Why do people say Avast is better than AVG?

Question

I downloaded avast just to see why everyone says it's better. and i still don't see why. the stupid 'boot scan' is useless since i will skip it every time. the design couldn't be any worse (a media player?! what the hack?) and even the anti virus itself sucks. i downoloaded this known Trojan horse (http://getcracks.com/ click on the first link)on my desktop and scanned it. it didn't find anything. avg properly recognized it and automatically removed it. i found it useless waste of hdd space...

Answer 1

Because it is better. Avast has a higher detection rate than AVG.

PS: I clicked on that link too and Avast detected it before I downloaded it and removed it.

Answer 2

Ok, get yourself educated: just because you skip something doesn't mean it's useless.

A boot scan is a necessity when you have a virus or rootkit that loads itself as a Windows service that cannot be killed (SYSTEM account) - the boot scan will take care of that, boom.

But yeah, a feature that you - thankfully - never had to use is pretty damned useless, for sure. Uh-huh.

Virus scanners are always struggling to keep up with the newest viruses, Trojans, kits, worms... so if a good virus scanner misses one at a certain point in time, chances are that it WILL detect it after an update or two. And like with any piece of malware protection, it depends on people reporting things, so that the database can be updated. I'm sure that for every single infection Avast doesn't detect, there's a dozen infections AVG knows nothing about.

Avast can detect most malware *before* you even download it (it actively scans pages and incoming data).

I guess I haven't told you about my adventures in computer-cleanup, where I had AVG running on a family members PC ("full protection" up and running, and a crapload of things starting up all over the place). I removed AVG, installed Avast, and within ten minutes of scanning it had found 31 infections - including a rootkit which free AVG does NOT EVER detect (check their website - rootkit detection is part of the paid version, NOT the free version)

That pretty much did it for me. I've followed several links here on good ole Yahoo to check out certain websites I suspected contained downloaders - and Avast has proven me right and caught the culprits before any download could even start.

If an *interface* is more important than functionality, go ahead, use AVG.

I'll see you back here when you discover you've run into problems it couldn't handle, and you need a bunch of strangers to help you out because OMG AVG R0x0rz!

There. An opinionated *and* educated answer. :-)

Answer 3

my friend also say the same. he say that avast is better. but now  he turns to avg like me, i don't know whats the problem, but he say there's something problem that disturb him so much after unknown virus attack his computer.

hehehe...

Answer 4

I don't know. It's not bad as you say. I've always used Avast.

EDIT: Keep in mind most anti viruses aren't perfect. Scan your file using this site: http://virusscan.jotti.org/ and see what ones catch it and what ones don't.

Answer 5

Avast is better. Trust me. I had AVG and it's very vague in its options once it found something. Plus Avast has more features than AVG and faster updates too.