Don't under estimate them mate..they are good security providersNice find @Slyguy
Sadly I no longer think of Avast as a security company. Ever since they bought Jumpshot they became a data harvesting company that happens to have a security program. The sad part is they keep getting caught, apologize, create an update to "fix" the issue, only to discover they just changed the way it happens, hoping that they did a better job of hiding it this time around.
Over the last few years. I have slowly watched Avast just completely drift away from the great company they once were. I've always felt like they gave away to much with their free version, but in all honesty I think they could have taken a different path than the one they are currently on if they felt like it wasn't sustainable (which it probably wasn't). Personally I think they could have either just got rid of the free version all together and just offered their paid versions at a reasonable price. Sure they would lose some customers, but I think in the long term it would be better for them, as they wouldn't have to resort to these tactics and tarnish their reputation. The other option they could have chosen (if they wanted to offer a free version), would be to do what Bitdefender did with their free product. Offer a product that is very simple, little to no adjustments in settings, but have features and capabilities built in to offer decent protection.
I personally will never use any of Avast/AVG's products any more, nor will I ever recommend them. I don't care how well it may score in the Hub or else where, its not worth it IMO and I shouldn't have to jump through hoops to block this stupidity.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not doubting them on their security capabilities, they have proven to do a very good job, there's no arguing that. I'm not comfortable with their constant behaviour/tactics as of late. I understand that many 3rd party products have some bloat, but I do not see the reason why a security company needs to buy a company like Jumpshot. As I've said I do believe they could have taken a different approach if they felt like they can't sustain themselves with the free version. I will be honest though, if they some how wake up and change their stance/practices a little and be less intrusive, I may consider them again, but as of right now I'll have to watch from the sidelines.Don't under estimate them mate..they are good security providers
Though Bloat exists nothing beyond unbearable
It has market share alone>80% in free market
Even many paid products can't hold a candle to them..Avira, Bullguard, Vipre, Ad Aware, Sophos, Webroot >>List goes on..)
I'm starting to notice more Windows Defender on Windows 10 as AVs. Hell, I even recommend it considering free and paid AVs are becoming bothersome to novice users. Gone are the days of installing Free AVs because anything is better than MSE (the old Windows Vista/7 days)...at least in my world.People don't want to pay... they want free, so they install Avast Free. And why is that ? Because Avast Free has been promoted to death on the web for decades because it is free.
The point is whether one should consider better Free alternatives. Every kid in the planet knows that there is no such thing as Free. Even many paid versions of software from Avast/AVG what else even Microsoft steals user data.People don't want to pay... they want free, so they install Avast Free. And why is that ? Because Avast Free has been promoted to death on the web for decades because it is free.
The average person could care less... as long as it is free.
The reality of today's digital world = "If I give you something for free, I'm definitely getting something from you... because I don't do anything for free." Not to mention that people do not own their own, personal data. Sorry. You don't. If people owned their data, then they could interfere with the entire digital system in such as way and to the extent that it would be harmful to that system. And no government in its right mind is going to allow that to happen. Research it. A person has the right to restrict data, but generally the system is given the rights to harvest data at many levels - most notably operational.
Data = money.
The free-loading has a lot to do with how this evolved over the years. And more importantly the fact that people don't think about the consequences of what they do.
People who participate on these forums forget that security soft publishers don't care about the perspectives of security soft geeks, the paranoid (ultra-privacy types), the conspiracy theorist types, etc. If security soft publishers focused on that demographic, then they would go out of business in no time.Real-World users (aka not us, geeky paranoid security forums lurkers) want free and set&forget solutions , so when they realize "Holy cow, Windows has a built-in AV !!!! awesome !!!" they don't even move their fingers to look for another solution.
geeks like complicated things, because it is a hobby; real world people want spend their time on social medias or with their kids, they don't have time for tweaking OS and security apps; which most of the case hamper their computing experience.
Would this be kind of like a non-windows parent of a windows process? In process explorer, processes run underneath others, so maybe these are the hidden ones, but I don't know. One other thing...why are they called hidden? Is this because they can't be seen in Task Manager?Sorry for the dumb question, but what is a "hidden process," and how can you see such processes?
Wireshark intercepts all traffic, is not for common users though.