system
10
I agree with you. But, don’t forget that upgrading versions within business is not without its risks (even more than for home users) and new learning process to known how to deal with the new version, because they introduce new features; so versions aren’t always upgraded whenever a new one comes out; there’s a waiting period, for testing stuff and see what other clients complain about as well. Some businesses simply don’t see immediate reasons to upgrade to newer versions (whatever the application is)… (Heck, some folks still run IE6!!!)
So, the fact that people should upgrade, and I agree, doesn’t mean they will do it right away; no, there’s a waiting period before they are deployed.
Only very recently I’ve upgraded a security application from another vendor to its newest version, and the newest one came out in late 2010.
The thing is, considering the above scenario and that many are using the paid-for products (and specially businesses), it’s to be expected that the “older” version is not forgotten regarding definition updates; at least, until the license allows so.
I’m aware that the VirusTotal versions aren’t complete versions, and that’s something I previously mention, but the reply I got from an avast! team member was nothing explanatory of why such discrepancy exists. The complete 4.x version may detect the sample for all we know, but I wasn’t given a satisfactory answer explaining that, despite VirusTotal shows its lacking detection, the complete version (the one clients actually use) may detect it. Something that could be explained.
Kind regards