I mentioned it because it has more then Kaspersky in post 195 I mean a little reading and you would not need to ask I mean come on now! As for the level it is at that may be true as well as the fact it is new.
If it does not matter then why say this? I dare say it might well have more signatures than avast, but it means very little are there is no standardisation in counting (variants, etc.) or what count you should give to a) generic, b) algorithmic or heuristic signatures/scanning, answer you can’t.
Surly if it does not matter you would not need to say anything about the standardisation as it does not matter. So does it matter or does it not?
It all depends on how the AV company set up their signatures as some have 2 sigs that catch 2 pieces of malware or some have it set up as 2 sigs that catch 400 malware, so that is what I mean by lots of sigs a good AV does not make as they could have it set up as the former and not the latter.
Excellent example is Win32:Vitro and older Win32:Virtob detection. A single detection in avast! that covers all the latest virut viruses. From what i’ve seen, they’re adding separate detections for it in CIS. In such cases you can quickly reach sky high numbers while you may not even be better than competition thats using just 2 detections for exactly the same thing.
This was discussed a lot in the past…
- There are a marketing issue involved. Companies estimate the number of viruses by high.
- There are different counts possible: variants, etc.
- There is not an international rule for virus naming, so same virus could be consider one or more by other company.
- Scanning settings are very important.
- Active viruses (ITW) are really more important then the whole number.
- Generic signatures and heuristic detections cannot be really counted as ‘virus detection’.
Well, etc. etc.
Trust avast!
patrice58,I really have to hand it you.
You have stretched out a fourteen page thread,
(nineteen if you count the Comodo thread)
throwing in a new tidbit here and there,
playing Devil’s advocate on occasion,
And I still have no idea where you stand.
are you “Crouching Avast!, Hidden Comodo”?
All you have you do is read my post again and you will see where I stand. Check my sig as well and see what programs I am running. I would suggest you read posts number 9, 70, 80, 103, 106,148, and post 169 will explain why I do not have Avast in my signature. Where do I stand? As I have said in the forum which I am sure you have read. In my very first post I said I am using C.I.S and since I have not said I have stopped using it, I think you can take it as fact that I am still using it. As for Avast if it was working properly on my system (Most likely that the firewall is to blame but that’s a another forum topic on another day.) then I would of used that without a second thought. As I have said elsewhere in this thread I am waiting for Avast 5 and I will install it and see how it goes. So to answer your question where do I stand, well I would like to think I stand on my own two feet!
As for are you “Crouching Avast!, Hidden Comodo”? I am not really sure, but that sure made me smile. 
Here is your answer right from the err horses mouth.
FYI: We use both Family Signatures as well as single signatures.
Family signatures catch a family (eg: one signature will catch more than one malware and its variance) where as the single signature will catch a single file.
around 256 thousand of our signatures are Family signatures (eg: catch more than one file as long as its a variant). The rest are single file ones.
We concentrate on increasing both as they are equally important in protecting the end user one for speed and the other for depth.
But…guys… we are the new kid on the block… just give us some time… we only started having some fun Wink
Btw: we also know how many of the malware we have in our database the other AVs detect (or don’t detect)… you would be surprised Wink (I wasn’t!)
Melih
Here’s another one… last month…
we put 1415573 files through our systems (not all malware)
Caught by CAV only 98838 (this is only caught by CAV and no other AV at that time)
Caught by competitors only 1437 (this many is not caught by CAV but with some of the competitors)
Analysed by CAMAS 179639
Verdicted by CAMAS as suspicious 25962
Verdicted by CAMAS as highly suspicious 32825 (these are added as signature to CAV as well straightaway on top of Caught by CAV only number. These from CAMAS is not detected by other AVs either so you can add this number to the Caught by CAV only number above.)
As always no single AV can cover 100% of the malware, including CAV Smiley. But the percentage of what CAV detects compared to what other AVs detect is increasing.
Our next target is to do updates every 30 min. Now, i don’t want people to misunderstand this… its not about simply changing our frequency to 30 min from 1 day… no no no… this is about time it takes from a suspicious file being submitted to us to our sig generation in 30 min. So you give us a file to analyse, within 30 min your AV should have the updated signature base to detect it… that’s our goal.
Melih
Well we are all human i think ALWIL do a great job and my self i would buy Avast Pro if i got the money but i didnt so well its already a big cake for ALWIL that giving us Avast Home a nice anti virus. But well each anti virus and firewall got his best thing and low thing. Where ever you surf you cant be sure. So Avast scan where you go so that why its nice so if he caught a suspect in your pc or anywhere he will tell you
Must just come here for some adult company and to get away from the fanboys. 
Don’t understand the numbers, though, with all of the FPs reported. And with their own files against their own database why don’t they score 100%? But they are making progress, and say that someday all will be revealed in the standard tests. In the meantime, pay careful attention to your HIPS. 
In reality, most people rarely see malware in the wild. And if the FPs are recoverable, not a big deal. But based on comparing their Forum head count to their claimed installed base, there must be a lot of confused ex-users out there already. So be cautious of the results, verify independently with sites like Virus Total, run Behavior/Removal programs like SAS and MBAM regularly. And, BTW, repeating Melihgalomania here is not really useful to anyone.
Well I am showing 1st how the suite will improve or 2nd the crap he comes out with or 3rd both!
Apart from possible entertainment value
Meanwhile at a boat accessories manufactuer:
But…guys… your boat was sinking and you discovered that our bailing bucket’s got a few holes in it… we are the new kid on the block… just give us some time… we only started having some fun
Safety fence supplier:
So you put our fence around your pool to make it safe for your kids… you still have some left… just give us some time…
My self i see alot guy that test avast his self and publish on the TV and they say This is a great Software the only guy i see that say its suck they really didnt know nothing about cpu and i swear for all guy that think it is then its NOT suck ! Avast is still the best !
after testing numerous times…my results…and I am no noob to all this.
Avast:
slows enitre operating system (using xp) starup speed is reduced by over 50%
protects well against viruses…but scans are slow…and sumtimes freeze.
it looks and sounds like crap.alert alert like your pc will explode…NOT neccasery
scan with heur level at the highest and your pc locks up.left for 9 hours…still neva completed jus froze
Comodo:
are the way to future pc protection
does not mess with pc speeds in any way
protects against viruses as well as avast(comodo latest version…and i dnt giv a ***k about statistics this is from user exp.)scans are also quite slow.
it looks and feels professional…
heur are hyper sensitive if required.and never lock up your system.
I would go with comodo 100% of the way…they offer complete computer protection and maintenece utilities at an UNBEATABLE level for FREE
also the comodo firewall is one the most powerful availible for consumers.to be honest i cant think of any other that stands up to it.
its only a debate…
avast is for amatuers/and kids 
Thats a rather bold statement. Until i see some half decent results of Comodo on AV-Comparatives, all i have is word from Melih and bunch of fanboys from their forums. And most of them are really hardcore fanboys…
Well, what are you using as firewall…? Comodo could have a bad interaction with avast.
No. Scan speed has getting better (still room for improvement) and does not freeze in normal operation, at least, most users.
Configure it. avast is one of the most configurable antivirus round.
Depends on your system, RAM, CPU, archive files, etc. etc.
On contrary, it messed my Vista installation. It was a good firewall, but started to be bloated and somehow buggy with Defense+.
A kind of joke from you… see any comparison test…
Sorry, nobody likes Comodo fan boys… I used Comodo, but I’m not a fan boy of avast or Comodo.
deleon 78 said:
(comodo latest version…and i dnt giv a ***k about statistics this is from user exp.)
Of course not!! Comodo is faith based security!
You really do not thank clicking 30 or 40 pop-up’s per hour that are about as clear as an old Simon and Garfunkel song,does not slow down the use of your machine?
If Avast is for kids,Comodo is for acolytes and “experts”.
The only effective parts of the suite are the firewall and defence+
Defence+ requires you be “HIPS Foo Master” or really masochistic,and Online
Armour is at least as effective,and much more user friendly.
As for CAV,well even the Inter Sanctum Faithfull admit it is(to be charitable)
weak.
If you like Comodo,that is fine,but really I would avoid comparisons.
You come out on the bottom every time.
Thank you Deleon78 for providing a glimpse of ‘Planet Comodo’.
You should not be surprised if satisfied users of avast!, AVG, Avira, Dr Web, Kaspersky, McAfee, NOD, Norton, PC Tools, etc, on this planet, have experienced Comodo products in ways which are at variance with the utopia you describe.
Just a reminder that a “debate” usually presupposes substantial and reasonable arguments.
“Comodo are the way to future PC protection”, “does not mess with pc speeds in any way” and the the sage-like pronouncement that “[b]avast is for amatuers/and/b kids” do indeed remind me of my school days (which of course, being an avast! user, was only yesterday ;D), but of the playground, rather than the debating room.