Maybe, Nesivos, maybe. I'll grant you some of what you say (if not all) -- for one thing, as I said before, I do like the Avast (avast!) products I have and am using.
The issue I was trying to address in these posts wasn't even the quality of efficacy of the products themselves, in general (which I like), as I still use them, and will continue to use them unless they plain stop working (in which case, obviously, I'd have no choice but to pick an alternative among the many).
Instead, it was the way it seems to have been handled, without an official word of warning and advisory, and the effect such a silent treatment might have on the efficacy of a product that depends on timely information and updates. That's all.
And that's not a major issue either, in and of itself. Not yet.
As long as it's a single occurrence, a blip, that too is OK. I just hope it doesn't and won't reflect official policy going forward, and future handling of such events (glitches, bugs, etc.). Because they can happen, and whatever
can happen, most likely
will happen, eventually, now and then; you can prevent many accidents, but not all; "sh*t happens," right? We all know that (or should).
The word of advice and the plea is in
hopes of preventing it from becoming a habit, maybe part of an unspoken but practised company policy or established modus operandi when it comes to dealing with issues like the current virus definition (or software engine) update.
Simple as that. I don't expect miracles, Nesivos, and I don't know that anyone does (I think we're all aware that the mess might hit the fan at times, and things might go wrong).
I don't have illusions or expectations of Avast being a miracle product -- only a good one worth using, and maybe safeguarding, too.
And worth posting about, and for, in hopes of trying to see to it that the product remains effective, and something as simple (and avoidable) as poor communication with the customer / user base doesn't compromise its effectiveness in the future, of safeguarding us, which is the software's primary purpose (or sole purpose, as far as that user base is concerned).
I'm not overly impatient either,
True Indian.
(But I do hope we'll get a fix eventually. And that it won't involve another round of multiple-system uninstall - reinstall procedures. O.o :\)
(Incidentally, addressing the gist of your post, Nesivos, regarding Windows and third-party products and incompatibilities, and for the sake of 'full disclosure,' since it's relevant: I myself run Windows 7 almost exclusively, with only two desktops still running under Windows XP, and those two are strictly stand-alone island PCs, permanently offline, no longer and never connected to the net or networked in any way -- mostly test and software compatibility platforms.
Anyway, Nesivos,
"the only reason for anyone to continue to use XP is because they cannot afford to purchase a new computer that will run Windows 7, period" -- that may not be the case, and there could be a "comma -- or" instead of "period." Right?... ;~)
