Anti-Virus Software

For a number of years, I have been a strong advocate of Kaspersky Anti-Virus software. A few years back it was the ultimate choice of many large corporations, and did well in the reviews.

Unfortunately a few major revisions later they have not managed to maintain the quality of their offering. With each update, the software has become much more resource hungry.

I work with a lot of customers who wish to preserve the life of their old PCs. These machines are running old versions of Windows (usually XP) with a moderate processor and limited amount of memory. Many were complaining that their machines were running too slow. The solution in most cases was to pause Kaspersky. The machine was significantly faster, but they were left extremely vulnerable to any viruses or malware.

So it is time to have a good look round at the alternatives. A news article caught my eye recently saying that a thorough and independent lab test had rated the free Microsoft offering above many of the traditional packages that were sold on a subscription basis.

Trying to search Google for advice about anti-virus software is a nightmare. All the top articles are either sponsored by an anti-virus company and hence are very biased, or you will come across illegitimate anti-virus software that actually infects your computer.

So who is this independent lab whose review I am basing my new recommendation on? NSS Labs. Their Consumer Anti-Malware Products: Group Test Report Q3 2010 is available free at this link.

They tested 11 leading products, two of which are free. AVG has been available for a number of years, but the Microsoft addition is relatively new. And I really like the look of the Microsoft product. It has above average scores for Malware blocking and Exploit blocking, and has the joint-best rating for performance. Add to this its free, and the convenience that it is updated through the normal windows update system and this has to be my new favourite.

I note that the report also compares this year's findings with the previous year. In 2009 Kaspersky was second in the rankings detecting 87.8% of malware against an average of 80.2% for the group. This year Kaspersky detected 71.3% against an average of 74.1%. For performance Microsoft is rated 8 times better.

The guidance in this year's report is that AVG and ESET are poor. F-Secure, McAfee and Trend Micro were recommended and the remaining 6 (including Microsoft) were rated neutral.

The main problem for my customers is the performance impact of the anti-virus software. Cost is also a large factor for them. The product I will recommend was not the top rated for malware detected, but it still does a respectable job in both categories.

To summarise the next time I need to renew or install anti-virus protection, I will be selecting Microsoft. Click here to visit the Microsoft Security Essentials website.

Chris

OS Wars.... Microsoft have just shot themselves in the foot.

If I was the IT Director of a large company with a large user base running Microsoft Windows, I would be very concerned at the moment.

I would have looked at the cost of upgrading to Vista a couple of years back, considered what benefits it would bring and made a decision about whether to invest in upgrading all my users to Vista. Most large companies decided that Vista is far more resource hungry than XP meaning a large proportion of their existing computers would struggle to run Vista. The specialist applications a company uses would be thoroughly tried and tested, and the users are happy with them. These applications in all probability would need upgrading or replacing to run on Vista. And the benefits to upgrading are ...... transparent windows!

So to make my first sentence more specific, I would have a large user base running Microsoft Windows XP. I had no compelling reason to rollout Vista.

Don't get me wrong here - I know Vista and have been running Vista on my home PC for about 18 months. My advice to my next door neighbour would be if they had enough power and memory to run it, and if all the programs and hardware you use work I would recommend switching to Vista. But I would not buy a new PC just so I could have Vista.

So most large corporations with thousands of PCs decided that Vista would be a waste of money that they did not need. So they didn't. This is no secret and Microsoft are well aware of this. I have lost count of the number of times XP's support life has been extended.

For some reason, Microsoft has now actually switched off support for XP. It officially went end-of-life on April 14th 2009. What this means is Microsoft are no longer helping people with problems, or writing patches to resolve issues that are still to be discovered.

This is not a situation a large corporation should find itself in. The IT director and board made the correct decision not to upgrade. What does Microsoft expect all these companies to do now? Upgrade to Vista for a few months until Windows 7 is launched? Run unsupported until Windows 7 is released *and* has had chance to be tested?

If it were me, I would be saying that we are seriously exposed, and must take steps to avoid being in this situation again. How? Well now we have to upgrade everything in the next 12 months, I would be evaluating the other options beside Windows. In fact I would be very seriously looking for an option other than windows so Microsoft cannot do this to us again.

Linux is now much easier to use - it is much more plug-and-play. Mac OS is growing in the size of its installed user base, and all Macs now have Intel processors, which makes it much easier to run Mac OS on a standard PC (I have it running in VMWare and it runs a treat! VMWare Fusion on the Mac lets users run Mac OS as a virtual machine. And the PC can run with a couple of little tweaks!) Google are working on a new operating system. I think in the next 12 months we will see cheaper alternatives to windows that are actually viable! I forgot to mention the unreliability of Windows. People just think it is normal to wait when a PC freezes, normal to restart apps, or to reboot to fix odd problems.

If I were Microsoft I would not have switched off XP support until Windows 7 was starting to be taken up on a large scale. Because they have I would have a very good argument to try and move away from Microsoft desktops!

Chris

Update: Today Microsoft are officially concerned about competition to the desktop OS.

Google Chrome - web 2.0 starts today....

Back in April 2007 I wrote a blog post about all the hype around web 2.0. My opinion was "You can't call something Web version 2 without changing some infrastructure (Ie hardware), protocols (Ie http) and/or browsers."

Well today Google have launched a new browser, named Google Chrome!

If anyone knows anything about the Internet, where it is going and how to make it better this company does.

The browser is simple, well designed and has a new architechture to protect our computers from the nasties on the net. And I believe it (unlike when Microsoft make the same claim with every new release of their software).  Each web site and plugin is in a process of its own, which is a kind of virtual box. Whatever happens inside that box only affects the box.

This is my shortest post ever because the software has been released within the hour. Get this browser now. Today the internet has changed. I need to add this browser is still in testing and is classed as Beta, but Google always do this. I'll bet a Google beta works better than any Microsoft final release!

I have never been so excited about the future for computing. What with the Apple iPhone which will be expanded into a laptop form building on the success of the touch interface, and now Google evolving the web browser which could morph into a replacement for Microsoft Windows.

Chris

Update: I use this for normal surfing, but there are more than a few sites that are not properly compatible with this browser.  If you like a browser to store your logins for all the websites, Chrome is poor in this area.  Unfortunately one still needs to use Internet Explorer for some tasks.

BATTLE OF THE YEAR: Can HTC beat the iPhone??

I am referring to the HTC Touch range of new mobile phones. The Diamond is the consumer model which has a joystick, 4 buttons and a touch screen (no keypad). The Pro which will be out in the next couple of months has a sideways sliding full qwerty keyboard.

I have tried the HTC Touch Diamond as on paper it beats the iPhone, plus it runs Windows Mobile operating system which I have used before and really liked. The main benefit is full synchronisation with Outlook contacts and calendars.

The adverts all show off the screen with a selection of album covers to choose from to play your music, and some very nicely animated weather program.

I will cut to the point - it does not work. Trying to use this handset to make calls and text is next to impossible. Windows Mobile v6.1 cannot cope with a touch screen. There is one simple flaw that they have not addressed. If I am on the contact screen and flick the screen from the bottom to the top to scroll the list the phone will on about 30% occasions dial the contact on whom your finger first touches.

As for texts there is a nice HTC front end to the text inbox. However to view old texts or to compose a new text you have to revert to the standard Windows Mobile interface.

The album covers that are in the ad are only available within the playlist. This device has 4Gb internal storage so can hold a decent amount of music. This is impossible to flick through and select from the text list (and there is no other way). Lastly you have to buy a third party adapter if you wish to use anything other than the bundled hands-free kit to listen through.

When I said the HTC beat the iPhone the main point was the screen resolution. iPhone boasts 480x320 over 3.5". The HTC has a physically smaller 2.8" screen (allowing the handset to be much smaller than iPhone) but has twice as many pixels (640x480). The "minor" problem is that the processor in the phone can't process a movie anywhere near that resolution. I uploaded a 480 line mp4 and was lucky to see 1 frame per second. And it downsized that to view in portrait - couldn't get it to use landscape...

Which brings me on to my next issue. Not only is use of the accelerometer restricted to the flashy but useless album viewer and opera mobile, but most apps do not have a setting to tell them to put the screen in landscape. For example Windows Remote desktop took over my PC but with a screen res of 480 pixels across and 640 down!!

Lastly the internet experience - there are two browsers loaded. Opera was the easiest to use, but couldn't use the bookmarks sync-ed from your PC. IE could see the bookmarks but had problems rendering a lot of websites and had poor support for the touchscreen.

To sum up this phone has a lot of features and a large amount of apps are available to customise the phone with it being Windows based. I chose this phone thinking it was a cross between a phone and a laptop - against the iPhone which is a cross between a media player and a phone. But it simply doesn't work. There is no point having a phone if you feel like throwing it everytime you try to ring someone.

The last problem for HTC is simply that iPhone is "the iPhone". Doesn't matter what anyone else launches it will not BE an iPhone. The iPhone is from Apple. It has the press coverage. Everyone has heard of it just because it is!

Chris heads to the Apple store........

PS. When you go to the store to buy the iPhone the O2 website will not work in Mac OS. They boot their lovely Mac into Windows XP before they can process the order lol.

Embracing Vista

I am running Vista on my main PC. I have been for over a month.

Why?

Firstly because SP1 is all but officially finished. On the 11th January Microsoft released an almost final version of service pack 1 for use by anyone who is interested. Ie Me!. Most major corporations refused to evaluate Vista until it had time to 'bed in'. Plenty of people were classing the launch version of Vista as a beta, and were waiting for the first service pack. Well here it is!

Secondly I am fed up with having to format my computer and re-install XP from scratch every couple of months. XP seemed to develop quirks and problems that would eventually become such an issue a re-install was the only option. I had done this so many times I had the rebuild down to 3-4 hours and knew exactly what to backup and where to find it.

Lastly because Microsoft's claim that Vista is more secure seems to have stood the test of time. I have not seen any stories of viruses breaking into the protected kernel or any other other such major problem being found in Vista's security. It has had its share of critical security patches, but not as many as XP or other software.

I have previously criticised and joked about Vista. My gripes can be summarised as:

First - the new UAC or User Account Control. Whenever you install anything or change any global user settings you are bombarded with security prompts asking you to confirm the changes. Now more programs are vista compatible there are less prompts during installation. There is also a very neat solution to this problem. I have mentioned it before on here but I have now found a much easier way to enable it.

On the start menu, right-click Computer and select Manage. Confirm the action at the security prompt.

Expand Local Users and Group in the left tree and select Users. Double-click Administrator and uncheck the account is disabled box. Click OK. Now right-click Administrator and click Set Password. Enter a strong password when prompted. When you login as Administrator you bypass UAC but it is still active for all your other users.

Second the lack of new features. When Vista was announced many moons ago we were promised some really ground-breaking and much needed improvements. Not many of these promises were actually delivered. When you compare XP and Vista on a major functionality basis there are not many changes.

Thirdly the many different versions and the unjustifiably high price tag. Vista Ultimate which is the best version available retails at £323 on DVD from Ebuyer. However I recommend buying the OEM version - it is exactly the same software but without the shiney box and it retails for £106. This version is only meant to be sold to PC manufacturers to pre-install. It has slightly different terms and conditions but all that matters is you are not meant to be able to move your license to a different computer after it has been activated. In practice I don't know how strongly this will be enforced, or how many times you are allowed to reassign the expensive version.

Also bear in mind some hardware that works perfectly in XP will be obsolete and need replacing when upgrading to Vista, which will add to the cost of upgrading.


After installing Vista I found it to be extremely sluggish. When my computer was idle I found my CPU usage was about 20%!!

SP1 does improve this - but - the cause of this sluggishness can be explained by Vista's improved search system. After an install the system will comb your hard disks and generate an index for the search subsystem. This is why it runs slow.

Turn off the power save features and leave your computer switched on for a day or two. In this time it will complete building the index and setting up other tuning systems. I found once this has completed the system will run about as fast as XP!

So after installing, turn on the Administrator account and use it to setup your computer without UAC annoying you. Leave your computer on for a couple of days to build its indexes etc. Then you can think about Vista's benefits!


Chris

Ps. My PC is only a fairly old Pentium 4, 3.0GHz with HT (Single Core with HyperThreading) and 1.5Gb RAM.

Commercial Interests vs New Technology

I often wonder what the world of computers and technology would be like were it not for commercial companies making sure their user's choices are restricted to their own products, and were it not for all the law suits due to infringing patents that defy common sense.

Competing techinical products are great - if only the winner was the one that proved to be technically superior as opposed to the one whose inventor had the biggest pockets.

It is an ongoing joke in the web programmer circles as to how Amazon managed to get a patent for a One-Click shopping service. Most shopping websites allow customers to create a profile holding their address and payment details to make repeat shopping easier. So I am browsing a shopping site, I have logged into the site so they know my identity. If such a site allows me to click a 'Buy' button and my order is created this infringes an Amazon patent.

Another example is the iPod. On it I store music - each track having properties such as Genre, Artist, Album and Track name. The obvious way for me to choose what to play is to select the property I wish to use, then to look through a list of all music sorted by said property. This is patented by Creative Labs. How else am I meant to choose my music? Any 10 year old asked this question will come up with the same answer. How can a commercial company patent something that is not a serious invention?

These patents causes competing products that cannot afford to pay for a patent license to deliberately design some inferior interface. How is this good for the user?

Quite often a company has a successful product that people like. It gets an established user base. As the product and technology evolves this company makes some bad decisions that lead to a worse product. Users are then stuck with a dilema and have to choose to put up with the new inferior product, or deal with the upheaval and problems of switching to an alternate and incompatible product.

I get so annoyed when features are removed as products evolve and users are forced to buy a second add-on product or upgrade to get the features back.

A final issue is when companies set rules and restrictions that govern how other companies can create products to integrate with their products. So often these are designed to prevent integration and cause users inconvenience to limit the user base that embrace the competitors product.

Havn't I done well not mentioning Microsft and Apple in the above article??

Maybe this is one area where I should be grateful to the regulation fanatics that run the EU? They have taken on Microsoft for uncompetitive practicses. The problem with fining a company for bad practices is that they simple pass the cost of the fine on to the end user. When you buy your next Windows think how nice it is that some of that price paid the record breaking EU fine they incurred! I await to see if the EU ruling actually improves the user experience.

Chris

Vista again!

I still enjoy a good laugh every time I think of Microsoft's launch campaign for Vista! Remember that "The Wow starts now"! What wow? Looking back it wasn't even a pop. Or a squeaky bit of wind. (Sorry for being a bit rude!)

Do you know anyone who is using Vista? I don't. I have considered switching to it a few times but within a couple of days come running back to XP. One of the main issues I have with Vista is it regularly re-writes its boot program to my boot sector. I think it is triggered by Microsoft Updates. But becuase I am evaluating Vista I am multi-booting and using a third party boot manager. The fact Vista always screws this up and I have to restore it from CD to get back to my XP installation puts me off trying it!

I havn't mentioned my Dad on here before. He is very clever and is the fountain of all knowledge. But he really struggles with computers. He believes a computer should do what he wants, how he wants. And it never does. The reasoning for pressing the Start button to stop the computer still beats him.

Because he is a computer amateur he is probably one of the most vulnerable users to all the virus and phishing scams. I have set up all his computer security as high as I can. I have explained to him to watch for anything suspicious and tell me if anything changes on his computer. I have also explained to be extremely warey of pop-ups telling him of a problem and telling him to click somewhere or install something. This is how he has been caught in the past by a trojan.

He has a new digital camera and enjoys checking his emails. Someone at work had told him you can put your photos onto a DVD as a movie and play it on your friends televisions and he wants to do this. I can't find any simple software to do this on XP but Vista does it natively. The Vista interfaces for photos and videos are significantly enhanced over XP. I have asked him to try and upgrade. Though it is noticably slower, his PC can run it. He hasn't switched yet.

I have waffled a bit above, but I have two serious points to make:

1) A learning computer operating system.

This is a vision we were promised with XP. That the computer learns what tasks you do most and automatically tunes itself to help you. Problem is it doesn't work with XP. And it has got worse in Vista. Every few weeks when I visit home I have a list of messages, changes or new icons that Dad has noticed - as I asked him to. They are nearly all made automatically by the computer learning or applying updates. They do not help at all. They cause confusion. Why when he is learning how to work the computer do the goal posts keep moving?

There is really no excuse on Microsoft's account. Computers are fast, have plenty of idle processor time and always on internet connections. How can basic self-tweaking algorithms perform such a bad job of knowing what a user wants? And why is it impossible to turn them all off and lock the computer down to a consistent state?

2) Multiple Users with proper roles still not anywhere near implemented.

Since Windows NT Microsoft has allowed multiple users to have a different personal environment. Users can be an administrator or a standard user. I've have discussed Vista security on this blog months back so will avoid repeating myself. What I want is for the standard user to be let alone to work. They can use Word, surf the net and use the applications that are on the PC in peace. Save all the annoying windows nags (which have increased three-fold in Vista) for when an administrator logs in.

Why is it not possible for me to make any change as an administrator and apply it to all the users? If I install a wireless network when I am the administrator it should work as soon as a standard user logs in. When I am setting up the machine I have to log in as every user account and setup things like the networking and Office settings.

I know windows is not meant to be a fully multi-user operating system. Only one person can work on the machine at a time. It is not possible for a less powerful machine to connect remotely and run programs on a powerful machine while someone else is working on it. However on the launch of Windows XP it was claimed that each member of the house could have their own account, own documents, own favourites etc. But it still does not work.

Usability of computers should have moved on by now. Microsoft has had generations of operating systems to make this work. Why have such basic features still not been delivered? And why are amateur users still struggling to learn Windows way of doing things?

Chris

Update: I am discussing stand-alone Vista in a home or small business environment. Central management and configuration are different if your Vista machine belongs to a Domain.

Vista Security Configuration

In the last few weeks Sony Ericsson have realeased Vista software for their mobile phone range. Philips webcam drivers are now available. I believe also that Apple iTunes is at long last Vista compatible. So now more hardware is supported is it time to upgrade yet?

If you are a computer guru and can still do what you need to on your PC under Windows XP then I don't see much need to upgrade, other than curiousity. It is no more stable than XP. I had to pull the power plug out to reset mine which has now caused serious damage to my user environment. All I was doing was watching a video full screen while running a slow installer in the background. The installer asked a question meaning I couldn't minimise my video or bring the installer to the front to allow it to continue. I should be able to multi-task perfectly in windows by now, but it is still not right. Also why Mr Gates have you taken out the ability for me to choose the colour of my taskbar?? XP Blue is nicer than Vista Grey - Grrr

If you have young kids who's internet usage needs monitoring or controlling, or you struggle with the multimedia interfaces of XP then maybe Vista would help you. Parental controls and digital photo handling are much enhanced in Vista. It is also true that it is harder for viruses to propagate through the internet under Vista - so long as you keep UAC (User Account Control) enabled.

What is User Account Control (UAC) you ask?

If you have installed Vista you will know - even if you didn't know it's name! By default this is enabled. It prevents any major changes to your computer without your permission. Whenever you use the control panel, or run an installation program you will be bombarded with windows telling you that you are about to change the system or install the program. After an hour you will be so fed up with all these prompts you will just be clicking Yes and Accept to them all without reading them or thinking about them. If you have searched help about how to turn the problems off the only option listed is to disable UAC completely. Don't do this!

This problem, technically called 'User Fatigue' makes the new protection virtually useless. In fact I will go one step further and call it damned annoying. The level of user it is meant to protect is the level of user that will become most vulnerable.

There is a very little publicised way of fixing this, while still making use of all the advantages of it. That is the purpose of this post. The instructions below will allow you to create one account that will be able to alter anything without receiving the new security warning windows.

Background

In Windows XP each account was either a standard user that could not change the system configuration, or an administrator that could change anything. Because everyone needs to tweak things at some point everyone used the administrator setting for all their work under XP. Hence the terrible situation with viruses, malware and configuration problems.

In Vista this has been modified. An administrator level account is a normal user that must say yes to a security warning before it can change the system. Perfect you shout! Except when setting up a new system you will be constantly changing things and will get so many of these security prompts you will be pulling your hair out. Standard user accounts now have to supply the password to an administrator account before they can change things. Isn't that pretty similar to a new-type administrator account?? In a domestic situation yes!

Follow the steps below and you can have a proper administrator account that can do anything without being prompted. I recommend for normal use you use a new-type administrator account (created by default when you install your computer). If you have people using your computer who should never be able to install or change your computer create a non-administrator account for them.

Configuring UAC in Vista

Please note these changes are made at your own risk. If you change anything else make notes so you can repeat the process to reverse the changes.

1. Click on the Windows icon to open what would be the old start menu.
2. In the search box type 'mmc'
3. It should be found and listed as a program.
4. Click on it or press enter to run it.
5. You will be prompted with one of the security warnings asking for permission to run the Microsoft Management Console (now you know what mmc stands for).
6. Click Continue. The console will load.
7. Open the File menu and select Add/Remove Snap In.
8. From the list of available snap-ins, double-click on Group Policy Object Editor.
9. Simply click Finish in the Group Policy Wizard.
10. Click OK to dismiss the Add/Remove Snap In window.
11. Navigate the tree in the left hand pane of MMC to the following item.
"Local Computer Policy" ->
"Computer Configuration" ->
"Windows Settings" ->
"Security Settings" ->
"Local Policies".
12. Click on the policy titled "Security Options".

In the right pane are about 50 different policies that can be configured.

I recommend you change the following:

• "Accounts: Administrator Account Status" = Enabled
• Optionally edit "Accounts: Rename administrator account" to set the name of the super administrator account we are setting up.
• "User Account Control: Admin Approval Mode for the Built-in Administrator account" = Disable.
• "User Account Control: Behaviour of the elevation prompt for standard users" = "Automatically Deny Requests"

To exit the management console choose Exit from File menu. Say no when asked if you want to save. Your changes were saved instantly.

To login to the new administrator account open the start menu. Point at the arrow to the right of the padlock. In the menu that pops up select either "Log off" or "Switch User". I recommend the latter.

You should now be able to login to the new account. First thing to do is press (alt) - (ctrl) & (delete) and use the Change Password option.

For completeness, you can create, change or delete user accounts in the Windows Control Panel. The option you will require is in the "User Accounts and Family Safety" section and is called "Add or remove user accounts".

The more I use Vista the more I cringe at how it has such serious shortcomings in user friendliness. If a company of mine launched software this bad as a Beta I would be very concerned. I think a few people at Microsoft have been sitting on their arse eating donuts! (Picture homer simpson!). According to this report 10,000 people have been working for 5 years on this!

Chris

Update: This option is not available on the basic versions of Vista

If Microsoft made cars....

Bill Gates reportedly once compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating:

If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:

1. For no reason whatsoever your car would crash twice a day.
2. Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn, would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Only one person at a time could use the car, unless you bought "Car95" or "CarNT." But then you would have to buy more seats.
6. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, reliable, five times as fast, and twice as easy to drive, but would only run on five per cent of the roads.
7. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car fault" warning light.
8. New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
9. The airbag system would say "Are you sure?" before going off.
10. Occasionally for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key, and grab hold of the radio antenna.
11. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need them nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.
12. Everytime GM introduced a new model car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
13. You'd press the "start" button to shut off the engine.

It's an absolute classic, but still rings so true!

Chris

First Vista security bug!

It is 1st February, 1:30PM.

I am rolling on the floor laughing at this, but it is true.

A technique has been released to delete files from a Vista PC!!!!

Have you ever been to a website and unwanted music starts playing?

Are you aware that speech recognition is becoming more popular so you can talk to your PC instead of typing?

Can you guess where this is going?

Yep a website only needs an audio file dictating commands to the computer to delete files, then empty the trash bin and it will.

Until Microsoft cave in and remove all the content control that stops you playing your own videos you have paid for on your computer, and stop taking control of what you can do with YOUR OWN PC this is gonna get far worse.

Their T&Cs let them delete anything they want to from your PC. Dangerous when viruses find a way into this mechanism!

Keep XP and sit back and laugh!!

Chris

Update: Vista's integrated virus scanner is worst on the market.

Windows Vista launched, yawn!

Today is the launch day of Windows Vista to the domestic market - it has been available to businesses for two months already.

Does anyone need it? Not really. Have I tried it? Yes. Have I upgraded? No chance!!

The way I view the evolution of windows is that under Windows XP most PCs are now more than fast enough. People can surf the web and do word processing. Most people have a PC of some form.

That means Microsoft and PC makers have got their money from the customers and the customers are now happy at home using their PC and software. This is the problem.

Microsoft has to add better graphics to the user interface so it looks slow on your existing PC. Then you go and buy a new PC with enough grunt to make Vista look fast. They have to persuade you the new Windows is better and you have to have it so they continue making money. But you don't!!

Let's look at this upgrade process realistically. Yeah Vista may only (cough) be £250, but then half your peripherals and expansion cards stop working. You replace the problem hardware with Vista compatible versions. Then half your software is not compatible. You have to buy different software to do the same job - and have to spend time learning how it works. You also have to spend time learning how to tweak and use Vista. Now you are back to where you were, running Vista and able to do everything you used to do. Except your PC responds much slower. Then you shell out to expand your PC - a bit more memory. That speeds it up a bit until you can afford a brand new machine.

Before upgrading be aware of the total cost - it ain't just the Vista license. Ask yourself what have I wanted to do on my computer that I can't do at the moment yet I will be able to do if I upgrade? Is the benefit worth the financial cost and upheaval? The only answer I can find to this is a few bouncy icons. So what?

The security improvements will keep out the current type of viruses but wait a couple of months and there will be viruses for Vista. Also watch that the improvements in Vista may require you to subscribe (yes monthly cost for ever) to Windows Live. Lastly how come a Vista license in the UK costs twice the US price??

Chris

Update: See A lawyers view of the Vista T&Cs and Vista security claim challenged.

Windows Vista Security

Following on from my previous post supporting Microsoft in locking down the Vista kernel to keep other companies out and all the noise from anti-virus vendors there is a bigger issue underlying all this.

If software vendors cannot get inside windows, that in principle means that virus writers can't either. So if viruses and security software are successfully locked out of Vista what is the problem? Surely anti-virus companies only want to be saviours and protect our critical computers from damage. They couldn't possibly be wanting the system to be opened up so viruses can infect a system so they can sell a product to remove the viruses?? Nah - Im being silly now :)

Microsoft and security

I have just seen this article on BBC News: Microsoft 'taking security risks'

It is from one of the many anti-virus vendors that are all whinging about Microsoft locking them (and dodgy device driver writers) out of the core of Windows Vista.

I am not a fan of Microsoft products to say the least, but if anyone has tried to uninstall Norton Anti-Virus in the past I agree with Microsoft. These security products really do screw things up if you decide to remove them and not pay to renew them each year.

Just speak to any Mac fan (for reference, I don't own an Apple computer. The reasons why are a whole other post). The thing they like most about their nice looking toys is that they never get an operating system crash. Why? Because everything on Macs is made by Apple. They keep their cards close to their chest. They supply all the hardware and the operating system which all work seamlessly together.

So why is Windows so unstable? Mainly because companies that make hardware and low-level software/device drivers don't have the expertise or testing facilities needed to alter the windows operating system. They make hardware that has been designed and tested with a final cheap price tag in mind when it hits the shops. I wonder why it is unreliable?

With everyone locked out and an Apple type situation the buck stops with Microsoft. If anyone asks the question 'Why is Windows Vista so unstable' there is only one place to point the finger. Microsoft have to get this right and make Vista secure and stable. Looking at the stupid number of Windows security updates they produce their track record is, how can I put this, crap!

So if third-party vendors cannot try and save the day, and if Microsoft screws up where will this leave everyone? People will need an alternative operating system to Vista on their PCs. What are the options? At the moment, its Linux. But, one second don't Macs now run on the same instruction set as Windows - ie Intel? Yes. Mr Steve Jobs, can we please have Mac OS for our PCs?

Knowing this guy if he wants to, he will make it happen and make it work well. Just expect the PC version of Mac OS to be a bit cut down so there is still a reason to buy your hardware from Apple as well.

If Jobs doesn't rise to the challenge we will be left with a very large vacuum. Someone has to because I think there is a 25% chance Microsoft get this right. And Im praying they do!