Testimonial - AVG vs: Avast

[Chief Suspect]

Well .. after much soul-searching, I made the switch from
AVG to Avast. I think AVG has served its purpose for the
free-world, and it's becoming cumbersome now. Avast, on
the other hand, has lightning and reliable connections to
its updating data and new versions, and it all works so
much faster and reliably .. IMHO. Perhaps others did not
have the same hesitancy I observed in getting updates from
AVG, but I do not regret the move now after several weeks.

 

[Ken Peck]

I did the same a few weeks ago and am sorry I did not do it sooner.

Cheers,

Ken Peck

 

[kenny]

Avast is far better than AVG

 

[Josh Randall]

Avast is far better than AVG

Yup!

JR

 

[Chrissy Cruiser]

Yup!

JR

Yup Squared.

 

[Al Smith]

Well .. after much soul-searching, I made the switch from

AVG to Avast. I think AVG has served its purpose for the
free-world, and it's becoming cumbersome now. Avast, on
the other hand, has lightning and reliable connections to
its updating data and new versions, and it all works so
much faster and reliably .. IMHO. Perhaps others did not
have the same hesitancy I observed in getting updates from
AVG, but I do not regret the move now after several weeks.

The people at AVG have let things slide. They must be losing users
in droves. Loss of paying customers can't be far behind.

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

Yup!

JR

OK
Time for some meat with the potatoes:
- Perhaps the reason why AVG has gotten slower is that it is scanning
more thoroughly! That's exactly what you want an antivirus program to
do. Some virus writers use devilishly-clever routines in order to
subvert antivirus programs. The AV software must, in turn, respond with
equivalent craftiness. This is no simple matter. I want to know that the
AV program is working really hard!

So, what do you mean by "better?"
Or, to put it another way, "Do you want your chicken cooked fast or do
you want it cooked enough?"

What I've learned from hard experience is that I need four things from
an antivirus provider:

The first is for the program to nab the invader, isolate it, and put it
to death. I think that most programs do this part OK.

The second is for the program to reverse any damage that the invader has
caused to files on my system. Those files may be data, executable code,
or both. It may also consist of renaming files. How well does your
program do this?

The third is for the program to remove any software that may have been
placed on the hard drive by the invader. Last time around, it was me who
found the invader's second program. My antivirus sure didn't.

The fourth is for the publisher to provide some method for reversing any
changes that the invader has made to my registry. This typically is not
an automated procedure, but is a set of instructions to be carried out
by the user to manually edit the registry.

**** Note that the virus's damage has not been undone until this last
step has been performed.

My experience with various antivirus software is that many programs fall
down on the third and fourth of these. I'm glad to see these two
companies doing antivirus work in the Czech Republic.

I tried Avast last year and abandoned it -- it felt too much like a
lightweight to me. I experienced another problem, too, which I've forgotten.

With the double worm infection that I had to eradicate last week, the
only company that I found that addressed my registry problem was Norton
Antivirus, and even that was not for the particular version I was
afflicted with. For this reason, I will probably be abandoning both of
these Czech products and will pay for Norton.

Note that I have no love for Symantec, the publisher of Norton
Antivirus. I am disgusted by the way that they relate with their
customers and avoid personal support. I was also infuriated by the
performance (or lack of it) of two versions of their Norton Systemworks
on two different computers and two operating systems.

So, so far, in my own life, it appears that Norton Antivirus is the only
game in town. If you've found another outfit that can provide an
affordable, total virus removal that really works, please, for godsake,
let me/us know!

Unfortunately, there are some things that freeware has not been so good
at, things that are too important to treat lightly.

Richard

 

[Al Smith]

[some snipped]

I tried Avast last year and abandoned it -- it felt too much like a lightweight to me. I experienced another problem, too, which I've forgotten.

With the double worm infection that I had to eradicate last week, the only company that I found that addressed my registry problem was Norton Antivirus, and even that was not for the particular version I was afflicted with. For this reason, I will probably be abandoning both of these Czech products and will pay for Norton.

Note that I have no love for Symantec, the publisher of Norton Antivirus. I am disgusted by the way that they relate with their customers and avoid personal support. I was also infuriated by the performance (or lack of it) of two versions of their Norton Systemworks on two different computers and two operating systems.

So, so far, in my own life, it appears that Norton Antivirus is the only game in town. If you've found another outfit that can provide an affordable, total virus removal that really works, please, for godsake, let me/us know!

Unfortunately, there are some things that freeware has not been so good at, things that are too important to treat lightly.

Richard

You make good points. My own situation is that I've never gotten a
virus or trojan over the Internet. I've had one virus in my life,
only one, and I got it when I installed a new ZIP drive that
someone had opened, infected with a virus, then placed back on the
store shelf. I found that no antivirus was worth a damn to remove
it(I tried four different brands, including Norton), so I had to
reformat.

Meanwhile, I'm running an antivirus full time, and for me a big
feature is that it doesn't bog down my system or screw up my other
software. Since I don't get viruses anyway, that's important. If I
were getting infected every other week, removal would be top on my
list. But in the day to day on-line world, not buggering up my
system is tops. AVG failed in that respect by breaking their
downloading of updates, so I moved to Avast, which so far has been
smooth sailing.

 

[John Corliss]

Well .. after much soul-searching, I made the switch from
AVG to Avast. I think AVG has served its purpose for the
free-world, and it's becoming cumbersome now. Avast, on
the other hand, has lightning and reliable connections to
its updating data and new versions, and it all works so
much faster and reliably .. IMHO. Perhaps others did not
have the same hesitancy I observed in getting updates from
AVG, but I do not regret the move now after several weeks.

I'm using and very much like AVG. I have NO trouble getting updates and
the program runs well on my old machine. OTOH, Avast used a lot more
resources on my ME machinee the last time I ran it (about a year ago.)

I'll stick with AVG.

 

[David]

I'm using and very much like AVG. I have NO trouble getting updates and
the program runs well on my old machine. OTOH, Avast used a lot more
resources on my ME machinee the last time I ran it (about a year ago.)

I'll stick with AVG.

I'm with you, John. I rarely find any problems with AVG or its update
processes. Of course I do not let it update automatically but when I
tell it to. It doesn't interfere, or doesn't seem to interfere, with
my machine speed. I too have only had one virus found in the last
seven years but then I use Mozilla for browsing and e-mail. Mailwasher
is used to clear the detritus out of my mail server before I download
any mail at all.

 

[elaich]

The people at AVG have let things slide. They must be losing users
in droves. Loss of paying customers can't be far behind.

And just what is your basis for making such a comment?

 

[Steve H]

I'm with you, John. I rarely find any problems with AVG or its update
processes. Of course I do not let it update automatically but when I
tell it to. It doesn't interfere, or doesn't seem to interfere, with
my machine speed. I too have only had one virus found in the last
seven years but then I use Mozilla for browsing and e-mail. Mailwasher
is used to clear the detritus out of my mail server before I download
any mail at all.

Ditto, pretty much.

Most of the updates seem to be around the 200k mark - unlike Norton AV
which I binned in favour of AVG. Every update was 5+ Mb!

Even managed to shoehorn AVG onto a P166 laptop with only 64Mb of ram.
I wouldn't call that 'cumbersome'.

Regards,

 

[André Gulliksen]

So, so far, in my own life, it appears that Norton Antivirus is the
only game in town. If you've found another outfit that can provide an
affordable, total virus removal that really works, please, for
godsake, let me/us know!

You may want to try NOD32, then.

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

[some snipped]

Meanwhile, I'm running an antivirus full time, and for me a big feature

is that it doesn't bog down my system or screw up my other software.
Since I don't get viruses anyway, that's important. If I were getting
infected every other week, removal would be top on my list. But in the
day to day on-line world, not buggering up my system is tops. AVG failed
in that respect by breaking their downloading of updates, so I moved to
Avast, which so far has been smooth sailing.

Al, Please explain what you meant by "breaking their downloading of
updates."

Thanks.

The sense that I have is that the Grisoft people may have put their
focus more on substantial changes to their software for a few days,
which was responsible for a massive download that someone was
complaining about. They may have made some decisions about the relative
threat of some newcomers in light of the need to put more staff time
elsewhere.

Whenever I have to remove the destruction caused by viruses on my own
system, I have to marvel at the ingenuity and craftsmanship of the virus
writers. I just wish that their talents were put to constructive instead
of destructive uses.

The worst virus situations I've ever been involved with, by the way,
were on two separate projects that I worked on for our largest
California telephone company. The phone company seemed to have been a
cesspool of viruses, and, working in both locations, I managed to bring
them home with me on two occasions. The corporate setting used McAfee at
the time, with major maintenance being done for the telco by IBM. I put
out an alert when I discovered that the maintenance company was always
one release behind the AV provider (!).

I've only had to deal with bad viral infections four times, but each
time required at least eight hours of work to eradicate. In the Windows
arena, every infestation has required some dredging of the registry, and
every time, I have had to play the role of a professional detective and
programmer -- and I am not either one. This registry business is very
serious and I don't see a lot of discussion about it.

Richard

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

You may want to try NOD32, then.

Something just clicked:
This product is from Eset. It's not freeware, unless they've changed
something.

In fact, I had become interested in their antivirus a couple of years
ago. I don't remember why, but it seemed that they had something very
special to offer. I called them in San Diego, California.

Also, something very important: although they don't advertise this, they
agreed to speak with me on the phone if there were ever a problem. To me
this is a critical requirement of a security package. Email-only support
is ridiculous -- if my computer is choked up with an infection so badly
that I can't boot the computer (and this is likely, in my experience --
many viral writers have this as their goal), I cannot get on line to get
their help. In this situation, I'm dead in the water: the company offers
me no support whatsoever.

I realize that this is a freeware venue, and I'm responding to one
poster who recommended a for-profit application. In this case, I trust
that you're all with me in continuing this branch of the thread because
the virus issue is so urgent for all of us. If you don't agree, after
you have to reformat your hard disk due to a bad antivirus "solution," I
think that you'll be on board this train.

Agreed?

Richard

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

Ditto, pretty much.

Most of the updates seem to be around the 200k mark - unlike Norton AV
which I binned in favour of AVG. Every update was 5+ Mb!

Again, though, let me point out that there's a price that we've got to
pay for thoroughness. The huge updates may be due to two things: they're
comprehensive; or, they're sloppily written. I don't know which, in this
case.

Even managed to shoehorn AVG onto a P166 laptop with only 64Mb of ram.
I wouldn't call that 'cumbersome'.

Let me single out Grisoft for one very special commendation that I've
forgotten to mention earlier. The human engineering is especially good.
Although the menu system is a bit confusing, once we get the hang of it,
the entire update procedure is rather pleasant -- it chugs along with no
need for intervention. This is some very slick programming.

Richard

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

You may want to try NOD32, then.

André, please tell us more; much more!
I need to know your particular experiences with this software.

Thanks

Richard

 

[Steve H]

Again, though, let me point out that there's a price that we've got to
pay for thoroughness. The huge updates may be due to two things: they're
comprehensive; or, they're sloppily written. I don't know which, in this
case.

In Norton's case, I'd suggest sloppiness - 5Mb constituted the entire
virus database, as opposed to an incremental update.

Let me single out Grisoft for one very special commendation that I've
forgotten to mention earlier. The human engineering is especially good.
Although the menu system is a bit confusing, once we get the hang of it,
the entire update procedure is rather pleasant -- it chugs along with no
need for intervention. This is some very slick programming.

I'd agree that the control panel needs some logical tidying - there
are plenty of option there, just a bit disparate.
Once you've found them though, it's a cinch to set up.
It's a job I do just once - after installation - so it's hardly a
workaday issue.

Regards,

 

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 02 Jun 2005, David wrote

-snip-


I'm with you, John. I rarely find any problems with AVG or its
update processes. Of course I do not let it update automatically
but when I tell it to. It doesn't interfere, or doesn't seem to
interfere, with my machine speed. I too have only had one virus
found in the last seven years but then I use Mozilla for browsing
and e-mail. Mailwasher is used to clear the detritus out of my
mail server before I download any mail at all.

Just to add tuppence and all; I use AVG -- it seems good, and I've not
had problems updating. (Machine is an Athlon +2000, running 98SE.)
Like you, I don't update automatically, and I've found no viruses for
years and years.

I don't even run it in the background. (Gasp!)

I've only ever had one virus -- once -- which came c.1998 as a Word
macro in an expected document from a trusted source. I ran Norton AV
for a yeaar or so then, but after switching a few years ago to AVG I
turned off the background scanning. I run a firewall, but I don't run
AV in the background or actively for e-mail.

Part of this is because I use single-application clients for mail, news
and browser, none of which use Windows rendering (Poco, XNews and K-
Meleon, respectively), but it's also because I have a one-computer
system which no one else accesses.

Frankly, the "you've got to run antivirus in the background or you
*will* be comprised" doesn't fit every Internet user. When it's a
single-user PC, care, attention and regular maintenance can also do the
same trick.

I run virus scans the same way that I run other regular maintenance
tasks -- AdAware, Spybot, CrapCleaner and a couple of others. I also
update AVG and run a scan if I think I've clicked on something that
might be dodgy, but again -- I've never found a virus, nor have I seen
any virus-like behaviour or symptoms.

 

[André Gulliksen]

André, please tell us more; much more!
I need to know your particular experiences with this software.

I have none, unfortunately. All I can give you is hear-say and third party
opinions. What I've heard is pretty good, though. Basically it breaks down
to excellent accuracy (the only one I know that scores better than
Norton/Symantec on Virus Bulletin), lightning speed (does not bog down your
system) and friendly support.