a bit concerning

[alpha1]

i read recently in some av-comparatives comparisons,that most av programs,including avast,didn't load completely on system start-up (so as not to slow start-up too much),compromising security.
report did however mention 4 programs that did load completely at start-up; which bears the question,why not avast?

i suggest that this behavior be rectified in version 7.

[Asyn]

i read recently in some av-comparatives comparisons,that most av programs,including avast,didn't load completely on system start-up (so as not to slow start-up too much),compromising security.

That's nonsense.

[CraigB]

i read recently in some av-comparatives comparisons,that most av programs,including avast,didn't load completely on system start-up (so as not to slow start-up too much),compromising security.
report did however mention 4 programs that did load completely at start-up; which bears the question,why not avast?

i suggest that this behavior be rectified in version 7.

Please supply a link to where you read this, as Asyn said thats nonsense.

[alpha1]

www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/performance/performance_aug_2011.pdf

of course that test was for security suites, but i doubt stand alone av programs are different.

[CraigB]

Avast does completely load at startup unless it has been configured through settings to load after boot, a rootkit scan is done about 8 min's after boot.

[alpha1]

i don't think u read report craig.

[CraigB]

i don't think u read report craig.

I did read it and i believe it's wrong.

[alpha1]

how can they be wrong?

av-comparatives is a recognized independent lab,i.e they have proper equipment and qualified staff.

[YoKenny]

i don't think u read report craig.

I did read it and i believe it's wrong.

It is just another opinion.

As alpha1 is a Newbie he has a lot to learn abut avast! 

[alpha1]

well im not newbie anymore 

[Gargamel360]

If the report is right, then its fine by me. 

I take no offense from an AV that makes effort to find a balance between performance and security. 

If most programs (including Avast!) practice this, there must be a reason, no? 

[alpha1]

performance on frequent operations,not startup.

im not saying it should load completely even if it takes half an hour for windows to start (and be usable), but since starting/restarting windows isn't a frequent action generally,i for 1 am willing to wait an extra few seconds in return for increased security.

[DavidR]

The next time you reboot, once the avast Icon is in the tray open it, then the real-time shield, file system shield and see just how many files have been scanned during boot. Not all will have been scanned as those in the persistent cache won't be scanned.

Avast also loads a kernel driver, which has to happen very early.

[alpha1]

why would av-comparatives make such a statement?

btw dave,ur not a manchester utd fan r u?

[DavidR]

I have absolutely no idea, as I have no idea how they measure what is loaded when during boot as by their own admission this is hard to determine.

Manchester who, no, I think watching football is about as exciting as watching paint dry.