Hi Tech,
Thanks for the reply.
[agree... but for me detection is not the *only* thing to pay attention... performance, configurability, ...
By the way, avast Home and Pro version "detection" will be the same in most circunstances.]
While I must agree that detection is not the only thing, assuming that the AV works well on my system, it is the single most important thing. The only reason we use an Av is for protection. Obviously, if an AV causes conflicts and system breakdowns it is not satisfactory no matter the detection rate.
But in my case at least, I have not recently tried an AV that did not run well on my system. The last ones that I have trialed were KAV 6 (Which I now have on my desktop.), Avast, NOD 32, and F-Secure (Which I now have on my laptop.)
All have run well, and I have not had to make adjustments, such as turning some part of the protection off, to make them run well.
So, it is all to the good to get one that has the best detection rates. With the last test of the PDM module by AV Comparatives, KAV has a detection rate overall of over 99%. If one is going to buy an AV, it makes sense to me to get the best detection rate since all run well on my system. It certainly appears that KAV is the best.
I have stated previously that the area where Avast falls short is in the area of trojans. I am not sure, but I have the impression that the greatest threats now are trojans. I am willing to be corrected as it is just an impression without any data to support it. A good AT like Ewido running in real time helps offset the lack of trojan detection.
All AVs are not equal. Some are more configuarable than others, some are free, and some are more expensive. There are considerable differences in detection rates, and that is the primary reason I have any anti-malware.
I have not heard of PeerGuardian, and will take a look at it. Thanks.
Best,
Jerry