so again: ""Would you use an AV which does not include any on-demand scanning feature? "
…please try to stick to this question only and not comment any other AV parameter mentioned in the report
I recently canceled my scheduled scans with Avast. This is new and not new. Not new because I was - almost - never performing on demand scans with Avast 4. I came back to it, somehow blinded by the efficiency of Avast UI interface allowing highly customized scans and schedules. But in the end, chances are that our resident shields are good enough to spare us the need of manual scans. Comments appreciated
Ok, why would anyone intall an AV without OD scanning…?
To be honest, I don’t know if there even is such a ‘product’ around. ;D
Guess no. Therefore your question is quite obsolete.
I do…on Ubuntu ;D
EDIT: Ok, I guess this wasn’t what you meant…I suppose the proper answer from me is no. I am spoilt by the real time scanning of the webshield etc…
On the scanning comment, I rarely scan…more out of lazyness than anything else…
AFAIK, Clam is on demand? (At least the portable version is…)
Sure. I am already getting on access scans with the latest database everytime I use a process or download anything. I never do scans with Avast!. I do scans with MBAM for a second opinion when I create an image. And Prevx does a daily scan to inventory my configuration, but has no resident database.
Obsolete? Asyn are sure that you understood the question? Your system AV protection is based 100% of the time on resident aka on access scans. That would be a good reason to install a product that does not have on demand scanners wouldn’t it? As to products that don’t have on demand scanners, that’s right there are none. LOL that’s why I posted this thread.
Now there are products that have exclusively on demand scanners, especially on Linux.That doesn’t interest me at all here. Not the topic.
…obsolete meaning old and outdated, I can’t see what your point was… as the question is rather new…when one considers how good real time scanners have become.
I would still like to have it there....
bc if/when a infection is discovered i would like to do an on-demand scan of the hole system......maybe not necessary but i feel safer after a full scan
and if the malware is difficult to remove you also have the option to scan in safe mode and remove it
@ Logos
Well most resident on-access AVs as far as I’m aware also have on-demand scanning, so I’m not so sure you would come across that scenario too often other than perhaps cloud AV solutions.
I think avast’s full range of shields (web, p2p, IM, mail, etc.) to try and keep malware out, backed up by the file system shield (FSS) much depreciates the need for an on-demand scan. For the most part on-demand scans are going to be scanning what are dormant or inert files, the FSS would be scanning active files.
However, new signatures are added constantly and generic/heuristic signatures updated, so it is possible that something that was previously undetected could be picked on the on-demand scan (depending on the scan type). Whilst active files should be picked up by the FSS on-access scanner.
I too never bothered with scheduled scans with avast 4.8 Home (using the ashQuick.exe hack); as you mentioned the convenience of the avastUI and inclusion of scheduled scanning even in the free version, I do a scheduled weekly Quick and monthly Full System scan.
Since I’m using avast I don’t have to make the decision about an AV that doesn’t have on-demand scanning, so that bridge remains uncrossed.
That isn’t the question as Logos is asking/talking about, but an AV that ‘doesn’t have/include on-demand’ scanning not an on-demand AV that doesn’t have resident scanners.
Well i wont use av without ondemand scaner because i need it everytime i attach a usb i dont want to just relay on the real time scanner when using usb. I also do weekly quick scan and monthly full system scan because with new virus defination update it might find something it missed before.
