Battle: AVG versus AVAST?
Pedro Sanchez
I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
When is better and which is not as bloated?
thanks
p.s. I know I've posted a lot but this is very important to me.
And thanks to you all.
========================================================================================
Sun Tzu, “If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.”
"Build a fire for a man and he will be warm for a day, but set fire to that man and he will be warm forever!"
========================================================================================
What's in a Name?
6/17/2006 after much thought,came up with this gem:
> I'm using AVG Free now.
> I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
> When is better and which is not as bloated?
>
> thanks
>
> p.s. I know I've posted a lot but this is very important to me.
> And thanks to you all.
>
*********************************************************************
I have used both AVG and Avast.
I'm tellin' you-try AntiVir free edition.
better detection than both AVG or Avast
max
--
Virus Removal Instructions: http://home.neo.rr.com/manna4u/
Keeping Windows Clean: http://home.neo.rr.com/manna4u/keepingclean.html
Windows Help: http://home.neo.rr.com/manna4u/tools.html
Specific Fixes: http://home.neo.rr.com/manna4u/fixes.html
Forums for HiJackThis Logs:
http://home.neo.rr.com/manna4u/forums_for_hijackthis_logs.html
To reply by e-mail change nomail.afraid.org to gmail.com
nomail.afraid.org is setup specifically for use in USENET
feel free to use it yourself. Registered Linux User #393236
Phil Weldon
| I'm using AVG Free now.
| I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
| When is better and which is not as bloated?
|
| thanks
|
| p.s. I know I've posted a lot but this is very important to me.
| And thanks to you all.
Yeah, but it's the same question, over and over and over. At least three
threads in the last week from you with the same question. Dozens of replies
to yours and similar questions.
You use the free version of AVG. How does the performance, as far as you
can tell, compare with what you used before?
How long have you used the free version of AVG?
Nearly all the paid anti-virus applications offer a 30 day free trial.
If 'this' is very important to you, try each one from the list of highly
rated anti-virus applications for several months, take notes of your
experience with each. Then make a decision.
Use the information at the link
<http://www.claymania.com/nav-map.html>
that David H. Lipman posts over and over and over again.
The information at
<http://www.claymania.com/nav-map.html>
will give you a basis for judging what to try and how to evaluate replies
posted in newsgroups.
As always, the care you take using your system and Internet connection is
the best defense.
Phil Weldon
"Pedro Sanchez" <Dr.Pedr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:767892tc5k8dibtv5...@lol.com...
Kayman
www.free-av.com
http://www.majorgeeks.com/AntiVir_Personal_Edition_7_for_Win9xME_d4472.html
or
http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/
Free trial version for one full year..................go for it!!!!!!!
"Pedro Sanchez" <Dr.Pedr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:767892tc5k8dibtv5...@lol.com...
Man-wai Chang
> I'm using AVG Free now.
> I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
> When is better and which is not as bloated?
What about AntiVir? http://www.free-av.com
I like it more than Avast.
--
.~. Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. http://www.linux-sxs.org
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Ubuntu 6.06) Linux 2.6.16.20
^ ^ 17:34:01 up 12 days 3:17 0 users load average: 1.00 1.00 1.00
news://news.3home.net news://news.hkpcug.org news://news.newsgroup.com.hk
Lars-Erik Østerud
> I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
> When is better and which is not as bloated?
Have you considered that both might be very good?
--
Lars-Erik - http://home.chello.no/~larse/ - ICQ 7297605
Lars-Erik Østerud
> I'm tellin' you-try AntiVir free edition.
> better detection than both AVG or Avast
Since you can tell that the detection is better, does that mean that
you cacth viruses very often? I have never (with any anti-virus
installed, at home or at work) got I virus (if I not did on purpose to
test av AV). If you are careful with message attachments it's hard.
* * Chas
"Phil Weldon" <notdi...@example.com> wrote in message
news:oh4lg.7366$lp....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> 'Pedro Sanchez' wrote:
> | I'm using AVG Free now.
> | I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
> | When is better and which is not as bloated?
> |
> | thanks
> |
> | p.s. I know I've posted a lot but this is very important to me.
> | And thanks to you all.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
expecting different results.
Benjamin Franklin
;-)
Chas.
Lars-Erik Østerud
> expecting different results.
Ouch :-) I'll just turn myself in too :-)
Art
>What's in a Name? wrote:
>
>> I'm tellin' you-try AntiVir free edition.
>> better detection than both AVG or Avast
>
>Since you can tell that the detection is better, does that mean that
>you cacth viruses very often? I have never (with any anti-virus
>installed, at home or at work) got I virus (if I not did on purpose to
>test av AV). If you are careful with message attachments it's hard.
If you're going to use scanners, it makes sense to use those which
have top notch detection rates, no? I use them to check my machines
from time to time, along with general methods of searching for
anything unusual. Since I, my methods, and my scanners are fallible, I
can never say that my machines are perfectly clean. All I can say is
that I can't find anything amiss.
It makes no sense to me to use less than the best scanners in terms
of a broad range of detection capabilities. Then the probability of
harboring known malware is at a minimum.
What's in a Name?
much thought,came up with this gem:
> What's in a Name? wrote:
>
> > I'm tellin' you-try AntiVir free edition.
> > better detection than both AVG or Avast
>
> Since you can tell that the detection is better, does that mean that
> you cacth viruses very often? I have never (with any anti-virus
> installed, at home or at work) got I virus (if I not did on purpose to
> test av AV). If you are careful with message attachments it's hard.
*********************************************************************
I can tell from results of my submissions to VirusTotal. I did get
infected once about 5 years ago (I was using AVG and Outlook Express at
the time). Now I use Thunderbird for my mail(much better handling of
"attackments").There are security settings (block remote images,block
javascript,check e-mail scams)and a junk-mail filter. Oh,and I stopped
using Internet Explorer! I use Firefox and Opera instead.
Lars-Erik Østerud
> If you're going to use scanners, it makes sense to use those which
> have top notch detection rates, no? I use them to check my machines
Yep, and how do you check that? If you read the virus tests you'll
see that the results vary from each test to the next. avast! and AVG
have even beaten the "huge" ones several time (like McAfee, Norton,
Fsecure, eTrust).
Also there is the resource stuff. I have used McAfee at home and
F-sercure and eTrust at work. And will NEVER use them at home. They
are to big, to complicated, and steal far to much resources :-(
Only reason I use avast!, well I like the interface, I like the way it
works. It has alerted me of all viruses here (I do some scans with
other scanner once in a while), and it has done the same for all my
friends (I install avast! when they ask me for help).
Maybe if I had tried AVG first I'd stick with that. Never will know.
Lars-Erik Østerud
> I can tell from results of my submissions to VirusTotal. I did get
> infected once about 5 years ago (I was using AVG and Outlook Express at
But how did you get infected? Do you open all mail attachments? I
think why I never see and warnings (at home and at work) is maybe
because I spot the viruses before I open the attachments. There is no
better protection that to be very careful. Don't trust anti-viruses!
What's in a Name?
much thought,came up with this gem:
> What's in a Name? wrote:
>
> > I can tell from results of my submissions to VirusTotal. I did get
> > infected once about 5 years ago (I was using AVG and Outlook
> > Express at
>
> But how did you get infected? Do you open all mail attachments? I
> think why I never see and warnings (at home and at work) is maybe
> because I spot the viruses before I open the attachments. There is no
> better protection that to be very careful. Don't trust anti-viruses!
*********************************************************************
I got infected by using OE and poorly protected shares.It was Opas. I
have since learned how to protect myself. That is what prompted me to
create my web site.
Art
>Art wrote:
>
>> If you're going to use scanners, it makes sense to use those which
>> have top notch detection rates, no? I use them to check my machines
>
>Yep, and how do you check that? If you read the virus tests you'll
>see that the results vary from each test to the next. avast! and AVG
>have even beaten the "huge" ones several time (like McAfee, Norton,
>Fsecure, eTrust).
Maybe you're just looking at VB100 where sometimes the better
scanners fail because of a false positive or something. What you're
asserting most certainly isn't true of quality large scale comparative
test results.
>Also there is the resource stuff. I have used McAfee at home and
>F-sercure and eTrust at work. And will NEVER use them at home. They
>are to big, to complicated, and steal far to much resources :-(
Try Kaspersky version 6. It's not bloated and it's unlikely that
you'll know it's running. The other scanner that's recommended
here often is NOD32 now that it does much better at detecting
Trojans, etc.
>Only reason I use avast!, well I like the interface, I like the way it
>works. It has alerted me of all viruses here (I do some scans with
>other scanner once in a while), and it has done the same for all my
>friends (I install avast! when they ask me for help).
>
>Maybe if I had tried AVG first I'd stick with that. Never will know.
Again, I suggest that you try one of the much better scanners
I mentioned.
Lars-Erik Østerud
> here often is NOD32 now that it does much better at detecting
Norton? I'll NEVER have that on my system. I spend a day removing it
from a friends system. It messed up everything for her. And that is
not the first time I have seen that. Stopped legitimate web-pages,
stopped legitimate pop-ups. And what a resource hog :-(
Only thing I use from Norton is Norton Utilities :-)
> Again, I suggest that you try one of the much better scanners
> I mentioned.
Why? I'm happy with avast! My system has NEVER been infected.
Why should I use a new system that steals resources and has a much to
complex user interface and hook on to so many things that my system
slows down (and is nearly imposiible to get stable again). Why?
Lars-Erik Østerud
> I got infected by using OE and poorly protected shares.It was Opas. I
> have since learned how to protect myself. That is what prompted me to
That's one of the downsides of using MS products :-)
I myself have always used Forte Agant for e-mail and news.
Only downside has been no inside HTML-message viewing, but that will
change from 4.0 (that will have "safe" HTML-rendering included).
Art
>Art wrote:
>
>> here often is NOD32 now that it does much better at detecting
>
>Norton?
No. NOD32 is not Norton :)
Lars-Erik Østerud
> No. NOD32 is not Norton :)
Puhh... Good for you :-)
Lukas Mariman
"Pedro Sanchez" <Dr.Pedr...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:767892tc5k8dibtv5...@lol.com...
> I'm using AVG Free now.
> I wanted you all's opinion on AVF Free Vs AVAST?
> When is better and which is not as bloated?
>
> thanks
>
> p.s. I know I've posted a lot but this is very important to me.
> And thanks to you all.
I just switched from AVG to Avast today, and ran some full-system scans.
Avast found about 5 viruses and trojans, at least 2 of which had to have
been on my system for ages. So it seems Avast is better than AVG.
I guess the next question is: what's better than Avast? :-)
Art
<lukas....@skynet.be> wrote:
>I just switched from AVG to Avast today, and ran some full-system scans.
>
>Avast found about 5 viruses and trojans, at least 2 of which had to have
>been on my system for ages. So it seems Avast is better than AVG.
>
>I guess the next question is: what's better than Avast? :-)
Kaspersky and NOD32 to name just two.
Art
What's in a Name?
6/19/2006 after much thought,came up with this gem:
*********************************************************************
How about an educated User?
But on to your question-
For free-AntiVir,with a healthy dose of AdAware, Spybot S+D,
SpywareBlaster and SuperAdBlocker!
Oh,and a side of CrapCleaner.
Lukas Mariman
"Art" <nu...@zilch.com> schreef in bericht
news:e9pd929mgue46l7ra...@4ax.com...
Thanks for the recommendation(s)! I will definitely check those out. But
since I just installed Avast, I'm going to give that one a try for the time
being.
edgewalker
"Lukas Mariman" <lukas....@skynet.be> wrote in message news:4fo6ilF...@individual.net...
> I just switched from AVG to Avast today, and ran some full-system scans.
>
> Avast found about 5 viruses and trojans, at least 2 of which had to have
> been on my system for ages. So it seems Avast is better than AVG.
There isn't really enough good data there with which to base such a
conclusion. Any detection program would be as likely to compare
similarly to any other - both ways. They all have different ideas of
what should and should not be detected as the type of program is
often only grey area.
Lukas Mariman
"edgewalker" <nu...@null.invalid> schreef in bericht
news:129dvlh...@corp.supernews.com...
OK, granted, but if I hadn't switched to Avast I would not have detected
these viruses & trojans. That would at least SEEM like a good credential...
:-)
edgewalker
"Lukas Mariman" <lukas....@skynet.be> wrote in message news:4foejcF...@individual.net...
Indeed!
...but just now someone else could easily say the reverseor that hey used
Avast! and switched to Brand "X" and someone else from Brand "X" to
AVG so they are "all" better than each other. :))