Two updates are not enough… but one?!
Yesterday and the day before yesterday… we got only one update.
The amount of vps updates depend on when detections are added and if if they are really critical or not. In theory you can have no update on a certain day or 100.
So after two days of only one a day you feel that is enough to consider this a policy change.
There is no set number of updates, generally this has worked out at two a day, but I have had times when I received 3,4 and on occasion 5 VPS updates in a day and that was some time ago when it was more regularly one a day (but again no fixed schedule).
I guess you didn’t take notice of a recent av-comparatives report that estimated avast had 1 update per day, yet had the second highest detection rate. Way ahead of those that were churning out 25 and more updates a day. I think Norton supposedly had 222 updates a day, now if you release a single signature update you could have hundreds of updates a day and not make a blind bit of difference to detection rate from those that release more signatures in a smaller number of updates.
avast! has a good detection rate, but its heuristics is bad. So if you get a zero-day malware, you’ll be infected.
I think that the bad heuristics isn’t a disaster… but… instead of the good zero-day detection there should be more VPS updates per day.
I read the post on the blog about ESET’s marketing strategy.
And how does that make any difference to the number of daily updates.
Then if you have read the blog article I can’t see why you even raise the point as there is on correlation between the number of updates and detection.
I have been using avast for almost seven years and for most of that time it was signature base detection only and I have not had a single infection, now there are generic, heuristic and algorithmic detections and these are improving.
Not to mention the new features included in the avast 6 version when released will improve protection over and above just detection. But again these have nothing to do with the number of virus definition updates per day.
I have to go with my own personal experiences and if you feel that way then you are free to go your own way also, there are plenty of other free AVs out there. If they don’t meet your needs you can purchase the avast Pro version or AIS with their additional modules, etc.
More than 1-2 updates per day - that is important for protection. If you get update earlier, you will become protected against the new malwares earlier.
No, it isn’t…!! 
asyn
Well the blog post http://blog.avast.com/2011/02/04/eset’s-creative-interpretation-of-testing/ pretty much shows that isn’t the case.
http://blog.avast.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Norton_Advert.png
As I said if you aren’t happy perhaps you might want to pay for Norton with its 222 updates which was the only one ahead of avast in protection with its single update (over the period of their 28 day period in 2008).
The importance of very frequent updates is much depreciated as you haven’t a clue what is in these other programs updates.
As I said to start with this has been over a whole 2 days, you simply can’t form any opinion that this is going to be the case in the future. Oh today we have so far had two, tomorrow, who knows. But the number really isn’t that important, if you feel it is then vote with your feet/money and purchase an AV with frequent updates, yet a poorer detection based on that image.
Don’t forget that very frequent and/or numerous updates may indicate an unusually high number of FPs needing correction.
Furthermore, there were 2 updates today.
asyn
The ammounts of vps has nothing to do. They can do less updates push per day but they can find alots samples. So i dont know how much exactly Eset does but if they find 500 per updates and avast! does 1 or 2 updates and find 3,500 samples. So now you understand what i mean.
would you be more satisfied if we took the total number of new detections and splitted them to 20 updates per day instead of serving them in two packages? 
and btw: each AV may suck (absolutely regardless the quality of heuristics) when it comes to new zero-day malware, because it is very well tested against mostly used AV engines before releasing… from my testing no one detects new rogues in first few hours, not even symantec with 200 updates per day…
I’ve had Avast since 2005 and maybe a couple of years before that.
Norton I recently had for two or three days. I changed back to Avast because Norton’s get in your face every blankity-blank second is a nightmare. Norton likes to be noticed. That may not be the reason for their high number of updates. However, in my opinion, it does look like that’s the reason to me.
If you want too many updates per day, stick to a cloud AV rather than a regular AV with 1-2 updates per day, don’t let those AVs with fake updates (for marketing reasons) fool you