[OldLadyWho]

Over the last couple of weeks I've cleaned up a couple of friend's computers. I usually add AVG to any computers I fix - if they don't already have it (or another AV installed) - but, I'd recently read about another antivirus that offers a free version. It's called AntiVir. So, I thought I'd try it out on one of the computers.

The program seems less user friendly to me than AVG, and seems to report a lot of false positives. For instance, I ran it this morning for the first time and it kept popping up warnings about viruses in .cab files in OpenOffice.org. It also would totally stop scanning at each popup warning (there were several.

The OO install is a brand new one. The computer has a freshly restored W2k system on it, fully patched (it was the first thing I did). It's only been online a few times, and Firefox was installed immediately after all the windows patches. There doesn't seem to be much help on the AntiVir forums, and a lot of it is in German.

I think I will uninstall it and use AVG instead. I don't want to give folks a computer that has an AV that isn't easy to use, but I was curious if others on TSG had tried AntiVir and if it had a lot of false positives for them too. It'll be interesting to see what AVG finds, if anything, when I install it on that machine.

Personally, I feel that an AV software that finds viruses everywhere, whether they really are viruses or not, is no more useful than one that misses viruses. I was a bit disappointed in AntiVir.

OLW

[OldLadyWho]

I uninstalled AntiVir and installed AVg, updated and ran it. It found no viruses of any kind. I'm not sure what AntiVir was reporting.

I do have a question though. I used to use online virus scanners, like Trend, and Panda, etc. But long ago disabled ActiveX on my own computers. I was horrified to find that those online scanners will no longer work, in fact they recommend that people actually download the latest version of IE.

My question is, since IE and ActiveX together seem to be serious virus (worm, malware, whatever) magnets, and likely the way that computers get infected to begin with. It seems odd to require people to do unsafe things in order to be scanned. Is ActiveX truly the only means for an interactive online virus scanner to work? I hate to recommend online scans to other people anymore because of these requirements.

It's just something I've wondered about. Thought maybe someone here might know of an alternative online scanner, or could explain why ActiveX might be required for using them. Thanks OLW

[Skivvywaver]

I saw one of the major players a few weeks ago that was using java to scan. I think it was house call. I have been extremely sidetracked so I forget which online scanner it was.

[psaulm119]

Although I've heard rave reviews about AVG, I was never able to install it on my computer (XP SP2)--I forget if I even was able to run the installer. At any rate, the last year I have used AntiVir (from H+Bedv if anyone cares) and although it has caught a few, I was recently distressed to find that the Zapchast trojan had been on my computer for about a month, and AntiVir had not detected it at all. In my experience (running it at start up, and running an entire system scan every month), I haven't had a lot of false positives--usually I get no malware at all. So I've decided to uninstall it and use F-Secure (from my ISP's free security package) or combine another freeware av prog with weekly online scanning from Symantec or some other pro.

On the other hand, AntiVir has come out with a 7.0beta. Their UI didn't impress me. Running a scan and seeing their little "Luke Filewalker" utility with its record player playing an LP didn't really awe me with its 21st century virus detection capabilities--its UI looked rather Windows 95ish. They say 7.0 is available for download, and its updated--at least to the Windows ME I would hope.

Anyways, I really didn't have a bad experience, its just that I don't feel confident that I can rely solely on freeware av programs at this point, unless I switch to Linux, which is always only a harddrive purchase away.

[psaulm119]

It was Trend Micro (which allows for scanning with Firefox). Hurray for them.

http://housecall.trendmicro.com/

I think they even allow for Linux and Solaris as well. Its nice to know that I can count on them if I ever get another hard drive and install linux.

[Reposed]

I've used Antivir for some time and found it to be VERY effective. Check out this antivirus test:

http://overclockers.com/articles1260/

It also tends affect your system less than other AVs. Yes to UI is dated but the engine and VDFs are not. Clean install and uninstall as well. No email scanner, but most webmail clients these days already have virus detection and most organistions run some sought of email antivirus software on their mail servers anyway. Besides, Antivir real-time scanner scans files on both read and write with the exception of archives (which are scanned on-demand) so if it does get through email, it will be detected upon any activity.

[spectral]

I've been in business for 4 years now as a consultant working with a variety of different computer users. Many of these folks are quite computer-phobic or just don't grasp how things work. These people really need something that's going to take care of itself with a minimum of interaction from them.

Independent tests have found AVG and AntiVir to be virtually neck-and-neck in terms of detection abilities, and they often match or outperform the big commercial packages like Norton and McAfee. I went with AVG originally, then recommended AntiVir for a while, and then ended up back with AVG. Why? Although AntiVir is lighter on its use of system resources, a default installation required manual definition updates. This is a big problem for people who don't even want to think about this kind of stuff. AVG updates itself automatically whenever the computer is booted and there's an active Internet connection.

I can't say much to the false positives problem. AntiVir seemed to report virus problem as often or as rarely as AVG under the same conditions. I guess one has to keep in mind that no virus program will get every single virus. I think the use of multiple scanners makes sense.

[aarhus2004]

I found that AntiVir was the recommendation of an MVP for use with Windows Millennium.

Ben.

[frenat]

It has been a couple of years since I've used Antivir but it was decent from what I remember. I used to run AVG exclusively but i was given Symantec Corporate Edition antivirus and firewall free at work (DOD provided software). I tried that and the first thing it found was a virus that AVG had been missing for months. That was 2 years ago. AVG may have fixed this by now but I won't be going back.