Different Vendor's Antivirus Programs, Different Viruses Detected

[Acid]

I've been reading the reviews on Download.com of various antivirus programs.  It seems to be the consensus that no one product can detect all viruses.

Don't all of the major antivirus products' administrators continually monitor their competitors' update databases and try to match them as soon as possible?  In other words, if Norton, for example, were the first to discover a certain new virus on Monday, I would think that Avast at al would have that virus pegged by Wednesday. There should not be a question of whether Avast can detect all known viruses -- they should -- although they may not be the first.

On the other hand, does Avast purposely not include some of the "minor or scarce" viruses so as not to over-bloat our operating systems?  Is frequent first-detection by a certain competitor the result of a larger staff made possible by their product's higher selling price?

[Lisandro]

On the other hand, does Avast purposely not include some of the "minor or scarce" viruses so as not to over-bloat our operating systems?

I think not... the virus database is always 'growing' and not providing less protection by removing signatures of it. It won't speed up your system, just left you less protected 

Is frequent first-detection by a certain competitor the result of a larger staff made possible by their product's higher selling price?

Sure, it's possible.
But, on other hand, merchandising and marketing should be 'paied' by the user too 

[jstegmann]

Take a look at www.av-test.org. They recently made a comparative test of various AV vendors response time to emerging threats.

Avast comes out pretty okay in the field. KAV seems to be leading in this regard while major vendors like McAfee and Norton are almost dead-last 

Cheers,

JS.

[.: Mac :.]

hmm according to that test mabye I should go Back to QUick Heal

J/K