AVG7 is it reliable?

  bremner 11:16 16 Apr 2005
Locked

I was interested to see the comment in the latest PCA in the Helpline section page 180.

In response to a query on a virus problem Julian Moss concludes his advice with "Unfortunatley AVG does not have the very best detection rates"

As someone who, because of the many endorsements on this site, has recommended AVG7 to people I am now wondering whether that has been the right thing to have done.

Is there a more reliable free Anti virus?

  pj123 11:20 16 Apr 2005

Maybe I am just lucky but I have not had any viruses since using AVG7. I don't think any AV is 100 percent anyway. So detection rates will vary on them all. They do have to be kept up to date though.

  dogbreath1 11:26 16 Apr 2005

Of all the reports that I have read re AVG, it does a pretty good job. Miss dogbreath uses it as her real time AV protection and I use it as a standalone scanner (preferring to use Avast in real time) without problem. As a rule the best AV progs. are paid for applications but I think AVG is great and certainly good enough for domestic use.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 11:37 16 Apr 2005

I know over 90 users in the real world that use AVG. All are delighted and all have no problems. I use AVG and deliberately open EVERY attachment that is sent to me. I have had no problems in 3 years. I don't give a pig's burp about so-called tests done under 'lab conditions' as they are triple lame and tend to *ahem* vary from company to company.

  Belatucadrus 11:51 16 Apr 2005

"As a rule the best AV progs. are paid for applications"

Remember folks, that these 'free' offerings from alwil and grisoft ARE paid for applications, it's one copy only for non profit home use. The companies are funded by commercial users of the pro versions. I prefer alwils avast click here but it's a personal preference and I don't agree with Julian Moss. Despite GANDALF <|:-)>s unfortunate flatulent pig, you may want to check out Virus Bulletins test results click here AVG 7 has passed all but one since they began testing it in Feb 2004 and that's not bad at all.

  Number 7 11:53 16 Apr 2005

For what it's worth click here or click here

Kobra's results are getting on for a year old.

  Joe R 11:56 16 Apr 2005

I've to agree with Belatucadrus on this one, with the exception being that, I use the avg a/v.


I found that most of the paid for versions, (norton most of all) are bloatware, and use large amounts of your system resources.

I've never had a virus on my system, when using AVG.

  spuds 11:57 16 Apr 2005

I have used this product for a very long time now, recommended it to many people and have installed it on their computers.Never had any problems with it whatsoever. Read quite a number of reviews, in fact just done a google AVG review search, and I can only say that AVG review result appear to come out in favour of the product with an high score rating.

One review worth a browse click here

  Pooke100 11:58 16 Apr 2005

I am happy with it, was using a paid for security suite before. AVG free is running fine, no viruses (that I know of lol) and the PC is operating at good speeds, it's not invasive and does eat up system resources. And it costs nothing, you can't beat that can ya??

HTH

  Pooke100 12:00 16 Apr 2005

dang....that should read "does NOT eat up system resources"

Heads running to fast for my fingers.

  bremner 12:06 16 Apr 2005

Whilst the support for AVG is reassuring some who have posted have made the same claim - "I have never had a virus"

The point of the Helpline item in PCA is that the person had a virus that AVG failed to detect.

If you only run AVG and that fails to detect the virus how do you actually know you are not infected - Catch22 me thinks.

Perhaps it would be good practice to run regular online scans to validate our installed AV product.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Best phone camera 2017

Stunning new film posters by Hattie Stewart, Joe Cruz & more

iPad Pro 10.5in (2017) review

28 astuces pour profiter au mieux de votre iPhone