Why don

[+Warwagon MVC]

Why don?t most commercial AV?s prompt you to install the newest version? I'm going to use Avast as an example how I would think it should be done. If you have version 7 of Avast and 8 is just released a box will appear in the bottom right next to the clock and say an updated version of Avast is available click here. It then gives you an update button. After about 5 mins it downloads the NEW version of Avast and prompts you to reboot. Once you finish reboot you now have the newest version of Avast.

Why doesn't Mcafee or Norton, to name a few do that? if you have Norton 2012 and Norton 2013 is released why doesn't it give you a button to automatically install the new version?

In fact what ****es me off about Norton is on their website they tout Norton 2013, Norton internet Security 2013, but when you open up the ****ing app 2013 is no where to be found. All you see in the about box is version (example)19.00. So when I go to a customers house I can never tell what version of Norton they have with just looking. I have to google the fracking version number.

[primexx]

Why don?t most commercial AV?s prompt you to install the newest version? I'm going to use Avast as an example how I would think it should be done. If you have version 7 of Avast and 8 is just released a box will appear in the bottom right next to the clock and say an updated version of Avast is available click here. It then gives you an update button. After about 5 mins it downloads the NEW version of Avast and prompts you to reboot. Once you finish reboot you now have the newest version of Avast.

Why doesn't Mcafee or Norton, to name a few do that? if you have Norton 2012 and Norton 2013 is released why doesn't it give you a button to automatically install the new version?

In fact what ****es me off about Norton is on their website they tout Norton 2013, Norton internet Security 2013, but when you open up the ****ing app 2013 is no where to be found. All you see is version 19.00. So when I go to a customers house I can never tell what version of Norton they have with just looking. I have to google the fracking version number.

i'm guessing it's because a lot of people think you have to buy a new licence to get the new version, so why would they have an auto-update prompt and tell everyone that's not true?

[+Warwagon MVC]

i'm guessing it's because a lot of people think you have to buy a new licence to get the new version, so why would they have an auto-update prompt and tell everyone that's not true?

Correct, that's my thought as well.

On the other hand a lot of people just renew the license so i've seen people in 2013 still using version 2009

[The Evil Overlord]

Didn't know that, ZA pops up every time a new version comes out

[shra1]

Didn't know that, ZA pops up every time a new version comes out

Yup, so does Eset. In-fact, Eset prominently states that you don't have to pay license fee for a new version & that its part of the package you purchase.

Either way, I feel Norton & McAfee's home user antiviruses have outlived their competence & should be stopped for the benefit of the users ;-)

[HoochieMamma]

Yeah, Avast annoys me with that. When I install it for people I do work for the first thing I do is disable sounds and set it to auto update program version not just signatures.

[Phouchg]

Does it really matter? New year, new UI. If there are engine updates, they should be released as they appear, for all customers. If not - uninstall and choose something else, because they're screwing people.

[HawkMan]

Why don?t most commercial AV?s prompt you to install the newest version? I'm going to use Avast as an example how I would think it should be done. If you have version 7 of Avast and 8 is just released a box will appear in the bottom right next to the clock and say an updated version of Avast is available click here. It then gives you an update button. After about 5 mins it downloads the NEW version of Avast and prompts you to reboot. Once you finish reboot you now have the newest version of Avast.

Why doesn't Mcafee or Norton, to name a few do that? if you have Norton 2012 and Norton 2013 is released why doesn't it give you a button to automatically install the new version?

In fact what ****es me off about Norton is on their website they tout Norton 2013, Norton internet Security 2013, but when you open up the ****ing app 2013 is no where to be found. All you see in the about box is version (example)19.00. So when I go to a customers house I can never tell what version of Norton they have with just looking. I have to google the fracking version number.

For several reasons, one of which is that your x years license might not include software updates beyond year so and so.generally you get software updates the first year, and when you renew you just buy a new license for that as the full software package is more expensive, but this varies between them.

also because users are absolute idiots and they hate confusing pop-up like that and they think something is wrong.

[HawkMan]

Didn't know that, ZA pops up every time a new version comes out

ZA pops up regularly if you haven't paid for it, it's a bonus in addition to making your computer crawl with it's horrible firewall. after trying the firewall for a couple of months now, I have certainly no interest in trying their AV...

[goretsky Supervisor]

Hello,

There are a number of reasons anti-malware companies may not automatically update commercial software:

1. Licensing. As previously mentioned, some anti-malware companies only license a specific revision of their software for use, and provide maintenance for that specific version through that license period (signature updates, bugfixes, etc.). It may be possible that some offer fee-based "upgrade assurance" that allows a licensee to upgrade to a newer version when it become available. That's a line item that can be offered when the license is purchased, along with things like priority support, employee home-use options, etc.
   
2. Cost. There are some additional costs associated with software when you offer an automatic upgrade. Besides the network and bandwidth infrastructure requirements for switching between offering, say, 65KiB of threat signature database updates a day versus a 65-70MiB installation package for the new version, you also have to test the heck out of all the common upgrade scenarios (updating from old version to new version of anti-malware software on all supported x86/x64 versions of Windows, in all languages, and service pack patch levels, with most common apps used by customers on those platforms, testing how the procedure works for incomplete/failed downloads, etc.) to ensure they don't introduce instability into the user environment. This can be offset by staggering the update, i.e., sending it out to a fraction of a percentage of customers at a time so you don't overload your update infrastructure, to customers whose system telemetry has qualified them for compatibility, et cetera, but it's still a lot of work to get ready for an automatic upgrade.
   
3. Compatibility. There may be issues with consistency across versions, especially if you add new features, remove old features, change the default settings of various options and so forth. You really have to make sure there's not a lot of churn across feature sets between the currently-installed version and the new version upgrade in order to prevent configuration problems. Ideally, the new product builds on the feature set of the old one, instead of outright replacing it.
   
4. Stability. If system requirements or compatibility with other software markedly changes between versions, the anti-malware company could end up replacing a fast, stable anti-malware solution with one that slows down the system and causes all sorts of problems for users.
   

Of course, there are many different approaches one can take to offset these factors, like making the upgrade process manual from within the product (to reduce DDoS'ing yourself) and separating the threat signature update infrastructure from the version update infrastructure, but again, the more things you do, the higher the cost and greater the risk of introducing complications due to the complexity of the design. Of course, to offset that, really long public beta test cycles are helpful, but even those don't catch everything.

Anyways, hope that gives you some perspective from someone who currently works for one of the anti-malware companies mentioned in this thread (but is obviously not speaking for them in any official context).

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

[francescob]

Does it really matter? New year, new UI. If there are engine updates, they should be released as they appear, for all customers.

What? I thought it was a fact already that viruses are more scared by user interfaces than antivirus engines. What virus could ever resist Kaspersky's squealing warning?

[+Warwagon MVC]

For several reasons, one of which is that your x years license might not include software updates beyond year so and so.generally you get software updates the first year, and when you renew you just buy a new license for that as the full software package is more expensive, but this varies between them.

also because users are absolute idiots and they hate confusing pop-up like that and they think something is wrong.

In the case of Norton if you download the new version from their website manually and install it it upgrades and activates your existing license just fine. In the case of McAfee, i'm not sure. Yesterday I had a computer in my office that had McAfee 2012. So I went to Mcafee's website to grab 2013. Now in McAfee's case they make you sign into your account to download the newest version. I didn't have her login info.

On the other hand, that same day someone bought Kaspersky One 2012 from walmart. Before installation I downloaded Kaspersky One 2013 and used the key inside the package. Worked great.

[HawkMan]

In the case of Norton if you download the new version from their website manually and install it it upgrades and activates your existing license just fine. In the case of McAfee, i'm not sure. Yesterday I had a computer in my office that had McAfee 2012. So I went to Mcafee's website to grab 2013. Now in McAfee's case they make you sign into your account to download the newest version. I didn't have her login info.

On the other hand, that same day someone bought Kaspersky One 2012 from walmart. Before installation I downloaded Kaspersky One 2013 and used the key inside the package. Worked great.

As far as norton goes that's only true toa certain degree, though I haven't tested it lately. But ON THE PAPER, norton only allows you to upgrade the software the first two years. I some cases and on newer systems you may beable to do it beyond this, but the license doesn't actually allow it, technically...

In the past you couldn't do it at all after 2 years, then you needed to buy a full new version boxed or online. Of course this was back in the horrible 2003-2007 versions. I think that since the 2009 version the licensing system no longer checks for software version number, just if you have a license. But if you get a client with an ancient Norton on it. You can't simply download the latest version and upgrade, it won't work. Of course if the computer is that old they should replace it, and certainly replace the old pre 2007 edition Norton.

As as was said before, there's many more reasons for this.

[The Evil Overlord]

ZA pops up regularly if you haven't paid for it, it's a bonus in addition to making your computer crawl with it's horrible firewall. after trying the firewall for a couple of months now, I have certainly no interest in trying their AV...

No. I know that ZA pops up when newer versions are available. Mine is paid for.

If your computer is crawling then I would as how old it is as mines 9 or there abouts. It's now considered aincient, a dual core 3.2 gig athlon and I haven't noticed it slowing down.

If you don't like it, that's fine, I know everyone have their own personal preference in life.

And to address their horrible firewall, I scan my pc once a month with malwarebytes kaspersky tssd killer spybot and za antivirus which is kaspersky, I'm yet to have an infection of any kind.

Yup, so does Eset. In-fact, Eset prominently states that you don't have to pay license fee for a new version & that its part of the package you purchase.

Yes mine does the same :)

[HawkMan]

No. I know that ZA pops up when newer versions are available. Mine is paid for.

If your computer is crawling then I would as how old it is as mines 9 or there abouts. It's now considered aincient, a dual core 3.2 gig athlon and I haven't noticed it slowing down.

If you don't like it, that's fine, I know everyone have their own personal preference in life.

And to address their horrible firewall, I scan my pc once a month with malwarebytes kaspersky tssd killer spybot and za antivirus which is kaspersky, I'm yet to have an infection of any kind.

Yes mine does the same :)

My computer is a fairly new high mid performance i5 laptop from last year 2nd or 3rd gen don't remember ATM.

And znealarm besides being experimentally naggy and warning about non firewall issues like files launching other files constantly this very behaviour caused the performance issues, on certain application that write or read large amount of data on the disk, ZA would literally hijack IO virtually hanging everything.

Besides that it of course serves no point that I can't handle with windows firewall with less nag and no performance issues, especially since it doesn't use this ancient routine of trying to do non firewall internal computer communication control.

Also what does your paid for ZA have to do with the free version popping up nag screens near daily for you to buy their POS

[The Evil Overlord]

Also what does your paid for ZA have to do with the free version popping up nag screens near daily for you to buy their POS

For starters the pop up on the free version of their suite, like with nearly all protection software, has a notify me later option, 15 or 30 days depending on the product. So that gets rid of that pop up.

If you're referring to the one at za's startup, that one only pops up for the first 5 days and the last 5 days of the trial version, hardly nearly everyday.

I know this as when My key expires, I'll try out rival products just to see if I like it, ESET is the only one I wouod consider leaving za for, but before I buy another key for it I take the opportunity of their trial version as In my eyes I get a free month.

As far as it being a POS as you put it, you're the one that called it that and the refrained to notify me of your 'superior' product.

Something I would take seriously into consideration when my license expires.

I origionally was answering warwagon directly when I posted on this thread, you're the one who jumped on me with an opinion on how bad my choice of ISS is without offering an alternative, not everyone is ever going to agree with you.

As I do not wish to be rude I will simply ask you to either be more diplomatic in your responses to me, and I shall do the same, or put me on ignore. No doubt you'll be replying to me whenever you see this, so if indeed you feel so insecure as to have the last word on this please feel free to do so, then put me on ignore.

Warwagon, I sincerely apologise for going off topic (of sorts) on your thread.

[HawkMan]

Actually it doesn't, it has a close option, not wait x amount of days to bug me again, maybe you're thinking of an older version. Ad no it pops up at random times while using the computer and for LONG after the 5 first days.

My superior products would in this case be the built in firewall. There is ABSOLUTELY no need for another one at tis point in time. For AV,at the moment windows 8 defender and common sense is doing me just fine. But when I need something else I'll use Norton as its as good or in some ways better than the competition, and I get free licenses from them at trade fairs, so no need to shell out for Eset, which in general would be my goto in the past or Kaspersky which I've heard much good about.

I will however not get a any of the annoying 360 or Internet security bundles, but just the AV. Which is a bit annoying as Norton keeps giving me the full 360 package and you can't use that key for just the AV and you can't easily disable the non AV stuff.

Also I gave reasons why I don't like ZA firewall, you where the one who cam and claimed I didn't know what I was talking about or had a crap computer.

Also I like how you ask m to reply and then say I'm insecure if I reply and only do it to have the last word. A last sentence that in itself is kind of self reflecting don't you think. In effect saying I want the last word so I'm putting this here to make it look silly of you to reply. But I have no reason to ignore you.

[The Evil Overlord]

When did I say you have a crap computer? Trust me, I'm not the type of person who would hint at such things. I'd say it straight.

I even went on to tell you how old mine is first.

Hell, even I freely admit Win8 defender is good, now that you have told me what you use, my computer specs are on my profile, so until I'm told otherwise I just assume whoever I happen to be talking to has a similar build.

[+Warwagon MVC]

One guys computer today was still running Kaspersy Internet Security 2010 with 250 days left on the subscription.

[JJ_]

I actually prefer stable releases & updating my AV myself rather than being a guinea pig for the next major release which almost always comes with problems.

In your customers scenario where he was still running KIS 2010, I was have stuck with KAV 2011 throughout from late 2010, 2011 & 2012. Just because the customer has a 3 year old release, it doesn't necessarily mean he will be better protected against viruses with the latest version. I'm pretty sure 2010 & subsequent versions of KIS use identical signature databases. Latter versions may include an updated engine and greater functionality but the core functionality of detection is still the same.

[sc302 Veteran]

While the definitions are more than likely the same, the way they detect new or unknown viruses may significantly change between versions due to scan engine changes. It is not just about the definitions, if that were the case then malwarebytes would be sufficient...Oh wait it isn't, it can't find certain types of malware because the scan engine can't as of yet. Point is that just because you are using something that has current definitions, doesn't mean that the ability to properly detect and defend is there.

[+Warwagon MVC]

While the definitions are more than likely the same, the way they detect new or unknown viruses may significantly change between versions due to scan engine changes. It is not just about the definitions, if that were the case then malwarebytes would be sufficient...Oh wait it isn't, it can't find certain types of malware because the scan engine can't as of yet. Point is that just because you are using something that has current definitions, doesn't mean that the ability to properly detect and defend is there.

Correct, the nature of Malware changes as does the software to detect it.

[Aergan]

I don't know why they don't just charge a subscription for the definitions and auto update the software if you have to go down that route (paid AV).