No that is not my opinion :P. But honestly does anyone see an issue with this equation. Okay unless you've been living under a rock, you know about Microsoft's offer to buy out the fading web icon Yahoo. If you share the same opinion as I do about Yahoo, you couldn't care less right? Uhm, no. Yahoo is currently the under dog and simply is going to get bought by someone. The question is who and what would be the outcome. Well lets examine the Giant Juggernaut first. Over the past year or so (since Vista's launch) the new MS OS has been failing despite being the Windows system with the fastest selling licence, that statistic that MS is trying to say is a positive spin is falsified for a few simple reasons. 1. There are far more computers in the world today then in 2001 with XP's launch so of course there are going to me more sales. 2. MS doesn't say anything about that Vista is the most downgraded system since the flop that was ME. Okay, back to my point, with Vista's launch they also started developing "Live Services" of which I'm using :P. Well, if you watched or read any of the MS presentations at Electronics expos, then you know what they are trying to do. Using Live services and the single Live ID they are trying to eliminate the need for a "personal" computer. Okay imagine this, you go to a friends house, sign into Windows 7 by this time at least using your Live ID, and via internet, it loads all your personal settings, via Live Skydrive loads all your files and programs, via Live Mail all your email, Via Messenger all your contacts, etc. Sounds cool right, it actually does to me as well. Well as of now, MS has nowhere near the internet infrastructure to implement this idea. Where as Messenger and Hotmail are big, they are only a fraction of online services. MS's monopoly doesn't branch onto the web as much as they'd like. So what I believe MS would do is use Yahoo's current user base to help along and boost their presence on the net. It makes a lot of sense to me. Okay, now for the universal name, Google. Google is the online of MS. A much larger User base than both Yahoo and MSN it has the ability and the expertise and size to handle pretty much anything that any company can throw at it. I'm a major Google fan btw. Say Google buys Yahoo, I can see they using Fliker to expand their image search and integration with Picasa, using all or most of the Yahoo Mail because it is a ways ahead of Gmail's foundation as far as the UI and storage goes (but honestly who uses 6.6 gigs as of now for *just* mail. I've got more online files on Gmail than I could imagine) but still keeping Gmail's open-ness such as POP3 forwarding (which yes many of us still use :P). I can see pretty much the best search engine on the net being a combo between Yahoo and Google web search. Google is also about the king of open standards right now, they don't hold alligence to either side of the open source fight and thus could possible be the most flexible. They have already proved this by going with two completely different companies in Google pack in an attempt to get their name onto OS's. They have partnered with Symantec for the Norton Security Scan and also give a packaged version of Firefox (with the Google toolbar add on of course). And finally, I can see a major growth in Google itself. Either way there is going to be good, but as far as I could see, Google buying Yahoo would be the best way. MS getting even bigger cannot be a good thing, as if 98% of the Computer OS share isn't enough.

What in the world is CNET thinking. Okay, yes I do see some of the issues they outlines in Norton IS 2008 (I'm using it as we speak), but the whole time they kept comparing it to Mcafee Total Protection which is a completely different animal. Mcafee Internet Security is the program that would be comparable, not Total Protecton. If they compared Total Protection to anything, it should have been Norton 360. They said pretty much that Mcafee for a lower price also has system cleaning tools and all this yammer. Well that's true it does, but that's Total Protection, Norton Internet Security is just that, Internet security, that's all it does and it's designed to do it very well (and does, it works fine). Norton 360 is the Symantec program that has system tools, backups, and all the extras. All I can say is I know who is paying CNET this year. 06=Kaspersky, 07=Symantec, 08=Mcafee.

Ready for a full version, or as close as a beta can be. I've been using Advanced WindowsCare V2 for a very long time. Beta 3 was released not long ago and I took a look. The program has closed the difference between Personal and Professional with a real-time cleaning, RAM management (that I suspect is based off of Free RAM), defragmenter (that has some issues if you have other defrag programs), and other very powerful items. A simple click of the large "Care!" button in the middle runs all the basic scans. Beta 3 also sports a brand new interface. Although I do like the new interfaces navigation on the left side, I didn't like that even on the right side it hides things under several tabs like mainly on the System Utilities section. The Personal edition still lacks the automatic update which is slightly aggravating, but not a huge deal, remembering to update as I run the program isn't that big of a deal.

It's new revamped set of tools includes: Basic Spyware removal, Registry fixer, Privacy Sweep, Junk file clean, System Optimization, Security Defense, Defragmenter, PC Analyzer, Advanced Disk Cleaner, Disk space explorer, FireFox TCP optimizer, SmartRAM management, Start up manager, Settings Backup Genius, IE Security Assistant, Windows System Manager, Auto Shutdown, Settings Restore manager, and a very good System Information tool. Quite a list on a free program if I do say so myself. The frosting on the cake is that the cleaning tools in the Daily Maintenance section can be set to scan all the time to keep the system running in top shape. This is an excellent *full* system care program. I have had no problems with it so far, it makes various backups before altering anything on your PC making it very save to use and easy to recover.

Other ScreenShots:

Daily Maintenance Screen

System Advisor Screen

System Utilities

Sorry for the long time span between these packages, here is my PC up keep package. This one is small, IObit smart defrag, Advanced windows care, and CCleaner.

File: PCupkeep.zip

Well, it's about time that Mozilla prepares to release the next version of Firefox, and first off let me tell you, it's going to be awesome. Overall most of the improvements are going to be in the rendering engine, Gecko. For starters, Firefox 3 beta 3 can now pass the Acid 2 test which both Safari and Opera have been passing for a while (IE has yet to pass the Acid 2). The second largest improvement is to Firefox's usability, the toolbar has been overhauled, bookmarks and RSS feeds have seen improvements, and the download manager has also been made over (it scans files for simple viruses now XD). Lets put it this way, I'm comfortable using the beta.

Firefox's new toolbar (is it just me or do I recognize the pearly blue orb theme???):

Now for the bad news, I've had small issues on the side of an overall nice package. First, it's been having issues with some of my online emails and some uploading services, Gmail and Hotmail mainly (Yahoo's remained free of new issues). Youtube also wouldn't upload my video right. Second, is I've had major compatibility issues with add-on's, needless to say this isn't Firefox's fault considering it's still in beta and there are bound to be issues, it seems that the constant change in the program itself between beta's is causing incompatibilities. Finally, I've also had issues with flash rendering, but I think this is for the same reason add-on's are having issues, that Adobe Flash Player (or Macromedia) cannot simple keep up with the constant change in the program.

Overall, like I said I'm comfortable using the beta as my mains browser aside from it's little quirks. This edition of Firefox has been in development longer than any other version as of yet, and it seems the extra time is pulling off. The changes between Firefox 1 and 2 where mainly refining the start of the browser in Firefox 1, so it's only expected that Firefox 3 be a hodgepodge of new features and improvements.

I'm sorry this is just a nitpick of mine. Since Mac OS 10.5's release, Apple has branded it with the "most advanced OS in the world" title. I'm sorry, "most advanced" you say, "in the world" you say? No. Quite simply, no. There is no doubt in my mind that Mac OS is a very powerful OS, but I'll tell you what, "most advanced" is a claim that has rightfully belonged to Solaris 10 for quite some time. Solaris is without doubt the most powerful and well made OS I've ever used despite it's rather mild looks, etc. Solaris, despite being Linux based, is free of most of the normal Linux issues, like drivers and a lack of professional support. The only complaint I have against Solaris is that it takes over 8 gigs with most of it's features installed, but these days with 100 gigs the minimum, I don't think 8 gigs is really an issue, Vista's 20 gigs on the other hand.... Mac OS is also rather bloated and despite Vista's love of taking Ram, Mac OS can take up to 500 doing *nothing* which coincidentally is about how much Vista takes. Sorry I'm not trying to turn this into a Mac VS Windows debate, but it's turning out that way, I should be a Solaris VS Mac. Anyhow, that's my opinion the claim that if you ask me doesn't hold any water.

I've finished my security Package. Programs include Avira antivirus, Sygate personal Firewall free, AVG Anti-Spyware, Mcafee Site adviser, Spybot search and destroy, Spyware Blaster, Windows Defender, and the GDI+ files for defender on Win 2000. Note that the Windows Defender is tweaked to run on 2000 after installation of the GDI+ files. I cannot promise that the Defender will fully work or work at all, but I doubt that it will cause any major issues that a simple uninstall won't fix. Extract the GDI+ files to your system32 folder (C:/[System root, WINNT or WINDOWS]/System32) folder.

File name: secsetup.exe

I have just finished the installation of my Media Package in my public skydrive folder. This includes CCCP, Qlite, Real Lite, and Media converter SA edition. Look in the information provided during the installation for more information. Look later for a security package.

File name: mpksetup.exe

Isn't that about all you need to know? CCCP is lighter, faster, safer, and simpler than any other Codec I've found like KLite. It contains only one codec per media file, unlike most that can have 3 or more, thus keeping you from telling where a problem is. CCCP comes included with ZoomPlayer and Media Player Classic, two of my favorite players (that reminds me, maybe I should post an article on different media players XD). You can find all the help, FAQ, or other info on the Official Wiki, you can download either the pack or the CCCP Insurgent (finds and helps in the removal of other codec packs that can cause issues) on the CCCP main site. Here is a quote from the Wiki:

--------------------------------

"Why Should I Use the CCCP?

Because we couldn't find a codec pack that worked in all the cases.

All the other codec packs that are around have at least one of the following problems:

• They just don't work.

It's no good installing a codec pack if it doesn't help. The CCCP was put together to be able to play all the latest files by all anime groups and all videos in general.

• They damage your system.

Some codec packs like the Nimo codec pack can actually cause damage to your system that can only be fixed with a format. Not cool. We wanted the CCCP to be a codec pack that was 100% safe. Please, if the CCCP ruins your system, tell us on our forums so we can fix it. Total number of irreversible errors caused by the CCCP: 0.

• They are bloated.

When a codec pack has five decoders that do the same thing (as K-Lite does), it's almost impossible to work out what the problem is if something breaks. With the CCCP, we wanted to create a compact codec pack, which had less annoying extras, and fewer places for problems to crop up in.

With the CCCP, we KNOW that when you install it properly, it just works. You don't need to mess around in the options to get it to work, and chances are it will resolve any other conflicts on install as well. We invented the CCCP so we can say "Uninstall everything else, install the pack and live forever happy". That said, for the adventurous there are pages of options available to tweak if you feel like it.."

--------------------------------

I will tell you from a few years of experience with this pack and others, what they say is almost always true. I used to rely on KLite taking 120 megs of hard drive space, and having to constantly reinstall it because errors seemed to plague it. Alas no more, CCCP is on every windows PC in my house (thats...... like 6 now).

Speed: Something that all security software has issues with. This included the speed of the scanner, and responsiveness of Windows and the program. Right away I’m going to tell you that Mcafee and Norton are not going to win. That leaved Trend Micro and CA about tied as far as the UI goes, but Trend Micro’s scanner is considerable faster, giving it the edge here.

Memory usage: Another issue that most have trouble with. Trend Micro I’ve found to be heavy on system recourses along with Norton (although lighter than 06 and previous). CA is very light when not scanning and on my test machine (Vista Home Basic with a 3 ghz P4, 1 gig Ram) had little impact but the scanner took tremendous amounts of memory. Mcafee actually used the least amount of memory, more than likely hinting towards why it’s slower, it has to pull more of the actual program off the hard disk.

Ease of use: Ease of use is a real important plus to me, I like not having to pull back knowledge from years ago to have to work an 08 program. This is not Mcafee’s strong suite by any means. I think the slogan behind that software is “Slow and Sloppy” and they are very good at it. CA tends to hide things under various sub menus if it even has the settings, and Trend Micro’s UI is very jumbled feeling. This is Norton 08’s shinning time, the UI exposes the more common elements while putting the advanced ones in a still easy to find options area. It’s nicely organized and has a very nice way or placing options.

Install/Uninstall: Oh boy, this is the part that scared me the most. I’ll tell you right away CA was the best about both, Mcafee following close behind. Norton had many errors and forced me to forcibly remove it from the system by major registry work, service editing, and deleting system files. The Norton Removal tool wasn’t much of a help either, getting half way done and sitting idle for a whole day. It also left quite a mess behind on my PC, but even that is nothing compared to the mess Trend Micro left behind. I suspect that Uninstall  for Trend Micro entailed only removing it from the software list, and the startup list. I will say this, most all of them installed nicely and went smooth, getting them off is usually where the problems arise.

Features: Well, CA is clearly featureless. It has *nothing* to speak of in extras past just the security. Norton has some, with the “add on pack” but anti spam remains weak and only works in IE and Outlook, leaving us Firefox/Thunderbird users out in the water. Mcafee had a few extras as well, site adviser (available without the suite by the way) was more than likely the best one, an innate lack of anti-spam puts me at ends though. So, Trend Micro it is, it has the works, if you can configure in that evidently random jumble of a UI.

Function: Okay, here is the actual reason why this software exists. I want to point out a test recently done by a third party, according to the results, Mcafee fails to catch many viruses, catching about 82% is what I heard. Trend Micro and Norton are about tied with eachother, getting a close average of 98-97% of malware thrown at them, and CA tests out at 97-96%. The current tie between Norton and Trend Micro is the firewall and anti-spyware. Both the bests of these belong to Norton, who’s firewall is one of my favorites and very easy to use, bothering hardly ever because it preconfigured itself to common programs much better than Trend Micro’s and thus is more hassle free.

Customization: Something often overlooked in security software. This ties in closely with the features section fyi. I found that Trend Micro did have quite a few options to customize the program the way you want, finding the options was a whole other thing. Mcafee has very few options to change the way the program works, and CA had practically none to speak of. Norton had fewer than Trend Micro, but they were easier to understand, configure, and find. I’m rolling a die for this one guys, even is Trend, odd is Norton….. the number is 5 so according to me, Norton wins. This is more of an opinion though so don’t trust me all the way on this one.

Overall system impact: This entails boot time, speed of the PC while just running, speed while scanning, and generally if the program ever causes issues with web browsing etc. I find that Trend Micro is pretty bad about messing with me all the time and is usually the last thing to boot. It is always the last thing to boot, and the options can make the program somewhat intrusive. Norton has a faster boot time, had a very unseen firewall, and unless you mess something up (or try to uninstall at all) hardly ever get an error, and if an error is received, a restart will usually fix it. Mcafee is very intrusive with its updates, needing to restart the PC almost every time it updates, and constantly pestering you about the status that is easy to see. Mcafee is always the last to boot despite its smaller memory usage. CA is pretty light on things when running and very fast to boot, and while starting has a very minimal impact on things. I have had all but no errors with CA, but the firewall isn’t exactly the best. I have one issue, CA makes scheduled scans *way* more than enough.

Verdict: CA

So, that’s it. My final thoughts toward Mcafee: It’s okay, but where it fails, it fails miserably. CA: nothing really special, but nothing really bad either. Norton: It’s lighter, it’s faster, and it’s flawless….. if you can get it on and off your PC >.<.  Trend Micro: Will forever alter your system. Has it’s quirks (the UI, etc.) but isn’t *bad*. I know I’m lenient, but oh wellz. My final verdict to the best of these, I’m tied between CA and Norton. CA was hassle free and easy to work with, but offered nothing really past just…. security. Norton works great and is solid and customizable, but getting it on and off is a bitch.

Yes I know most people have a bad taste in their mouth from Vista. Truth be told it wasn't an impressive system by any means. But I have something that may put you back in a good mood. There is already a new windows system in the making, previously code named Vienna. Now simply called Windows 7, this system is going to have many of the features promised in Vista. A new file system called WinFS (woot, no more defraging) that will organize data better and will save tons of space because of the way it works. Second is a brand spanking new interface, completely changed from the start/taskbar that we where used to from Bob/Luna/Aero interfaces. Third is a full or majority rewrite of the Windows source code, which is good news, hackers beware. Third is Windows is finally going to drop DOS or DOS prompts. Not much info on the new command line interface except that it won't be dependant on syntax.

There are many theory's as to what will be added to Windows 7, but I'll try to add in the ones I think are most likely. One is IE 9. IE 7 as we all know isn't that great of a piece of software. It was a rushed release to slow the growth of Firefox, and incorporated many new features, but most of these where buggy and tended to act more like a cheap copy of Firefox. Look for IE 8 to improve on the interface and new features and to make IE 7 what it *should* have been before. This makes IE 9 in a prime time for new features and better performance (pray that IE will finally pass the Acid 2 test). Next is the new Windows Media Player. It sounds that WMP 12 will be released to Vista along with Service Pack 1 sometime in the first half of next year. So that means that depending on how fast R&D goes, we may still see WMP 12 or even 13 in Windows 7. I don't know about you but I'm excited, I'll edit this later to add some of the concept images for the interface as I find them.

Oh and I'm sorry, Windows 7 has a guessed release date of sometime in 09. This isn't a set date by any means, so it could very well be pushed back as far as 2010. In the mean time, fill yourself with anticipation, because (I may be sticking my foot in my mouth here) it looks like Microsoft is finally learning from past mistakes. Finally, I'm sad to say most of this is pure thoughts and rumors, although it holds reasons, nothing is solid yet so don't quote me on anything, it's still far to early to say what Windows 7 may or may not have. Here are some peoples hopes and dreams, and maybe an MS concept image in here somewhere of the Windows 7 interface (I suspect that many of these are Vista with Object Dock and Windowblinds). Just so you see how off anyone can be and how it's to early to tell, wikipedia is saying that the UI will be close to Vista

If you are fairly tech savvy you've heard of Linux, or a Linux distro. For this article I'm going to pull from Ubuntu Linux. Ubuntu Linux is based off of Debian Linux and is one of the most popular Linux distros today. All cut right to the chase, Linux is good, considering. When I say considering, I mean based on a few things, open source, software quality, problems, and development. With all of these things into consideration, I'll go over each one of them one by one.
Open source.
It's a brilliant idea if you ask me, but if you ask me as well, it will never replace proprietary software. Companies simply cannot make *near* as much money off of software that is free. The Open source theory makes a bit of an issue with Linux as well. With Ubuntu, the theory is that *all* software should be free. This causes an issue because by default Ubuntu comes with no programs that will use proprietary file formats, .mp3, .wma, these types of files will not work unless you scour the net for a free Linux program to play them. Although personally of this is balanced out by the fact that the OS is free.
Software quality.
I may be sticking my foot in my mouth with this article. Software quality is an issue that Linux distros have had for a while. Because it is open source and anyone can make software for it, you are never promised the softwares quality (although you aren't in the proprietary world either, but more than linux programs). I once used a Linux based program (adept maybe incorrectly on my part) to try to partition a hard drive, it somehow made an "overlapping" partition. This was a simple fix by running recovery consoles chkdsk /r /p, but the damage was already done. Both windows and Linux refused to boot, after chkdsk I got windows back but evidently Linux was dead so I had to reinstall (thank God it was a fresh installation to begin with).
Problems.
Most of the issues and problems in Linux are driver related. Once you get it working with drivers, Ubuntu usually works flawlessly, but getting it to that point is a whole other story. I've had display drivers crash X (the graphic user interface), and generally things like that. On account that I may have screwed up the installation, but I followed the help forums instructions perfectly. It was rather simple to fix X, but I still never got the drivers working.
Development.
I have to admit that everything I mentioned above is all the *bad* things about Ubuntu and Linux distros in general, because on the flip side most Linux distros are very well built systems that work very well. The biggest thing to consider with Linux based systems is exactly how far the system has gone so fast. Linux is still a young and developing system, and despite this is still impresses me on how well it works. Linux distros for the most part must have some really good programmers, that's all I can say. I will say that despite how fast the system has developed, I have had to resort to that terminal (command prompt) one to many times, and until that is almost completely un-needed, I don't think it will take the market for the PC. But hey, we can be hopeful.
Linux user hate-mail in 3, 2, *ding*

I’m going to compare the 3 major free email clients (Yahoo, Gmail, and Hotmail) here depending on a few factors: Speed, Services, User Interface, Spam protection, Storage, Attachments.
Speed.
Speed I’m basing with both page loading and reaction speed. I’m currently using a 512 kp/s internet connection and with FasterFox timer, I’ve found that Gmail is the fastest loading, and most reactive. Yahoo is close on Gmail heels. Hotmail is Rather slow loading with the full version, the classic is considerable faster, but I’m trying to test the clients with their newest and best software.
Verdict: Gmail
Services.
Here is the other benefits that signing up with these Clients gives you. Hotmails Live ID gives you a lot of access to other things from Microsoft, things like new Beta products, sidebar gadgets, news, a customizable home page, a messanger ID, Live toolbar, and some other things. Yahoo gives you a customizable home page called My Yahoo, messanger program, Yahoo toolbar access, and that’s about all. Gmail gives you a messanger, document publishing, POP3 forwarding for using with email programs like Outlook and thunderbird, News feeds, Web publishing, Google Toolbar, Maps, photos haring, and Google Pack. I’m having a hard time giving a verdict on this one. But I think that Hotmail slightly outweighs the other two.
Verdict: Hotmail
User Interface:
Okay, the interface of all three. Hotmails full version is purposefully made to strongly resemble the new “Windows Mail” and Outlook to make it easier for user to find options. Although the speed of the interface is too slow. Yahoo’s old interface is getting way outdated and the new Yahoo Mail is a significant improvement. It is faster than Hotmails and has a new tabbed interface making it easy to view several emails at once. I do have one issue though, it’s difficult to select large amounts of mail to delete or move, and many buttons are hidden under various sub menus. Gmail is gonna have to catch up here. The interface is kinda jumbled looking. But I do have to give Gmail this, when we check our email, that’s what we want, out inbox. Many email Clients give us a home page full of news most of us just don’t care about. Gmail takes us straight to our mail.
Verdict: Yahoo
Spam Protection:
I don’t know what happened to Hotmail here. It’s spam guard catches usually most of the things I want and lets a lot of spam into my mail box. Yahoo has a usually very well built spam guard that catches most of the spam sent to my inbox, but what I don’t like is there is no simple block list. Gmail, what spam. Gmail has also never caught a real email.
Verdict: Gmail
Storage.
Yahoo has finally delivered on it’s unlimited storage promise, so it is in advance the winner. Hotmail has a set amount currently at 5 gigs. Gmail as I’m writing this is currently at 4.4 gigs but it’s such a nice feeling to actually watch it go up.
Verdict: Yahoo
Attachments.
The Current Attachments are somewhere between 10-5 megabytes. Yahoo currently allows most file types up to 10 megabytes. Hotmail, I can’t find out how to use attachments 0.o. Gmail has recently increased the size of it’s attachments to 20 megabytes. Although Gmail is more limited in the file types you can attach to an email. I’m having an issue deciding here. I’m going to go with the biggest file size.
Verdict: Gmail.
Total Winner: Gmail takes the cake.
Before you say anything, I've used all three for quite sometime.

Hello, welcome to my blog. Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Link Stifle, I'm a 24 year old computer hardware tech. I'm extremely experienced with Windows running PC's, any system from 95 to Vista. Here is where I'll try to help people as much as I can, and if I can't, I'll point you to someone who can. Please don't ask for help in the comments, ask for help by sending me an email to link48010@yahoo.com with a detailed description of the problem, any other info relevant info (error messages, etc.) I'll post a blog entry with your question, the answer and anything else that you may need. For follow up, use comments not emails please. If your email doesn't go through for whatever reason, you can also use my hotmail link9454@hotmail.com but chances are I won't answer it near as fast. Glad to see you here (should I be O_o, if you here that means you have a problem).