Windows Tips and Tricks

There are a number of all-purpose security suites that combine a variety of functons. Some are better integrated than others and none has the best software in all categories. I do not personally use a suite but they are quite popular and PC Magazine gives the results of its tests on the leading offerings. Note their overall conclusion:

There are two Editors’ Choices in this roundup, both demonstrating considerable maturity. But even the best products in this category are so complex they fall behind in some ways, for example in antispam protection.

The magazine (actually Neil Rubenking) picks ZoneAlarm Internet Security Suite and Norton Internet Security 2007 as the best. Apparently Symantec has been working to make Norton less intrusive and heavy-handed. Making Noton less of a system hog would certainly be welcome; I have often complained about its big drag on performance. Also, once it’s on your system, it takes a real effort to remove it.

PC World had a go at listing the worst tech stuff of all time and now PC Magazine is giving it a try. What’s interesting is how little agreement there is between the two lists. Unless I overlooked something, Microsoft “Bob” seems to be the only common item. (Incidentally, I believe that Bill Gates’ wife Melinda was in charge of the “Bob” project. They were married soon thereafter so obviously, the Bob fiasco didn’t hurt her prospects any.)

CNET has done a study of the effect of various antivirus software programs on how fast a system can carry out certain common tasks. As is well known, antivirus programs slow down a computer and it is interesting to look at the CNET numbers. The article concludes:

For the first time in nearly two years, we have an Editors’ Choice winner for antivirus protection. Of the products we’ve tested and reviewed thus far, we think Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6 offers the best value and performance. Norton AntiVirus 2007 improved some over last year, but McAfee VirusScan Plus 2007, despite adding a firewall, failed to move up. New this year is Eset NOD32, an excellent application, but one that’s best suited for more advanced users

Internet Explorer 7 (IE 7) has better defenses against malicious Web sites than its predecessor IE 6 but there are still some vulnerabilities, especially with regard to ActiveX. I have posted a page with some recommendations for configuring the so-called “Internet Security Zone” in IE 7. Increasing the security means that some Web pages will stop working and there is also a page explaining how to put the sites that you regard as safe into the “Trusted” security zone.

Most commentators are recommending at least 1 GB of RAM for Windows Vista, with 2 GB being needed for heavier applications. I can’t help thinking of the 1981 quote widely attributed to Bill Gates, “640K ought to be enough for anybody.” To be fair, I should point out that Gates denies that he ever said any such thing and there is no specific citation to be found. Still it makes a good story and Gates has been known to trip on a prediction. Almost three years ago he definitely said, “Spam will be a thing of the past in two years’ time.”

To answer the above question, CNET carried out a comparative study of the two browsers with a panel of three experts. They did a comparison in five different categories and picked Firefox 2 as the winner. Here’s the conclusion:

Firefox 2 still rules the browser roost for now, despite a much improved version of Internet Explorer. The most obvious new feature for IE 7 (tabs) has been in Firefox forever, and the security additions from Microsoft aren’t enough for us to allay concerns over new possible exploits. Lastly, the extensibility of Firefox 2 is its knockout punch, and IE’s add-ons cannot compare. The flexibility and customizability of Firefox might be best suited to more advanced Web users, but it has earned its spot at the top of the browsers.

Everyone ought to back up regularly. Contrary to what many PC users seem to think, Windows System Restore does not make a complete backup. (More on System Restore is in this post.) A separate program is required and a good way is with imaging software that creates an image or copy of the entire system. I wrote previously about my experience with imaging programs and my unhappiness with what Symantec had done to two of my previous favorites, Ghost and Drive Image. Apparently Symantec has improved Ghost since then (they killed Drive Image after acquiring it) and have renamed it “Norton Backup and Restore”. However, I have been using Acronis True Image and it is now my backup program of choice.

A review of five imaging programs has just appeared at Information Week. The author’s conclusion is:

Image for Windows carried the lowest price tag and the smallest feature set (no differential backups, no file/folder backups), but it also carried the least bulk and got the job done with little or no difficulty. I liked Norton Backup and Restore for being the most flexible, and it did have some of the best features overall, but it also carried the most heft. However, my personal favorite, Acronis True Image, had almost the same mix of features as Symantec’s offering and carried a lot less bulk.

The customized search engine mentioned in the previous post is just one example of the possibilities with a new feature from Google. PC World editor Harry McCracken writes:

What if you could create your own version of Google, and do it almost instantly? Starting today, you can, sort of–thanks to Google Custom Search Engine, a new Google feature that lets you create subsets of the whole Google search engine, then do interesting things with them. In short, it’s a way to carve off chunks of Google and customize them into a specialty search engine with a specific focus.

The Google Custom Search Engine is described at this Google link where you can build your own.

Using a newly released Google application, Office Watch has launched a search engine designed to find tips, help and information about Microsoft Office.

Firefox 2 (FF2) is out and the reviews are starting. At ZDNet, Robert Vamosi says:

The good: Firefox 2 adds built-in antiphishing protection, search engine suggestions, session restore, inline spell-checking, and Live Titles; the browser is available for Windows, Mac, and Linux; localized versions available in many different languages.
The bad: The Firefox 2 uninstall leaves behind a mess; some 1.5 version add-ons will break in 2.0; there are no thumbnail previews of open tabs; the browser doesn’t yet pass the Web Standards Project Acid2 test.
The bottom line: Mozilla Firefox 2 is a winner, beating Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on security, features, and overall cool factor and deserving our Editors’ Choice award.

You can also see a video on Firefox by Vamosi at this link.

PC World does a comparison of FF2 and IE7 and concludes:

Of the two rivals, Firefox remains the better application. Since IE users will have to adjust to a new layout and interface anyway, this might be a good time to give Firefox a try, then watch IE 8 play catch-up again in five years.

So, as previously noted, Firefox looks like the browser of choice for me. One nice new feature of FF2 is a spellchecker. The search function is also better than in IE7.