Tales from the toolroom - AVG free v. the rest

Yes I respect that
The bold and red etc were actually for others quickly viewing, to catch their eye as it were

Oh and I put Firefox and AVG in the same sentence only because of this thread (about AVG)
IE obviously is still required (and used) for Windows updates (and minor other things)
That's just one more area (discussed above, "in a nut shell") that Users should do

Go Avira, he's our man, if he can't do it, no one can :grinthumb

Lol you guys can ***** about avg all you like, but the fact of the matter is that I've been running this along with malware bytes and spybot at work and for clients without ANY problems at all. They catch the infections EVERY time. You can be the noob who has to argue and stick with their little known av due to having no credible experience in the IT field and really no experience at all. If you proof that avg is useless, I'm calling you out on it. I want some real technical proof and maybe some screenshots.

Comparing AV’s is a complicated task. But no task is so complicated that with a little effort you can’t make it even more complicated. And I think I can contribute to that.

My experience with fora (if you know Latin) or forums (if you don’t) of various kinds, has taught me certain truths, proven to myself, ipso facto, since I’m talking about my experiences.

1. No matter how many threads there are on AV’s, a new one will always attract heated attention. It’s a new horse race, a new chance.
2. Often, several such races…er…threads are running simultaneously in several sections, relevant or not, or even in the same one.
3. It’s not a one horse race, all AV’s do an adequate job against prevalent viri (if you know latin) or viruses (if you don’t) or virii (if you think you do but don’t). Prima faciae at least (I pretend I do).
4. People tend to be happy with the AV they’ve got and will support it, rather like one supports the horse he has put his money on.
5. As inevitable result of 3 & 4 above, there is usually plenty of disagreement and a tendency for all horses to be the winners…and the losers, at the same time.

Without doubt, the opinion of experts can decide the race, provided of course they can agree with each other, which is not a sure bet.

So, what is my opinion? I’ve expressed it earlier in this here thread. But though it’s here, it’s neither here nor there. Not being an expert, my opinion does not come from the horse’s mouth. After all, I am a cat.

Now, where are my binoculars? C’mon Antivir…you can do it…cut the corner and get in front …that’s my boy…

Oh Cheers and Cheerleaders..........YaY!

Right, you just felt the need for everyone to know you think I'm wrong. Sadly there are consequences, even when using a non lethal weapon such as altruism.

So, I guess that means than you still haven't grasped the correlation between using FF and safer browsing, and you're still choosing the let all the credit reside with Avira.

I've been aware of that for quite some time. Were you aware that repetition is a principle form of propaganda?

I actually dated a cheerleader, she had muscles in places that even the snake never told Eve about. And those pompoms! My goodness what she could do with those pompoms, and what I briefly considered telling you what to do with yours. :evil: :rolleyes: :haha:

I just wrote this little self induldency, but you might enjoy cheering along. Pompoms ready? "Captaincranky he's our man, but you still can't convince him, no one can"!

Give me an "A" give me a "V"

Oh etc etc, you get the rest :rolleyes:

Edit:

Lol the rest is "IRA" how funny

I was going to let your entire original cheer post slide, I never would have been able to live with myself if I did.

Ok well I've made light of the subject, but some actually might want to know

There have also been quite a number of previous threads on this subject, including:

What do you think is the best Antivirus right now?

What's the best antivirus program?

AVG Free Antivirus

Instead of AVG? free antivirus recs please

and Recommended antivirus/malware programs? http://www.techspot.com/vb/topic121226.html

I feel this debate will go forever, due to:

Personal Choice
Changes in Antivirus revisions
Actual abilities of Antivirus softwares
Varying Reviews across the Net (Here's another external review: http://www.av-comparatives.org/

So, there you go

PC World Mag runs an AV or security suite comparison fairly frequently. For obvious reasons they tend to concentrate on paid versions. As you suggest, brands wax and wane, plus they all have skill sets that differ from category to category of malware to which they are exposed. Simple AV detection and removal seems to be almost 100% though, in most suites tested.

I actually have Avira installed on a second computer, but I use that machine infrequently. So. with one principle email address it doesn't seem likely I could (or should) get a second copy licensed. I actually kinda see where these companies are coming from and their policy of one free copy, one computer, one address, is as much as we should expect.

Being an old fuddy-duddy, I don't have a bit torrent client installed, don't belong to a PnP network. or game on line. I'm no fun to be sure, but I don't reap the "benefits" of those sorts of behaviors either. And don't get me started about facebook, I'm a recluse, and where that site is concerned a "germophobe". Whaddya gonna do though, no fun, no infections.

It's unfortunate that you've trivialized the major impact (which I believe exists) with FF's designed inability to handle ActiveX, and the "No Script" add-ons effectiveness as a preemptive measure. With no script active, there's no vibrance ads, no clever hyperlinked words, no popups of any kind. As we discussed the other day, if you OK yahooapis script, then you can't edit titles. Is that what's supposed to happen? Because to me that just seems poorly written. I'm going to take a screen shot of the smilies and try to commit them to memory, then type them in by hand. I guess advertisers think that script blocking is a nightmare, but for me, it's a dream come true.

Believe it or not, (I say that tongue in cheek, since you obviously will) AVG let a virus slide the other day (didn't catch the tag # though) and of all things, Adaware (free) caught it and removed it.

I just ran the M$ Malicious Software Removal tool for March, and again, it didn't find anything. It does beg the question, exactly how hard should I go looking for trouble.
Sorry but, you have to be infected because you don't use Avira, is more opinion than fact. I found Avast to be tempermantal, useless and flaky, yet it also had a heyday at TS.

What the hey, with a 4 year old P-4 Prescott Emachine running dandy, how could any of my results be anything but atypical. Know what, I'm so used to this box, you could almost consider me attached to it. :haha:

Well this is obviously dependent upon where on the Internet you go, and basically your browsing habits.

But I've never had my AntiVirus pop up with Virus found (although I have run full scans in the past and it has found some basic stuff (like one file I've had since Dos days )

So for me I always wonder why I have it
I mean does everyone have their Antivirus popping up with Virus detected when it's set for resident protection? On a regular basis?

It's just about responsible safe surfing, and running the scans every now and then, in my view. Basically users need to be aware of where they are venturing and what they are downloading. As I've said many times if you want to venture into the unknown, or use File Sharing, or you're a heavy down loader (I was once) Then use Linux, you can even use a free one like Ubuntu (I only pick this one because it seems to be the most common, that many are aware of)

Safe surfing

I've scanned thousands of computers over the course of several years and the majority of those scans were performed with multiple AV products.

My personal choice? NOD32.

And sure, while my experience covers a large swath of systems, AVs and many years, I admit my observations are merely anecdotal. I have no fancy spreadsheet or pie charts to represent what I've seen in the field, but I can tell you NOD32 works very well.

The truth is, most AV products clean the vast majority of viruses you'll find. What sets them apart is avoiding false positives and features.

AVG, for example, is a respectable virus scanner. I feel AVG is "good enough" and I recommend it to my clients on a tight budget. Kaspersky has also been very good, but the scans take a lot of time to perform (especially on the job) and I've had quite a few false positives. I quit fooling with Norton years ago.. maybe it is better now.. but I won't ever touch another Norton product again after all the BS I've encountered over the years with the program itself. Avira and Trend Micro have been good as well, but again, I don't like the false positives.

When all is said and done, sngx has the right idea -- prevention is key. Use your noggin, update your software regularly and don't surf the "seedy" areas of the web. As long as you have some experience with the web, you'll be just fine, even without AV. If you don't have much experience though, you might want to get yourself an AV. The free ones (AVG, Avira and Avast) are all perfectly acceptable and will protect you well.

I respect the wishes of others except when it is just plain silly! I kept my council the other day when a client told me he was going to move from Kaspersky to NOD32 and then had trouble installing NOD32 because bits of Kaspersky were still on the system. When I got down to sorting this out I found the remains of McAfee as well and the reason he had being disappointed with Kaspersky was probably because of this.

OK guys, it’s easy to say “Avoid seedy sites” etc. But you only live twice, once for your dreams and once for yourself, the latter of which has the more substance.

You might as well say, “No drink, no overeating, no women, no indulgence, no excitement, no nothing, and you’ll live to be 100 years”.

The inevitable question arises, “To do what?”

Or, as somebody wittier than me put it,
“Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing.”
(Redd Foxx) (Well a fox is smarter than a cat).

So, if we follow a strict regimen of no P2P, no warez, no downloads, no porn, no new software, no social networking, no unproven sites, no link-clicking etc, what will happen?

If we are not too bored by the computer to turn it on and enter the web, we’ll catch a drive-by virus, or have our ports scanned by a hacker who will then duly load us with his Trojans, or get infected by what we most trust – did you know that fully respectable sites can be taken over by hackers? Or that Sony once put rootkits on its CD’s?

So, we may be super careful and, especially, lucky not to get seriously infected for some time. What then, success? Not so fast!

The disc will suddenly kick the bucket, in which bucket we had our most valuable, and inevitably not properly backed up, files.

The moral?

• Keep a full defense system, including updates
• Do regular backups
• Be reasonably careful, which in plain language means, “Don’t be an *****”.

• Last but not least, Have fun! (bobcat)

I'm no geek with a computer but probably no slouch either. I'm about average I would say. I've found the above arguments to be rather fascinating and enlightening.

I have however stumbled upon a major question, a dilemma so to speak. Why does there have to be a "best" anti-virus (AV is the anagram used by all you fundies)? How then is the "best" defined? By what virus it identifies and destroys or how many maybe? By the amount of system resources it uses in doing it business? Maybe it's all based on a simple majority vote by the literate or illiterater combined? Or perhaps it's judged by the panel of experts on AVs whose individual hard work has caused their hearts to settle upon a product that they've become attached and biased toward and thus ultimately forgotten what the true purpose of their experiments were in the first place?

Is it impossible to admit that one AV is capable of doing something that another cannot? In comparing two AVs aren't we in essence comparing a hockey player to a football one - one is better at skating on ice and hitting a puck whilst the other is quick across the turf and can punt a pigskin a good distance?

In a world of infinite viruses, cumulatively an infinite amount of time to contract these viruses, and subsequently a large number of variables defining the "best", aren't we asking the wrong questions?

Again, I'm one sitting on the technology fence - I guess it allows me to appreciate either side.

Spyder_1386

One of the first things to consider is what the product does: there are some which do 'only' anti-virus, others that do anti-spyware and yet others that do things like protect against phishing, hackers and the rest.
Personally I think that the top ones are so good that a single product that does all for you is probably best and avoids conflicts, duplication and sometimes expense.
People get fed up with me saying this, but top of the heap at the moment is Kaspersky Internet Security 2009 - followed by either F-Secure or Avira, then NOD32. Norton is producto non grata.

The 23rd Psalm.......

To Regret having missed those things! (Sooo, obvious)

(Sorry Bobcat, but here again, obvious.)

Well, not all that obvious. But , I knew that, and this was written (I believe) because of it. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897445.aspx Sony's CD rootkit was at very least partially responsible, of that much I'm sure.

You mean to tell me the 1,000,000 MTBF stat is a lie too? First weapons of mass destruction, now this.

I don't know if this is THE moral, but did you that a common male activity that was once linked as a causality of blindness, upon further study, has been linked to improved prostate health in aging men? Either that or the moral compass which guides our scientists has fled.

Captaincranky's Twitter; In addition to the TS forum tab which I have open, there are 88 other tabs open consisting of "Art Photo" galleries. But, yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no malware! For verily, in addition to an array of security software, I have a good Christian upbringing to ward off evil. Therefore, I will download no screensavers, yield not to the temptation of revealing my personal information, and I will dwell in the house of of my lord, Mozilla, forever.

Here's where I'm having problems. I think I'm having fun, but I'm so damned old that I'm losing the frame of reference to base it on Plus the fact the opportunities for fun are not as forthcoming as they were previously. Gotta "jet" it's time for my nap :zzz:

I just got a nastry trojan infection while using AVG8. I posted the problem in a thread in this forum and kimsland asked me to remove AVG and install AVIRA, which I did. AVIRA found and cleaned stuff that AVG had not detected. I work in a computer lab, and I had installed AVG in all of the computers (8 computers). After this incident I removed AVG from all of them and installed AVIRA and I was surprised when AVIRA found nasty stuff in all of them that had been unnoticed to AVG.

Maybe some of them are false positives, but (i) AVG did not see coming the trojan I got and (ii) I feel safer now

You and many others, Manolo! Seems as if AVG has lost the plot with v8 and later.

Well, I switched from AVG a while back because it was no longer Dial Up friendly. I now am a Beta Tester for Avira's new Premium Security Suite, and I love it. No problems, ever, and I go to some websites that some would say are "fishy", yet, I'll take Avira off and scan with Avast and others, and I get nothing, so I'd say Avira is a really reliable product. It finds things immediately and will even block most of those Fishy sites with my version.

The only thing I have against it is that when it finds a virus, it beeps and is more annoying than a siren, imo.

Well at least your computer speaker works, because that's the one it uses