Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Avira - December 2014


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 rhino1366

rhino1366

  • Banned
  • 524 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:58 AM

Posted 30 December 2014 - 01:58 PM

Hi folks!

 

It's December of 2014, and the new Avira Products is finishing on their latest versions to this year's completion, as summary.

You can check them out at their web-site: https://www.avira.com/en/index

 

Let's start this topic, as a general discussion of end-year Avira products (up to February). :)

 

So, my suggestions for the end-year Avira software:

1. Is to make "scan within the links" on-demand scanner's option ticked ON by default.

2. Is to make "use dual-core processor (and up) power, while scanning" option ticked ON by default. Also named "optimize processing speed" on scans.

.....these are, mainly, and are applicable for Avira Anti-Vir Personal, for home (freeware).

 

 

The program looks good, and are... scanning speeds are awesome, GUI is clear, like at anti-virus laboratory / base office, detection rates are top, and all.

 

So, let's start talking here! :)

Go on and post here, telling us about your thoughts on Avira's end-line products. Cheers.



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 rhino1366

rhino1366
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 524 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:58 AM

Posted 30 December 2014 - 02:17 PM

Hi.

December 2014.

 

Avira Anti-Vir Personal for home use, freeware.

I use Avira Anti-Vir Personal.

 

My complaint, is that during Avira updates it can take minutes to end-up one single update.

Usually, it takes ~3:00/~3:45 of minutes to finish it up. :(  The process sounds heavy, and IS hard on an HDD.

...as I've noted, Avira "presses" on an HDD so much, is because it's rewriting the scanning code / detection code / detection algorythm all the time on each time it updates, that's because. The initial process is heavy and loady - each new update gives blocks of fragmentations (usually, not a big line).

 

The system is of 2004:
AMD single-core Sempron on 2.0 GHz (for MS Word 2D tasking, mainly)

a standard motherboard, from ASUS

1 GByte of system RAM (enouph for Windows XP, even on today)

NVidia GeForce 6150SE plus graphical adapter

160 GBytes HDD + 80 GBytes HDD in addition

one DVD+RW

 

Starting of August 2013, Avira become taking kilograms on its code / program's source code.

It become more and more MBytes of its install file... on and on, until it reached such heavyness.

 

 

So, the ask is:
What would it take to optimize the process? Is it hard to develope?

Can Avira provide such compliment to us?

 

Thank you.

End note: Please, post a link of this thread to their help forums. I want 'em personally to go check here. :)


Edited by rhino1366, 30 December 2014 - 02:25 PM.


#3 rhino1366

rhino1366
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 524 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:58 AM

Posted 30 December 2014 - 02:28 PM

A merry christmas to all!

 

A merry christmas tomorrow! MERRY CHRISTMAS!! MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

 

 

:santa: :cold:

:rolleyes: :lol: :o :P

 

:gathering:


Edited by rhino1366, 30 December 2014 - 04:33 PM.


#4 rhino1366

rhino1366
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 524 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:58 AM

Posted 04 January 2015 - 10:54 AM

So, are you on Avira?



#5 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,266 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 04 January 2015 - 01:54 PM

Not me...I am staying with ESET NOD32 and Emsisoft Anti-Malware.
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#6 Sintharius

Sintharius

    Bleepin' Sniper


  • Members
  • 5,639 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Local time:04:58 AM

Posted 04 January 2015 - 02:09 PM

I use Kaspersky and Malwarebytes.

Avira seems okay enough for a free solution, but since most people I know use Avast I don't really know about it.

Edited by Alexstrasza, 04 January 2015 - 02:22 PM.


#7 thelittleduck

thelittleduck

  • Members
  • 910 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pond
  • Local time:04:58 AM

Posted 05 January 2015 - 02:35 AM

I recently changed from Avira to Avast.  No problem with Avira, just wanted a change after 5 years.



#8 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,266 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 07 January 2015 - 03:46 PM

Looks like they are going into the optimizing/registry cleaning business...Avira System Speedup
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#9 Aura

Aura

    Bleepin' Special Ops


  • Malware Response Team
  • 19,594 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 09 January 2015 - 09:40 AM

Personally I like Avira as a free Antivirus and I recommend it to a lot of people when they ask me which free Antivirus they should go with. I first used Avira years ago after switching from Norton (paid) and I was impressed on how the free version of it was more effective than Norton. Avira also does pretty good in the AV-Comparatives benchmark tests. If I wasn't a Kaspersky fanboy (running Kaspersky Internet Security for around 6-7 years now) and I had to take a free Antivirus, I would most likely pick Avira (or avast!).

unite_blue.png
Security Administrator | Sysnative Windows Update Senior Analyst | Malware Hunter | @SecurityAura
My timezone UTC-05:00 (East. Coast). If I didn't reply to you within 48 hours, please send me a PM.


#10 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,266 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 09 January 2015 - 09:46 AM

Avira also does pretty good in the AV-Comparatives benchmark tests.

 

There are several reputable labs which test the effectiveness of major anti-virus programs and security suites to include AV-Comparatives.org, Virus Bulletin Comparative Tests, AV-Test.org, NSS Labs Consumer Anti-Malware Products Group Test Report, etc.

These kinds of comparative testing results will vary depending on a variety of factors to include but not limited to who conducted the testing, what they were testing for (type of threats, attack vectors, exploits), what versions of anti-virus software was tested, what type of scanning engine was used, and the ability to clean or repair. There are no universally predefined set of standards or criteria for testing which means each test will yield different results. As such, you need to look for detailed information about how the tests were conducted, the procedures used, and data results.

Some of the testing criteria and standards may even be misleading.

...for some unknown reason...the renowned German test lab AV-TEST has quietly (there was no warning) modified its certification process. The changes mean that the certificates produced by the new rules are, to put it mildly, pretty useless for evaluating the merits of different AV products...With AV-TEST’s new certification standards, the onus is on the user to carefully investigate the actual results of each individual test…they may find that a product that blocked 99.9% of attacks has the same “certification” as a product that only blocked 55%.
Comparative testing: A bit of background for the uninitiated

Further, if you're dealing with zero-day malware it's unlikely the anti-virus testing is going to detect anything. It takes time for new malware to be reported, samples collected, analyzed, and tested by anti-virus researchers before they can add a new threat to database definitions.  
 
.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#11 Aura

Aura

    Bleepin' Special Ops


  • Malware Response Team
  • 19,594 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 09 January 2015 - 09:52 AM

Avira also does pretty good in the AV-Comparatives benchmark tests.

 
There are several reputable labs which test the effectiveness of major anti-virus programs and security suites to include AV-Comparatives.org, Virus Bulletin Comparative Tests, AV-Test.org, NSS Labs Consumer Anti-Malware Products Group Test Report, etc.

These kinds of comparative testing results will vary depending on a variety of factors to include but not limited to who conducted the testing, what they were testing for (type of threats, attack vectors, exploits), what versions of anti-virus software was tested, what type of scanning engine was used, and the ability to clean or repair. There are no universally predefined set of standards or criteria for testing which means each test will yield different results. As such, you need to look for detailed information about how the tests were conducted, the procedures used, and data results.

Some of the testing criteria and standards may even be misleading.
 

...for some unknown reason...the renowned German test lab AV-TEST has quietly (there was no warning) modified its certification process. The changes mean that the certificates produced by the new rules are, to put it mildly, pretty useless for evaluating the merits of different AV products...With AV-TEST’s new certification standards, the onus is on the user to carefully investigate the actual results of each individual test…they may find that a product that blocked 99.9% of attacks has the same “certification” as a product that only blocked 55%.

Comparative testing: A bit of background for the uninitiated

Further, if you're dealing with zero-day malware it's unlikely the anti-virus testing is going to detect anything. It takes time for new malware to be reported, samples collected, analyzed, and tested by anti-virus researchers before they can add a new threat to database definitions.


Thank you for the names you provided me, I didn't know some of these Antivirus Test labs/benchmarks test. Also, I don't really expect any Antivirus to block 0-day threats except if they really on other features like behavior blocking, IDS, IPS, etc. Hence why I like to recommend a software that can help against new 0-day threats or at least warn the user that something isn't right on their system, like Comodo Firewall (that HIPS...), Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit, etc. But I'll look more into how each labs do their benchmark tests. I know AV-Tests gives a lot of numbers and information when you check the results for the various Antivirus products, but not AV-Comparatives.

Thank you quietman :)

unite_blue.png
Security Administrator | Sysnative Windows Update Senior Analyst | Malware Hunter | @SecurityAura
My timezone UTC-05:00 (East. Coast). If I didn't reply to you within 48 hours, please send me a PM.


#12 quietman7

quietman7

    Bleepin' Janitor


  • Global Moderator
  • 51,266 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 09 January 2015 - 09:57 AM

You're welcome.


.
.
Windows Insider MVP 2017-2018
Microsoft MVP Reconnect 2016
Microsoft MVP Consumer Security 2007-2015 kO7xOZh.gif
Member of UNITE, Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators

If I have been helpful & you'd like to consider a donation, click 38WxTfO.gif

#13 rhino1366

rhino1366
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 524 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:58 AM

Posted 10 January 2015 - 11:42 AM

avast! is somewhat modern up, compared to Avira.

 

Emsisoft - is simply the best on today; even Kaspersky and Bitdefender cannot compare to it. ESET Nod32 - is my choice (along with Avira).

 

:)

 

Looks like they are going into the optimizing/registry cleaning business... Avira System Speedup

 

 

...that post impressed me, quietman7. a system suite - you should grab one (it's fun to use).



#14 Union_Thug

Union_Thug

    Bleeps with the fishes...


  • Members
  • 2,355 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:is everything
  • Local time:11:58 PM

Posted 10 January 2015 - 04:02 PM

I found that Avira produced too many false positives. Also having to perform various keyboard gymnastics including editing permissions, registry settings, group policy, etc. to disable their annoying splash & nag screens was very ... annoying.

YMMV.



#15 zcomputerwiz

zcomputerwiz

  • Members
  • 312 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:58 PM

Posted 10 January 2015 - 04:20 PM

I've always liked Avira for a free antivirus product. It's fast, light, the definitions updates are relatively small and the detection rates are quite good.

It's what I run on my own laptop (along with Malwarebytes) and recommend to others.

 

I'm glad they've gone away from the Ask toolbar for the web protection module. I'm not a fan of the new notification area launcher. Usually if i'm clicking the icon in the notification area, I want to update my definitions, disable realtime protection, or open the configuration interface. Fortunately they have added these options back to the latest version of the launcher, but the older launcher version is loaded first with the full installer (but may be upgraded when the first definitions update is run).

 

My one complaint is startup time, there is a long delay (30 seconds or so) immediately after login for the realtime scanner to load the virus definitions into memory.


Have you tried turning it off and on again?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users