[Explanation] Why old avast! versions are forcibly updated

[REDACTED]

Using the very latest avast! antivirus software is the best possible way to keep your computer infection free and following common sense on how to keep your computer safe from malware.

Not going to argue your point but with a caveat...."once it is stable". The question is do YOU want to be in control of moving to the latest or have Avast take that decision out of your hands and overnight install the new version, reboot your machine and hope you had everything backed up and nothing goes wrong ?  My point is choosing Manual or Automatic is the decision you make to that very point and should be adhered to by Avast.

I also agree with your comments on Avast.....I was hoping my comments would be looked at more of "hey, you know these users have a point....maybe better way to handle this".........but it has started a firestorm of "upgrades should be done whether you like it or not and if you don't then you are clearly not smart enough to know so we'll do it anyway".  Wow ! 

You need 3 years and 3 versions to go by until you are able to find out that 2 versions old one was stabilized? What!?

Besides, those update controls (Manual and/or Automatic) are for current version and are NOT absolute control for all versions back. Which means that you can freely control all updates within currently relevant version (lets say all v9 builds) so you can control if you want a newly released update to be installed now or maybe in next 2 months. But it doesn't give you absolute control for older versions that shouldn't really exist and be used anymore...

All my PCs were on V8 Build 1497....which was the last official stable build of V9.  This means I am within one year of V9 release...and if I look (which I have) to when V9 I would call stable....I am probably within about six month window.  If you want me to list known problems that effect me specifically of V9 that until Spring release were not fixed I will but don't think anyone wants that info and rat hole.  Also, Avast even said they are STILL SUPPORTING last version of V8 & V7....so your point is not valid......if they are supporting then why are they using EMU update to FORCE install and reboot.  These points are not arguable.....they are fact...you and others only retort is that I should have been on V9....that point is not even relevant to the point/issue...........which AGAIN for the millionth time is HOW....again HOW....Avast does or plans to force migrate users to newer version.

@RejZor, you are an extremely tech savvy guy, so is @bob1360 and the other mega posters so stop for a second and take your emotion (or agenda) out of it and think for a second on this.  If I agree (I do) that being on a newer stable A/V is better then the question (objection) posed here is how much time is given on older versions and how this is done.  You have stated basically "FU" to the users......would you like that type of treatment from Microsoft or other software vendors to your PC ?  I'm guessing every one of you guys use test PCs or VM loads or something to protect your assets while you play with BETAs.  Peoples PCs are very important to them and A/Vs are now by nature very intrusive and CAN (proven to happen) bork a machine.  SO, AGAIN......all I am asking is for Avast to look at HOW they force a migration.  The answer they cannot stop VBS updates to old versions is total BS.....others have done it and even Avast has in older versions.....in fact, very simple to do.  IMHO people stick on these old versions because they "see" the VBS coming in and think the old A/V is just running that alone and newer program A/V adds nothing.....which is wrong (of course Avast has not helped themselves with all the BS bloatware in new versions...but I digress).  I would guarantee that if people saw their VBS updates stop they'd then be forced to make the move.  Anyway, my point is that if Avast truly is worried about "protecting" their user base then they should see a forced program update from one version to another as a potential high risk item.  However, if you want my personal opinion...they are more worried about saying they have x-more people on x-rev so they can keep those statistics high of user base that everyone throws in your face.

We can keep going on with this for infinite pages.....does not bother me......I've got all time in world to post.
In summary (for this post)......you won't get argument from me that "stable" newer is better but if you are saying that a forced install and reboot of a person's PC is good thing then I will never change my opinion.....and deep down I don't think you believe that either......you just want to argue your point.  Also, I can tell you with 100% knowledge that Avast's EULA neither gives them the right to do this nor by use of their program on my PC have I given them the right to.  There are no "caveats" in the EULA on this nor in the Manual/Auto setting.  I'm a intellectual property lawyer for the tech industry (used to run software team, under grad EE, Masters CPE) and if you don't believe my expertise hire or send the EULA to a lawyer you know and ask him/her......but you are going to hear the answer I'm telling you.

Again, for you & others......this is nothing personal so I hope all this is taken as good conversation but I can tell you my "intent" in all this was not to just complain or post for the sake of it....it was truly to point out a method I think provides risk to the user and Avast as well as a simpler/better way to handle.

Regards.

[bob3160]

Is this repeated information ever going to stop
Your keys on your computer must have gotten worn out from all the typing by now.
This is never going to get solved to everyone's satisfaction and all the information has been passed back and forth countless times.

[REDACTED]

Is this repeated information ever going to stop
Your keys on your computer must have gotten worn out from all the typing by now.
This is never going to get solved to everyone's satisfaction and all the information has been passed back and forth countless times.

Trying to control his keyboard now?  He wants to type let him type... what's it to you?

[REDACTED]

Is this repeated information ever going to stop
Your keys on your computer must have gotten worn out from all the typing by now.
This is never going to get solved to everyone's satisfaction and all the information has been passed back and forth countless times.

Agreed........I'm now typing in "JEDI" (ie. letters worn off keys but still know where they are).
In fact, think it is almost getting easier on these threads.......I can cut-n-paste from my old posts. 
I only respond because it does not seem like the retort responses are even reading my point.
Why ?........no one sees I'm on V8 1497, no one sees I'm not arguing the virtues of new A/V, the point I make seems to be lost or not read....or that I'm attacking Avast for moving support away from older versions (I'm not).
As long as folks keep throwing back the argument the best way to protect stupid/lazy users for their own good is to take control of their PC then I'm going to keep posting.

[bob3160]

Knock yourself out. Make yourself feel good.
It's not going to change what's already been said and decided by both sides but, what the heck.

[REDACTED]

Knock yourself out. Make yourself feel good.
It's not going to change what's already been said and decided by both sides but, what the heck.

 
Understood.....but proves Avast's "agenda" is not to be in the best interest of their users but rather pumping up their own marketing #s.
It puzzles me that a company dedicated to protecting users would put them at risk for sake of marketing #s.
This is especially frustrating because an easy policy/method change can accomplish the very same thing and not put their customers at risk.

[RejZoR]

Sorry, but now you're just contradicting everything you've ever said.

It puzzles me that a company dedicated to protecting users would put them at risk for sake of marketing #s.

How is updating outdated software to the latest version "putting them at risk"? They did the exact opposite of that. You just make no sense with these random arguments. Running old outdated version is somehow fine and efficient and keeps users secured (how exactly is beyond me), but updating those users to the latest version because otherwise they'd still be using the same outdated version for the next 3 years is somehow putting them at risk. Lol much?

[REDACTED]

Sorry, but now you're just contradicting everything you've ever said.

It puzzles me that a company dedicated to protecting users would put them at risk for sake of marketing #s.

How is updating outdated software to the latest version "putting them at risk"? They did the exact opposite of that. You just make no sense with these random arguments. Running old outdated version is somehow fine and efficient and keeps users secured (how exactly is beyond me), but updating those users to the latest version because otherwise they'd still be using the same outdated version for the next 3 years is somehow putting them at risk. Lol much?

OK....I was calm until now............... 
Do you even read my posts or just pick out sentence or two ?.......obviously you do not.
I'm NOT ON a 3 year old product !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm on a VALID V8 build 1497.........can you READ ?
AND it is FLIPPIN, simple the risk is that if this FORCED, non-authorized update borks thousands of PCs then Avast loses their marketshare.  Did you even read the links to other A/Vs guys who did this ? Of course not........you are not reading cr@p.......you are so wrapped around Avast subsidizing you for your efforts that you'll say anything.  You are losing credibility by every post you make.

[CraigB]

I think this thread has run it's course, avast team have previously answered the topic and flogging a dead horse isn't going to make them change their process for a handful of users.

Time to lock this thread