Quick scans vs. Full scans

[sirMAXX]

Heya, another question...
I only have only been doing quick scans and never find anything. I hear some pros and cons about that. Like quick scans gives viruses less time to 'hide' (what ever that means or if it's a valid point.) and that obviously, quick scans are not as through, respectively.
But if I only use quick scans and never find anything or don't have too much reason to be suspicious, would it even be necessary to do a full scan?

[DavidR]

The Quick scan is essentially scanning those files which are targeted by malware (.exe, .com. dll, etc.) or if infected are an immediate risk. The Full System scan scans those same files and then a level where there is a lessor risk of infection or immediate risk if infected.

- With a resident on-access antivirus like avast, the need for frequent on-demand scans is much depreciated. For the most part the on-demand scan is going to be scanning files that would be otherwise be dormant or inert. If they were active files then the on-access file system shield would be scanning them before being created, modified, opened or executed.

I have avast set to do a scheduled weekly Quick scan, set at a time and day that I know the computer will be on. If for some reason my system wasn't on, no big deal I will catch up on the next scheduled scan.

I rarely ever do a Full System Scan.

[Pondus]

i only do full scan check if quick find anything...

[sirMAXX]

Sounds good. Yeah, I guess Avast would take care of scrutinizing everything else that gets changed or created.

[DavidR]

That is what resident on-access antivirus applications are designed to do monitor the file 'activity' (creation, modification, execution, etc. etc.) on your system.

[bob3160]

I only use the Boot time Scan. Once it comes back clean, the on-demand takes care of anything new or changed.
Will do my next Boot time Scan when avast!8 gets released.