About TeamViewer, I beg to disagree. It was a feature used by less than 1% of the users (most only ourselves and advanced users).
If we keep, or add, features that have security issues in other 3rd party apps, we'll see Avast being everything but a security app.
I know you'll be angry with me, but when people talk about "bloatware" and "keep only in security field" we clap-clap them...
Remote Assistance is not security in 1st place. It's convenient, it could be there, but it was gone and technical team needs to be focused 
1. Does it really matter if it is only used by a small percentage, it was essentially a unique feature to avast, not it isn't there what other unique feature is there to have people choose/switch to avast. I have no idea how much of an overhead it was, but I can't imagine it being massive.
2. You talk of bloat, well avast is still full of it, components that I will never use and that is why so many people get rid of the cr4p using a custom install or the minimum install. Fortunately people can uninstall or not install components they don't need or want, the same would be true for the avast remote assistance function.
People are more worried about components that are installed against their wishes (even though the EULA may cover that), just cast your mind back to when the safezone browser was introduced. Also all of the in your face ads for other avast products. These I would say are much well received than the avast remote assistance function.
So you think it is OK that avast removed this function, in light of the blog article about the team viewer vulnerability/exploit. If that were me I certainly wouldn't have released a blog article that highlighted the lack a remote assistance function that was driving avast users to team viewer and leaving them potentially vulnerable to exploit.
