very dangerous environment then you may need some very good behavior shield and very high heuristics system, at the cost of some fake alerts, and of course even so, you won't be safe at all ; ) in my case I use two different av who can work at the same time with no problem, but cmon, for real usage go for Avast! for real ; ) best best, trust me, I have tested many suites so I know what I'm talking about.
-
I have used Avast on my computers since about the time it came out when Norton had 90% of the security market. I always recommended it until recently.
I have a computer service business and I am switching my customers off of Avast. I setup a small business this week with 7 computers on Kapsersky Small Business security. I have seen in my business too many computers becoming infected while running Avast. Very often the infections begin with a rogue security program or online "optimizer" (snake oil) which Avast allows to be installed. These programs then let the flood gates open to all kinds of other infections. Avast has simply let me down too many times in the last year.
-
I have used Avast on my computers since about the time it came out when Norton had 90% of the security market. I always recommended it until recently.
I have a computer service business and I am switching my customers off of Avast. I setup a small business this week with 7 computers on Kapsersky Small Business security. I have seen in my business too many computers becoming infected while running Avast. Very often the infections begin with a rogue security program or online "optimizer" (snake oil) which Avast allows to be installed. These programs then let the flood gates open to all kinds of other infections. Avast has simply let me down too many times in the last year.
Hello sys-eng,
please keep a note avast! free antivirus is just for home users and not for commercial purposes... :P
why not try avast business security
-
Indian, I don't see where he stated what version he was using. Did you??
-
Hello sys-eng,
please keep a note avast! free antivirus is just for home users and not for commercial purposes... :P
why not try avast business security
I was referring to both the free version and pro version for customers. I have been running the Pro version for about 5 years. The story is the same - - Avast is not stopping rogue security programs and optimizers. This is the majority of infections I see.
I am not going to promote avast business security for home users to "try" to get better protection.
Avast is just not keeping up. Symantec/Norton was great then they declined for about 5 years and now the latest versions are among the best. Security companies must constantly work at staying ahead of the bad guys.
-
Avast is not stopping rogue security programs and optimizers. This is the majority of infections I see.
Well, it should if it is really an infection.
The nature of rogue is the most difficult to detect. It could be legit and it could be rogue.
Not the majority of the optimizers and tweaks are rogue afaik.
Security companies must constantly work at staying ahead of the bad guys.
And what makes you think we're not? ;)
-
Avast is not stopping rogue security programs and optimizers. This is the majority of infections I see.
Well, it should if it is really an infection.
The nature of rogue is the most difficult to detect. It could be legit and it could be rogue.
Not the majority of the optimizers and tweaks are rogue afaik.
Security companies must constantly work at staying ahead of the bad guys.
And what makes you think we're not? ;)
I absolutely agree that the rogues are the most difficult to detect. They are also much more difficult to remove and repair. Infections (sometimes just persistent scary pop-up messages) are released but the bad guys usually cannot profit from that directly; therefore, they setup several (I have seen more than 15) websites which look very professional and legitimate to remove and fix the damage. People with infected computers search Google with the error message and more than half of the links on the first two search results pages are sites ran by the same people who released the infection. People use their credit card to buy the repair or security program. They discover that the repair program does not work. Several weeks later they discover that someone has abused their credit card or stolen their identity.
Read carefully, I never said that Avast is NOT working to improve. I simply said that Avast is not staying ahead of the bad guys - - at least not as much as some competitors. Malwarebytes IP Blocker helps a lot but it cannot protect when a good website has been hacked and now downloads a rogue program.
Perhaps an organization equivalent to US-CERT could maintain a list. I don't know the answer but I am not in the security product business. I am in the install & repair business, and I know from experience that these rogue programs are the #1 problem by a wide margin.
-
I forgot to add something. One thing that Avast has done very well is participating in this forum. There is some really good help to be found here usually without waiting for days.
-
You have AIS 6.0.1367 SAS Pro, MBAM Pro, Spyware Blaster 4.5 protecting you. :)
1. AIS Failed at hxxp://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php ,
scoring only "15%/ 3 out of 10" on Firewall Leak Tests (allows data... to sneak by/transmit).
a. PC-Tools IS "firewall" scored well (9 of 10), but their anti-virus causes a Serious performance slowdown & low detection rate (cnet review).
2. SAS failed all 4 of their tests at another site/Compromised.
As has been said many times, Matousec does not test AV's and only products that use HIPS will score well in their tests. Avast does not employ any form of HIPS, thank God, and therefore will never score well there. Matousec is irrelevant.
-
I was referring to both the free version and pro version for customers. I have been running the Pro version for about 5 years.
Same thing...pro AV and free AV are not for business uses...avast business security is a good choice.. ;)
-
I started using avast after problems with avira..I had to turn it off to run some everyday programs because it was such a load. Then it managed to allow a fake avira virus to infect my computer...The real world results tell the story. Avast has stopped several intrusions and blocked web sites I wouldn't have dreamed were malicous...I also don't think the others have a boot scan option which makes me feel comfortable after an intrusion.. ;D
-
avast free soo far the best and lightest and most complete antivirus program ive ever used... highly recommend it... avast detection rates may have gone down a lot these past few results... it will shoot up to the top when avast 7 has been released and stabilised...as avast 5 was just development avast 6 was the final product and now avast 7 they are trying to boost the level of protection as version 4.8 did not have much heuristics and relied on signatures a lot... avast has also the fastest update time among all the other antiviruses i see....
-
avast free soo far the best and lightest and most complete antivirus program ive ever used... highly recommend it... avast detection rates may have gone down a lot these past few results... it will shoot up to the top when avast 7 has been released and stabilised...as avast 5 was just development avast 6 was the final product and now avast 7 they are trying to boost the level of protection as version 4.8 did not have much heuristics and relied on signatures a lot... avast has also the fastest update time among all the other antiviruses i see....
agree :)
-
i think lah the real version where avast will be very implemented with tonnes of detection technology that gives 99.99% no false positives might be version 10
:/ correct me if im wrong
-
...technology that gives 99.99% no false positives...
That's impossible. ;)
-
mmmm pretty right there make that 95% :)
-
Hi all,
Sorry to scratch open an old wound here, but I would like to add my view on this.
I believe strongly in test results, especially if they are from reliable sources.
In the AV tests (av-comparatives/Avtest.org) I can see avast is not doing so well, but then we must keep things in perspective!
first we ignore the paid Av's because we are getting Avast for FREE and that's a big +1 for me!
Second we look at the main contenders here Avira and AVG.
Avira is consistently scoring much higher than Avast, but then you must remember that the free Avira Does not scan E-mail, does not check sites, Does not check Scripts! it's basically only a scanner and file shield! (Don't forget their Horrifically aggressive intrusive advertising campaign)
AVG offers a little more than Avira and it consistently scores lower than Avast, AVG was never very good.
Here's a link to AV comparatives 2011 comparison. - http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart2.php
(Set it from Jan to Dec and sort via detection rates and notice Avast had a bad year and still Owned 5 other products, plus a 95.6% detection rate is still very good!
-
While I believe legit tests do say something, I haven't given up on Avast because of them. In fact I just paid again for another year of AIS. For me the concern is the slip in testing.
Jan-Mar 1.2% detection compared with Sept-Nov 3.7% (3rd from the bottom).
It's not a huge drop but it's the slipping thats a little concerning. People paying for an AV and doing any research will think carefully about actually paying for a product that is at the bottom of the list (and it's the paying customers that are keeping the lights on). If nothing else it's not good PR.
I'm hopeful that Ver 7 will stop this trend and turn this around (as VLK has indicated). Really looking forward to the Beta.
-
Hi all,
Sorry to scratch open an old wound here, but I would like to add my view on this.
I believe strongly in test results, especially if they are from reliable sources.
In the AV tests (av-comparatives/Avtest.org) I can see avast is not doing so well, but then we must keep things in perspective!
first we ignore the paid Av's because we are getting Avast for FREE and that's a big +1 for me!
Second we look at the main contenders here Avira and AVG.
Avira is consistently scoring much higher than Avast, but then you must remember that the free Avira Does not scan E-mail, does not check sites, Does not check Scripts! it's basically only a scanner and file shield! (Don't forget their Horrifically aggressive intrusive advertising campaign)
AVG offers a little more than Avira and it consistently scores lower than Avast, AVG was never very good.
Here's a link to AV comparatives 2011 comparison. - http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart2.php
(Set it from Jan to Dec and sort via detection rates and notice Avast had a bad year and still Owned 5 other products, plus a 95.6% detection rate is still very good!
but thats not good for gdata because avast is have a bad year
-
but thats not good for gdata because avast is have a bad year
I see you're back on your Gdata bandwagon. This is the avast! Forum. :)
-
As said earlier i know nsm from youtube itself...
nsm has been opposing avast! even in his/her youtube comments...I dont know why nsm should post .the gdata crap on avast! forum.[no offense to gdata]
-
but thats not good for gdata because avast is have a bad year
I see you're back on your Gdata bandwagon. This is the avast! Forum. :)
duh because im using avast though gdata you should know that by know :P
whatever something bad happens to avast it all way affects gdata.have you notice that in the test.
-
That doesnt mean u come here and began your gdata wagon wheel...
Neither...i know that u posted in a youtube comment saying that we are over our heads...Hmmm
u also mentioned that avast is crap...
That also hurts avast feelings...
why u come here then?
I have initially warned u...
and i think u should stay away and leave this thread alone rather than hijacking it with useless gdata crap...
-
I have a crazy ;D suggestion for Avast Developers. Adapt avast so to perform great at the tests (apparently, great PR in the eyes of some specific users), even if that means reducing the real actual security!!!
Wait, Oh no! Let's think again. The tests are only 1 way to compare different AV tools in a certain specific way or using specific methods. The real actual final security comes from real use, and the means that avast offers for the benefit of user's security may not be correctly measurable by the specific methods used by a certain AV test.
OK, so, maybe the tests are only one way to compare different security tools, and not the only one nor the definitive one? :-\
Yeah, I think I'll keep testing my personal use of avast, while I'll be open to the possibility of changing to some other tool if really necessary. I hope Avast Developers will keep focusing in real security and much less in marketing.
In the meantime, I am more interested in other useful topics.
-
Gdata has purchased avast! engine....so why should avast! help gdata in any way?
stop hijacking this thread please?
-
but thats not good for gdata because avast is have a bad year
I see you're back on your Gdata bandwagon. This is the avast! Forum. :)
duh because im using avast though gdata you should know that by know :P
whatever something bad happens to avast it all way affects gdata.have you notice that in the test.
You should also know by now that avast has no control over what Gdata does with there scanning engine so it's pretty pointless for you to keep posting here im afraid, your comments - suggestion's and pitifull threats you make against this forum ( avast ) and it's members are not welcome, it would be very appreciated if you would just go back and crawl under your Gdata rock >:(
-
Something strange happens with all threads that nsm0220 post in........... They usually end up being locked ;)
-
Something strange happens with all threads that nsm0220 post in........... They usually end up being locked ;)
That would be nice, banned even better ;D
-
I have a crazy ;D suggestion for Avast Developers. Adapt avast so to perform great at the tests (apparently, great PR in the eyes of some specific users), even if that means reducing the real actual security!!!
I'm all for that as it would almost have to of necessity also increase "actual security" which valid testing to some point does indicate. Personal testing and experience is almost irrelevant as one cannot know if it is the user or the AV keeping the one system clean. My real world testing in the last 6 months showed avast let a couple things in. I'm a very careful user who doesn't visit risky places so my real world testing doesn't look so good. Seems to reflect what the the lab tests indicate--Avast needs to address this.
As I've said elsewhere when VLK admits the tests do in fact reveal a concern that needs addressing--enough said. Apparently Avast takes valid testing seriously. ;)
Bring on Ver 7.
-
I have a crazy ;D suggestion for Avast Developers. Adapt avast so to perform great at the tests (apparently, great PR in the eyes of some specific users), even if that means reducing the real actual security!!!
Wait, Oh no! Let's think again. The tests are only 1 way to compare different AV tools in a certain specific way or using specific methods. The real actual final security comes from real use, and the means that avast offers for the benefit of user's security may not be correctly measurable by the specific methods used by a certain AV test.
OK, so, maybe the tests are only one way to compare different security tools, and not the only one nor the definitive one? :-\
Yeah, I think I'll keep testing my personal use of avast, while I'll be open to the possibility of changing to some other tool if really necessary. I hope Avast Developers will keep focusing in real security and much less in marketing.
In the meantime, I am more interested in other useful topics.
Some of the tests mean nothing, but it makes sense to look at detection tests as these test the AV's at their most basic form - Signatures and Heuristics...
In the test zero day malware is used that any user in the real world could contract, I believe this to be a good test if a large number of samples are used.
Avast has always held the standard for scanning speed and this is a GREAT plus, but I would gladly trade that for better protection...
-
Well, i'm not going to have any excuses because i know some parts of avast! don't performs as they should. Behavior Shield being one of them. If anything bypasses Web Shield and Network Shield, not much will stop the threat localy. And thats where some brands provide behavior based detection that actually works and it works really well. avast!'s behavior shield doesn't exactly do it's job. avast! 7 is suppose to fix this part but for now, we don't know for sure since there is no avast! 7 beta just yet.
-
@Hellion,
I'm not saying that avast doesn't need to improve. I'm not saying that the tests don't matter at all.
What I said was that it is only a (little) PART of my decision to use one antivirus or the other.
About specific tests being some "must" because "every user can find these malware", I would agree about the set of malware to be tested against, but the methodology is still a problem (for any antivirus, not only for avast). The method that one antivirus stops some malware can be measurable by the specific test, while other antivirus uses a very different method to stop the same malware and the same test is not able to measure this other method of protection. Both protection methods stop the same malware, but only one protection method is evaluated by the specific test. The results of the test won't show you "real" results, but a comparison about a certain method of stopping malware.
In short, avast needs to improve (as always), but I take the tests (also when avast's results are better) only with a very little weight in my decision. Examples of other factors are system resources, forum help, ease of use and more.