Talk:Avira security software

I really feel that this page is redundant. I have edited the main Avira Article and made it sorta one in the same with this article, and tried to smooth out any Bias and "advertisment" If anyone has any suggestions please post those in the Talk:Avira page. firevappor7--Firevappor7 (talk) 00:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Parts of this page is really written more like an advertisement than an encyclopeadeian entry.. Someone who knows how (i.e. not me) should get one of those disclaimers or rewrite the article :P 81.228.157.15 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree completely. Added one of those disclaimers, or "tag" as we call it, as you suggested. Thanks for stopping by. Unimaginative Username (talk) 05:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Nagware

"The product performs Internet updates (daily by default) in which it opens a window, with an advertisement suggesting the user to purchase Avira AntiVir Premium." Pretty much meets the definition of Nagware right there. I use and like Av-Free, but the nag screen is almost full-screen, although at least it can be clicked away quickly, unlike some nagware. IMHO, urging users to pay for a "premium suite" of tools that they might already have (anti-spyware, etc.) is in the same category as urging them to pay for the existing version. Always open to differences of opinion, of course.

Also, agree completely with the IP poster that the article reads like an ad. ("sports" is not encyclopedic terminology.) I don't have the time or knowledge to redo it, but hope that someone will so that it is more encyclopedic, even though I use it and like it. Cheers, Unimaginative Username (talk) 05:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Antivir a trojan?

Somehow antivir has infected computers of users who haven't consciously downloaded it, and then scanning for existing important system files calling them spyware or infections. Users are then urged to buy Antivir every three minutes or so... If I were a merciless killer... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.130.9.110 (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

No, AntiVir is a anti virus scanner and doesn't do that. What you are speaking of must be a virus which was called the same... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.130.66.201 (talk) 14:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I think he's telling the truth. AntiVir 2010 got on my computer via a fly-by download and it nagged constantly without allowed me to disable. I needed to download MalwareBytes just to get rid of it. 209.102.243.174 (talk) 18:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

That that sounds like a rough antivirus pretending to be Avira. Avira is legit. Can you link to a source confirming that this rough exists? Then we can consider putting it into the article. PlantRunner (talk) 01:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

http://windowsprotection.net/how-to-remove-antivir-malware-antivir-removal-guide/ 24.197.216.6 (talk) 05:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Or http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Threat/Encyclopedia/Entry.aspx?Name=Antivir2010 --HamburgerRadio (talk) 06:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

The first source is of a dangerous website. The second is referring to different software.

Speedy deletion/duplicate article

Because this article is almost EXACTLY the same was the article Avira, it is unnecessary and redundant. PlantRunner (talk) 19:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

It would be better to integrate the small content of Avira into this article. A short section with company info would be enough. Looking at the interwikis of both articles, almost all have company and product information in one article. --Denniss (talk) 19:19, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

This article has almost the exact same sections as Avira. The only thing Avira makes is security software, so isn't having this article rather redundant? There is very little additional information in this article, and perhaps that info. can be added to Avira, and this one deleted. PlantRunner (talk) 19:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Merging this article with "Avira"

This article has almost the exact same sections as Avira. The only thing Avira makes is security software, so isn't having this article rather redundant? There is very little additional information in this article. Originally I had requested a speedy deletion, but apparently this article is too old for that, so merging seems like a good solution in my opinion. PlantRunner (talk) 00:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

If you are against merging this article, please say something, I will be merging it in a couple of days if there is still silence. PlantRunner (talk) 00:26, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Merging seems like a good idea to me. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll do it once I get a chance. PlantRunner (talk) 16:10, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

completed the merge PlantRunner (talk) 18:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)