Since this matter was posted in the Meeting Spot, I assume it’s open for comments from ordinary members, so I give mine, which by definition are just my opinion:

1 The best place for such advice, if considered applicable, would be its integration in the 8-steps for Removal of Malware.
2 If it requires official discussion and approval before being implemented in the above thread, which is reasonable for such a thread which is justifiably closed, then it should be posted in Site Feedback & Suggestions rather than in an off-topic meeting place.
3 If a member already has installed a good premium AV plus firewall, I see no point in replacing them with the free tools mentioned. That would be a “step” in the wrong direction. The free tools are not better than the top premium tools, not even as good I’d say.
4 Indeed, Step 1, or the whole thread, contain no advice for such replacement, merely mention good free tools for those without protection. Of course, those who lack either AV or firewall, should proceed to immediately install the free tool(s).
5 However, if there is a tendency for advisors to recommend the a.m. replacement, then Step 1 should be amended to make it clear that it is not recommended.
6 If, on the other hand, a member’s existing AV is clearly considered below par, it may well have been the reason for the presence of malware. In this case, replacement seems logical before trying to get rid of the malware. Probably even better, the member should first scan with the existing inferior tool, then replace it and repeat for more results.

Discussion of Virus and Malware

Bobbye Mon Ami

The relegation to "The Meeting Place" of your discussion on the subject matter makes no sense.

Perhaps, the "powers to be" of this website could explain their rationale to the members, or not.

Bobbye,

You know my position on this.

If someone has paid for a security suite then we have no right at all to "recommend" that they unistall.

No antivirus is perfect and everything will let something through at some point. The only time we should be telling people to install antivirus is if they don't have any.

I am I'm still learning a lot about AV, but from what I've seen and heard in the past few months, it seems that Norton and Mcafee have been found to miss a LOT more than Avira, so wouldn't that mean it'd be best if they have something like that to recommend them run a scan with the program already installed, and then maybe TEMPORARILY remove the paid AV?

This coming from Dr. Vader from here on Techspot, he's done a lot of cleaning recently on school computers and kid's computers we know from school...

Here's the official quote

Obviously the UPDATED 8-step Viruses/Spyware/Malware Preliminary Removal Instructions
Does not require updating

Regarding why this thread is at The Meeting Spot
This is because it is not on topic
What is on topic ? On topic would be when you post for support required
The Meeting Spot is to allow other members to discuss things, otherwise not related to the normally offered support.
Therefore this threads location is correct, as stated previously and clearly (before this thread was made) to Bobbye, through PM

In regards to mentioning: Use another Antivirus
Here is another quote: Note this is a Rule

Therefore if any member wishes to help in the Malware removal process they must first, check the logs and act originally solely on that.

I agree with Bobbye that the suggestion to replace the currently installed Antivirus can be made at the end of the entire cleaning process, but it is also not against any rule, if a member wishes to suggest (without demand) to replace the currently installed Antivirus, at any time during the thread, whilst also going through the logs

I hope that clears things up

When is Replacement of AV Advisable

I wish to clarify and stress my all-important point 6:

I do see a logical case for recommending an alternative AV before removal of malware, but strictly provided that the existing AV is clearly substandard. After all, we are trying to eliminate tough malware and we need a good tool, not an inferior one probably responsible for its presence in the first place. Trying to do it with an inferior tool and then installing a good one, is like holding a faulty umbrella that won’t open, and opening a good one after being soaked by the rain. The fact that the substandard AV has been paid for is not a real consideration, it’s what is called in accounting a “sunk cost”. Just because we bought a faulty umbrella doesn’t mean we should be soaked by the rain instead of opening a freely available good one.

I repeat that all this refers to substandard AV’s, and I further clarify that by substandard I don’t mean Norton, McAfee or any other leading product. Performance differences do vary depending on who and when performs the test, but leading products generally do a good job. Of course, my arguments also refer to a stable system that will tolerate changing AV’s, otherwise they are inapplicable.

Now as regards differences of opinion, the OP did not refer to inferior AV’s, so I see no existing disagreement.

Really?
Well I'll give you an example then.

The "Op" states Malware is likely present and also provides the attachments. All good so far
The "Op" also states that he cannot access the Internet and his AVG8 Antivirus will not update

Now I'll just pause here before continuing. AVG8 is known to stop Internet access when it is corrupt. This has been proven hundreds of times on hundreds of threads and is related to one driver, a network driver ironically, that is a part of the AVG8 installation.
Just by pure co-incidence Norton also can corrupt with a similar network driver causing a similar - no Internet access scenario.
After much investigation (generally through loads of experience) with Norton and AVG8, it was found that this network driver would mainly only corrupt under malware or Virus infection (being a tad ridiculous) And by removing this offending driver the "Op's" machine could in fact access the Internet again! But to remove the single network driver, the Antivirus uninstall tool would need to be run.

Therefore under this one example, I would suggest to remove the inferior AVG8 Antivirus (Note: I honestly believe AVG8 is inferior anyway) by running the removal tool
On all occasions (all) this then allowed Internet access again.

Therefore this would be a "logical case" for removing a corrupted Antivirus, and a perfect opportunity to suggest an "alternative" better Antivirus, such as Avira. Note: Avira has never caused this network issue, even under Malware Virus infection, and Avira seems to be better anyway, as proved by scans done after AVG8 has been scanned, finding and removing further malware / Virus. Plus it uses less resource than I'd say all other Antiviruses with it's single running process as shown in Task Manager.


So, this would then confirm that depending upon the scenario, an alternative Antivirus can be mentioned
By the way, I could also list the many advantages and disadvantages between Antiviruses, but the main point being here, was: Is it ok to suggest another Antivirus at any stage throughout the thread, from a support member ? Yes most definitely ! If that support member believes that replacing the Antivirus will help the "Op" in the process of removing malware.

Lack of communication?

Without meaning disrespect, I fail to see the entire point you are trying to prove to me. While your initial reaction seemed disapproving, your conclusion clearly agrees with me, while the example you bring supports my case.

Unless…you have misread my statement: Please note that when I say I do, I don’t mean I don’t…
…Such misunderstanding could lead to the annulment of every existing marriage.

I find you posts to be very clear and well set out
My only intention was to re-confirm (via example case scenario)

My concern was that if any member noticed me saying "uninstall AVG8 ...." I wanted to let all know that it would be for a valid reason. Although that reason may not seem directly apparent at the time, nor may the reason for any support offered be required to be defended at any stage.

All support members should help each other and give beneficial positive criticism when required. This is a community constantly on the grow. This thread itself and the members posts prove the dedication and willingness for us to have a better community. If we all set out in one direction, to grow and provide better help to all, as a community, then this forum will continue to be one of, if not, the best support forum on the Net :grinthumb

Bobbye; shouldn't a member with close to 4000 posts know that it was pretty much pointless to post it anywhere? You had to know that you'd be shouted down the instant you hit "submit reply".
You can have a working AV program that you're happy with, no malware symptoms, and you'll still be told to remove it and install Avira.

From my own standpoint, I keep my restore disc handy, never install any more software than I need to cruise the internet, and keep all passive files off the C:/ drive. If disaster strikes, in go the discs, and out goes the mean old virus. Ask for help, do a bunch of scans over and over, I pass. Fool me once shame on me, fool me twice.....not happenin'

That member has been sent a PM (just now) on advising incorrectly. Thank-you

I have amended the 8-Step removal post again. I quote:

Red color added to text

Well that is out of context

I stated that you can suggest to remove AVG and install the better free Avira

By the way, I know this thread is all on principle and words
But on a totally different subject! Are you suggesting that Avira is not better than AVG?
You do also know that it was pulled from the 8-Step Guide by Blind Dragon, who agreed that AVG8 was awful under infection.

In my view Avira is way more better than

AVG8 (Definitely)
Norton (goes without saying )
McAfee (MS preferred Antivirus just doesn't cut it, in my view)
Trend PC-Cillin (way slow and high on resource)


You honestly don't believe that free Avira is better than the above (even if users have paid for others) ?

I find that difficult to accept personally

Edit:

My free Avira is presently running at 1.3meg on its single process in TaskManager.
I'd like to see others beat that. And it seems to detect more legitimate entries than all others. Proven by hundreds of user posts
I am more than happy with it. And I definitely feel that others should try it. Excellent suggestion I believe
.

Tell me.

Your standing on this was that users (members) should not be told to uninstall their paid for product

AVG8 is free

Why then would it matter if I said remove the free AVG8 (in PM to support members only, or on the forum) and install Avira?
Note: This is only stated when a user seems to be infected all over the place, and has actually come to TechSpot for help.

Plus AVG8 was removed from the guide

So it would be right, to inform someone to install this better (in my and the 8-Step guide) view. And remove the poor AVG8 and install the better Avira.

If your PM was in concern to a paid product, ok good point. But not AVG8, as this is free just like the excellent Avira.

The relevancy of Avira over AVG8 is relevant to this thread. Brought up by you and me.