I'm puzzled, what's best:
a) Use Avast and watch happily as your computer freezes and crashes.
b) Use AVG and know that even if your AV protection is not the best at least it's stable
Just use Antivir (ads) or Microsoft Security Essentials (Microsoft but hey....)
I've said this before but people who go on about how superior their choice of AV software is - how do they know? Why not admit like I do that you just don't know what the hell works best and just take a gamble?
The 'what's best' factor changes daily, hourly, even, depending on how up to date an AV software's database is, it's as simple as that.
So who do we listen to? You've got three choices - scan the web, bookmark all sites that do multi-testing of AV software regularly and then try to work out for yourself the discrepancies between them all.
Listen to your mate down the pub, which is roughly - but not entirely - aligned to listening to members here.
Get yourself a machine with a fresh OS installed then do your damndest to contract a virus with all of your AV software choices and see which does the best. Even better snag yourself a dozen or so new viruses from in the wild and see how they fare against different software.
The last method is probably the best although of course as databases shift the results could change within a twelve hour period.
How NOT to judge AV software is by declaring 'I've been using *whatever* for x amount of years now and I've never had a problem, I like the look of the software and it updates regularly'.
Go on everybody, carry on using what you think is best but the truth is none of them are 100% and to adopt this aurra of one-upmanship over choice of AV software is bordering on pathetic imo.
And of course always scan for malware using something like Malwarebytes and using a firewall's a pretty good idea as well.
FWIW since around '96 I've used, mainly: Nortons; Antivir; MSE and I have Avast on my media machine atm. And they're all rubbish!