AntiVir ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim Scott
  • Start date Start date
J

Jim Scott

I use AVG, and have done for ages with no complaints. I visit
MajorGeeks daily to check for new software and I notice AntiVir
postings there almost every day, which I assume are updates,
whereas AVG only updates now and then.
Beginning to wonder if I should change?
Any advice from those who have used both?
 
Jim said:
I use AVG, and have done for ages with no complaints. I visit
MajorGeeks daily to check for new software and I notice AntiVir
postings there almost every day, which I assume are updates,
whereas AVG only updates now and then.
Beginning to wonder if I should change?
Any advice from those who have used both?
Click to expand...

AVG has been very active with updates lately. The latest version July 24th
V6.0.504 with database 302. Have you set AVG to check for daily updates?
Running two anti virus active scanners simultaneously is not recommended.
So you could leave AVG running actively and use AntiVir to scan
periodically. I ran AntiVir ages ago but did not like the user interface
but that is just personal preference and otherwise it ran fine.
 
Jim Scott said:
I use AVG, and have done for ages with no complaints. I visit
MajorGeeks daily to check for new software and I notice AntiVir
postings there almost every day, which I assume are updates,
whereas AVG only updates now and then.
Beginning to wonder if I should change?
Any advice from those who have used both?
Click to expand...

AntiVir greatly outperforms AVG FREE in my tests. (AVG, imho, is the least
effect AV of them all).

Understand that AntiVir is not a great AV; for that you need to spring for
KAV or AVK.

If you're open for change, use AntiVir as your monitor, and fprot as your
scanner (if you're running win9x)
 
I use AVG, and have done for ages with no complaints. I visit
MajorGeeks daily to check for new software and I notice AntiVir
postings there almost every day, which I assume are updates,
whereas AVG only updates now and then.
Beginning to wonder if I should change?
Any advice from those who have used both?
Click to expand...
I got one or two crashes /freezes using antivir (98se possibly conflit
with other apps somewhere.I also found it very slow compared to avg when
scanning.Detection wise i dont think there is much between antivir ,avg
or avast.
me
 
I use AVG, and have done for ages with no complaints. I visit
MajorGeeks daily to check for new software and I notice AntiVir
postings there almost every day, which I assume are updates,
whereas AVG only updates now and then.
Beginning to wonder if I should change?
Any advice from those who have used both?
Click to expand...

Frequent updates are a *good thing.

Is that the one that updates the entire program instead of just the
definitions? That one was a pain.

I recommend Avast4, which has frequent and small definition updates.

Bob
 
bassbag said:
I got one or two crashes /freezes using antivir (98se possibly conflit
with other apps somewhere.I also found it very slow compared to avg
when scanning.Detection wise i dont think there is much between
antivir ,avg or avast.
me
Click to expand...
VB100 test results:

Antivir - 12 passes 14 fails (failed the 2 most recent tests)
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?drweb.xml

Avast! - 7 passes 17 fails (passed the 2 most recent tests)
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avist.xml

AVG - 2 passes 19 fails (passed the last test, several fails before that)
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avg.xml
 
Bob Adkins said:
Is that the one that updates the entire program instead of just the
definitions? That one was a pain.
Click to expand...

You can download virus definition files from their site, if you want.
When the program didn't change since last update, it will offer you the
choice to only download the virus definitions, otherwise it updates
completely.

No problem when you're on broadband, but I guess it's not really funny to
do that over a PSTN or ISDN line. ;-)
 
VB100 test results:

Antivir - 12 passes 14 fails (failed the 2 most recent tests)
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?drweb.xml

Avast! - 7 passes 17 fails (passed the 2 most recent tests)
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avist.xml

AVG - 2 passes 19 fails (passed the last test, several fails before that)
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?avg.xml
Click to expand...

Antivirus products often fail the VB100 for no other reason than
differing philosophies between the tester and the product developer. A
failure to pass the VB100 doesn't necessarily mean that the procuct is
incapable of detecting the test samples. A different test protocol
with the same test samples would produce an entirely different result.

I recall a recent test result at Uni Hamburg where if you looked at
only the results of ITW (In The Wild) viruses, AVG and other products
scored 100%. Most all av products do well in this category. They do
the basic function of a anti _VIRUS_ very well. They all detect _KNOWN
VIRUSES_ which are currently in active circulation. This being the
case, to make judgements concerning a product on the basis of just
VB100 pass/fail on ITW viruses is absurd and foolish. The pass/fail
idea itself is actually childish.

Antivirus products nowdays do far more than detect ITW viruses. The
best ones detect virus droppers (which are Trojans), and they test
well in a "zoo" (large collection of) viruses including old viruses no
longer deemed to be ITW. They now perform better in the Trojan
detection category than Trojan specific scanners. They have a variety
of other capabilities and features as well which require extensive and
thorough testing.

Since antivirus products are thus becoming anti _MALWARE_ (a wide
variety of malicious code), I tend to use a different yardstick. The
VB100 has become irrelevant IMO. And using a anti-malware yardstick,
AVG is practically at the bottom of the heap. So is the highly touted
NOD32.

Art
http://www.epix.net/~artnpeg
 
(e-mail address removed) schreef:
Antivirus products often fail the VB100 for no other reason than
differing philosophies between the tester and the product developer. A
failure to pass the VB100 doesn't necessarily mean that the procuct is
incapable of detecting the test samples. A different test protocol
with the same test samples would produce an entirely different result.
Click to expand...

A whois on "virusbtn.com" might reveal some interesting information about
their "independence" too. ;)
I recall a recent test result at Uni Hamburg where if you looked at
only the results of ITW (In The Wild) viruses, AVG and other products
scored 100%. Most all av products do well in this category. They do
the basic function of a anti _VIRUS_ very well. They all detect _KNOWN
VIRUSES_ which are currently in active circulation. This being the
case, to make judgements concerning a product on the basis of just
VB100 pass/fail on ITW viruses is absurd and foolish. The pass/fail
idea itself is actually childish.
Click to expand...

Right, and IMHO that german uni test is one of the best antivirus/etc
program tests that is publicly available.
Since antivirus products are thus becoming anti _MALWARE_ (a wide
variety of malicious code), I tend to use a different yardstick. The
VB100 has become irrelevant IMO. And using a anti-malware yardstick,
AVG is practically at the bottom of the heap. So is the highly touted
NOD32.
Click to expand...

Well, at least AVG behaves reasonably well on most PCs, while Norton's
product is responsible for a lot of trouble, judging from the number of
questions & complaints in several "support" newsgroups...
 
Back
Top