two false alarm
unknown virus test
grade standard
: the performance is not good for avast!
i am very sleepy
Already posted and discussed some days ago…
I think you are thinking of the av-comparatives and not the VB100 ?
I think he speaks about the VB100% June test on Ubuntu. http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/latest_comparative/index
edit: sorry, my bad. he mentions he ‘standard award’. yep, that’s av-comparatives.
Man, I’m loosing confidence fast in avast! after all these VB 100 failures. I might just go back to Avira if avast! doesn’t get a better detection rate soon. 
So there were two false positives and that was the reason for the failure of ‘the Linux’ version of avast.
You have to base your decisions on your personal experience. I have had avast for a little over 4 years and during that time there were failures but also awards of vb100. There are many AVs that fail from time to time if you are going to change AV for every bad report you will be hopping around like a one legged man. You have your own experience to call on.
Sammo… no one will be able to keep you here… I’ve used Avira in the past as a backup scanner, non-resident. It did have bad days too. It won’t protect your email, the update is not as reliable as to avast, less configurability…
i don’t pay more attention to detection rate for the avast!
i am more thinking highly of entire ability of antivirus
defense ability to detect unknown virus protect OS
such as kv antivirus of china
reducing false alarm is very important too
;D
Let’s not forget about the Web Shield that Avira Free doesn’t have it, but let’s not start a X vs. Y topic here.
Anyway, the last VB100% test was on Ubuntu. Why would you concern if you don’t use Ubuntu?
Well, I still have confidence in avast!, so then we can call it even…1-1