[WMCoolmon]

Buy a better brand of condom.

Strangely I had the same thought

This thread reminds me of a t-shirt I saw: "My Trojans protect Bush."

[jr2]

With AVG, or at least the previous version, the automatic updates were a bit so-and-so and usually updating recquired user input at least once a day. Antivir spills out advertisements during updates, which is a bit annoying. Tolerable, but annoying. Avast! is fun because the automatic updates actually work. It doesn't advertise itself all the time. There are localisations (easier for the parents with not-so-great foreign language skills), and the only nuisance is the need to reregister every 14 months.

Dunno about the differences between virus detections of each software, but in terms of other variables, avast! takes the first place. Coupled with Comodo Firewall 3, I feel constantly safe when using my rig and scouring the Interwebs.

Umm, k, user something, but not intervention.  Try selecting "Do not ask this question again", then selecting "Internet" as the source for the update.    Ta-da!  Auto-updates FTW.

[Jeff Vader]

When I first attempted to use Comodo firewall v3.0, it had major stability problems on my machine.  (CTD on boot 50% of the time.)  Judging my the number of complaints they got, I wasn't the only one.  As a result, I rolled back to v2.4.  But I'm wondering, did they ever fix v3.0?  I don't want to go through the hassle of installing it, only to find that it's still broken.

Mine clogged itself up when it tried to update itself. So I too switched back to 2.4. Recently, I decided to try 3.0 again, especially since I've heard that 2.4 has a rather serious flaw that hasn't been patched. Ever. 3.0 seems to work just fine right now. Except that I lose my temper with Defense+ and have thus disabled it.

Umm, k, user something, but not intervention.  Try selecting "Do not ask this question again", then selecting "Internet" as the source for the update.    Ta-da!  Auto-updates FTW.

Are... we talking about the same thing? I was specifically saying that I like avast! because the updates work like they should without any hassle.

[jr2]

Umm, k, user something, but not intervention.  Try selecting "Do not ask this question again", then selecting "Internet" as the source for the update.    Ta-da!  Auto-updates FTW.

Are... we talking about the same thing? I was specifically saying that I like avast! because the updates work like they should without any hassle.

Hehe... and I was saying, if you read before you clicked, there wouldn't be any problems.  AVG asks you "Do you want me to get the update from a File, a Folder, or our Internet Update server?  Oh, and click here if you want me to always use whichever option you select."  To which you respond, "The Internet, and be sure to ask me the same question next time."  xD

[Jeff Vader]

Hmm. Didn't ask me nothin'. And I believe I scoured through all the possible options and settings and the only thing I found was a "scheduler" where you could select a two(?)-hour time period during a day when AVG should attempt to update itself. Meaning that I have to be at home and the rig must be on and online in order for the update to succeed. If it doesn't... life sucks and then you ****in' die.

And that, at least as far as I'm concerned, sucks. I'm not exactly sure of how avast! does things but so far it has managed to update itself. Twice a day even, on some occasions.

[jr2]

Hmph.  I've used 7.5 and 8.0... this must be 6.x or 7.0 you're talking.  Either that or AVG gives you special treatment. 

[Jeff Vader]

Hmph.  I've used 7.5 and 8.0... this must be 6.x or 7.0 you're talking.  Either that or AVG gives you special treatment. 

[ralphwiggum]I'm special![/ralphwiggum]

It was last summer/fall. After that I switched to Antivir, and recently, to avast! And I'm quite happy at the moment. Though I assume that AVG is/was quite resource-friendly.

[S-99]

When was AVG resource friendly? It sure doesn't look minimalist to me.

[WMCoolmon]

Hmm. Didn't ask me nothin'. And I believe I scoured through all the possible options and settings and the only thing I found was a "scheduler" where you could select a two(?)-hour time period during a day when AVG should attempt to update itself. Meaning that I have to be at home and the rig must be on and online in order for the update to succeed. If it doesn't... life sucks and then you ****in' die.

And that, at least as far as I'm concerned, sucks. I'm not exactly sure of how avast! does things but so far it has managed to update itself. Twice a day even, on some occasions.

I don't know why you're having so much trouble...I have AVG installed on my laptop, and every time I connect to a network, it wants to update itself. Although I do notice that the "periodic" option of the new AVG Free is grayed out on my desktop.

[Stormkeeper]

I set my avg to update it self at 12 daily.

[Jeff Vader]

I don't know why you're having so much trouble...I have AVG installed on my laptop, and every time I connect to a network, it wants to update itself. Although I do notice that the "periodic" option of the new AVG Free is grayed out on my desktop.

Neither do I. Luckily, I had trouble with AVG. But not anymore. At the moment I have avast! and I like it, I trust it and I'm not going to remove it unless it really does something that forces me to such acts, hmm.

[S-99]

Neither do I. Luckily, I had trouble with AVG. But not anymore. At the moment I have avast! and I like it, I trust it and I'm not going to remove it unless it really does something that forces me to such acts, hmm.

Like reinstalling windows?

[IceFire]

When was AVG resource friendly? It sure doesn't look minimalist to me.

It used to be about 2 years ago.

[Stormkeeper]

My AVG works fine. I dunno why you all have so much problems with it.

[Jeff Vader]

Neither do I. Luckily, I had trouble with AVG. But not anymore. At the moment I have avast! and I like it, I trust it and I'm not going to remove it unless it really does something that forces me to such acts, hmm.

Like reinstalling windows?

Either that or the scenario where avast! does something stupid, like removing some important stuff. Which should fortunately be quite unlikely, hmm.

[S-99]

I can see any AV removing important stuff. As long as it's an important file that's infected, and also that the default handling of infected files is to always delete them instead of cleaning them. Most of the time i can see why people would want the default file handling of AV to just delete all files instead of cleaning them. Cleaning them doesn't always work.

[jr2]

Default should be Disinfect, then if that fails, Move to Vault.  Not all AVs can do that, but that's what it should be.  Oh, and AVG 8 runs fine on an old 433 MHz Celeron with 384 MB RAM, and a tweaked XP Pro SP3 install.    (Of course the whole thing runs pretty darned sluggish, but there's not that much difference between when the AV is on or off unless you're copying a bunch of files.)

[Hellstryker]

Default should be Disinfect, then if that fails, Move to Vault.  Not all AVs can do that, but that's what it should be.  Oh, and AVG 8 runs fine on an old 433 MHz Celeron with 384 MB RAM, and a tweaked XP Pro SP3 install.    (Of course the whole thing runs pretty darned sluggish, but there's not that much difference between when the AV is on or off unless you're copying a bunch of files.)

Or playing crysis, lol

[jr2]

Trust me, the last thing you'll do on that machine is play Crysis... it's waaay too slow.  xD  I daresay FSOpen would even choke a bit on it.