AVAST 4.0 TAKING AGES TO SCAN HOURS!!!

[deep purple]

Hi there,it is taking hours to perform a scan with AVAST 4.0,i know that you can perform 3 scan types,quick scan,normal sca,thorough scan,i prefer the safest to detect any nasties!,but should it take so LONG?,,can i choose for example for it not to scan all my GAMES,PICTURES,PROGRAMS ect?,and is this a good idea?.
 if AVAST detects a VIRUS/TROJAN what is the best course of action?,DELETE or CHEST VAULT?,and is also is their a conflict with SPYBOT TEATIMER,i had trouble with the icons in the toolbar disappearing after installing and re-booting up later?some advice appreciated thankyou!

regards all.

dragonbreath

[igor]

Hi there,it is taking hours to perform a scan with AVAST 4.0,i know that you can perform 3 scan types,quick scan,normal sca,thorough scan,i prefer the safest to detect any nasties!,but should it take so LONG?,

It depends on the speed of your system and drives - and especially on the setting of "archives". If you turn on the scanning of archives, they have to be unpacked (so that they can be scanned), which can certainly take a lot of time if you have big archives on your disk.

can i choose for example for it not to scan all my GAMES,PICTURES,PROGRAMS ect?,and is this a good idea?.

If you have them in one location (or just a few), you can put these folders into the list of exclusions in program settings - avast! won't scan them. Whether it's a good idea... that's another question. I think it's safe to exlude the folders with images/movies/music - they are data files that are safe from infection. Programs and games, however, certainly can be infected.

If AVAST detects a VIRUS/TROJAN what is the best course of action?,DELETE or CHEST VAULT?

The exact question would depends on the particular virus detected, but the safest action is probably "Move to Chest" - if necessary, it can be extracted back later.

and is also is their a conflict with SPYBOT TEATIMER,i had trouble with the icons in the toolbar disappearing after installing and re-booting up later?some advice appreciated thankyou!

Couldn't it be just the WinXP "auto-hide inactive icons" feature?