Norton Internet Security has been my main PC protection in recent years. I’ve a few minor criticisms, but for the most part it has done a good job guarding my desktop, laptop and my wife’s laptop. The computers run Windows XP and Vista.

One problem worth mentioning is PC performance drops a few percent while the program is running – which is all the time. A small performance hit really doesn’t matter when I’m surfing the web or using Microsoft Word. It is noticeable when there’s heavy duty video, audio or Photoshop processing. Read the rest of this entry »

A whole range of security products can help protect your computer. Some are traditional packaged software others are online services. Here’s a list of the types of security software applications you are most likely to need:

Anti-virus

Designed to keep your PC free of infection, anti-virus programs generally use two different approaches. First, they use large databases – known as signatures – which are matched against incoming files to identify potential threats and block them.

Although signature files are updated regularly, with some vendors running daily updates, while others updating signatures every hour or so, this isn’t always enough. Virus writers are engaged in a constant battle of wits against antivirus specialists and aim to ‘fly under the radar’ with fresh malware.

The worst code can often spread faster than distribution of signature updates. So most antivirus programs now include tools designed to identify suspicious virus-like behaviour from unknown files. These files are then flagged as potential threats and treated accordingly.

Anti-virus is a misleading name these days. Almost every anti-virus program provides protection from a range of different mal-wares.

Firewalls:

Firewalls control the flow of internet traffic to and from your computer. They can be hardware devices – if you use a router it may have a built-in firewall – but in most home set-ups they tend to be software.

Firewalls have two main functions. They act as a gate, stopping unwanted traffic from entering your system. At the same time, they should stop unapproved traffic from leaving your system. For example, if there’s a spyware program on your computer monitoring your activities, a properly configured firewall will stop that information from being sent. Equally, if you are infected by, say, a worm, a firewall won’t let it get out and infect others.

Be warned that the firewall in Windows XP only stops incoming traffic; it will only protect you up to a point. You should invest in a commercial firewall product – they are all bi-directional.

Unlike antivirus programs, which can be installed and forgotten, firewalls can be complex to operate. If you set things up incorrectly, you may leave your computer vulnerable. Alternatively, you may hinder legitimate traffic – this can be especially difficult if you operate a home network. The best firewalls will automatically configure themselves, but they tend to err on the side of caution blocking any unusual application.

Anti-spyware

Also known as spyware blockers. There’s a thin line between antivirus and antispyware tools – in fact some commercial security products now combine the two functions in a single application. Good antispyware products will detect and remove both spyware and adware from your computer. It should also block this kind of software from being installed. Some spyware will be detected by a firewall when it first attempts to send data back to base.

Spam Filters

A program designed to stop, or at least drastically reduce, the amount of spam turning up in your email in-box. Spam filters can save you time and money sorting through rubbish emails but most home and small business computer users don’t need to worry about filtering spam. That’s because many ISPs and web-mail providers now use anti-spam filters to check mail before it is downloaded to your computer or read in your web browser. Also, modern email programs, like Microsoft Outlook 2007, have built-in spam detection tools.

See also:

Computer security guide: 1 introduction
Computer security guide: 2 what are the main threats?
Computer security guide: 4 how to buy security tools
Computer security guide: 5 what to buy or download for free

Related articles by Zemanta

• Antivirus on Linux and Macs (lockergnome.com)
• Top 10 Signs, You Have Viruses or Spyware (computer-realm.net)

Any science fiction movie worth its salt features computers or robots that not only recognise human speech but also understand what the speaker means. This isn’t likely to stay fiction for much longer*.

Right now, some of the best brains in the computer industry are working to develop ‘natural language processing’ products. That’s the jargon term for software that turns vocal sounds into meaningful data.

When natural language processing arrives, it will be the biggest breakthrough in the history of computing. Apart from anything else, it will mean we can do away with keyboards and screens – or at least relegate them to occasional use.

But intelligent voice recognition isn’t just about computers. Imagine telephones, TV sets and microwave ovens that understand spoken instructions.

Natural language processing

Natural language processing won’t all arrive at once. We are at probably ten and maybe 15 years away from computers hearing the difference between war and Waugh. And computers capable of meaningful conversation, like Star Wars’ C3P0, won’t be available for 20 years or more.

The early fruits of language processing have been on the market for years. ACT, a now defunct British computer maker, sold a system that responded to a limited set of voice commands in 1981. Today, we have fourth, possibly even fifth, generation voice recognition products that can turn the spoken word into typewritten text – most of the time. You may see them referred to as speech recognition applications.

The slow progress to date has not been due to software issues, but had more to do with the available computer power. You need a substantial processor to run voice recognition. Make that substantial spare processing capacity after all the fancy graphics and other cycle-chewing work required by modern operating systems.

When they work as advertised, today’s voice recognition products are impressive. It was Arthur C Clark who wrote that any sufficiently advanced technology tends to look like magic. It’s hard not to believe in the supernatural the first time you see your own speech appear as type on a PC screen.

Better for small business

Unlike many computer products on the market today, voice recognition offers more to small businesses than large companies. There are two reasons for this. First, voice recognition requires a degree of effort on the part of the user. A users train the software to understand an individual’s voice and speech patterns.

Further refinement is needed over the first few weeks of use. Because of this, it only works well for highly motivated people. Indeed, mischievous, or reluctant users can make sure their systems never work effectively.

A second reason is that voice recognition products needs lots of support. The cost of supporting an individual PC user tends to rise with organization size. In a big company, the cost overheads of voice recognition can outweigh the productivity gains.

The biggest name in voice recognition is Dragon, part of Nuance. The company’s Naturally Speaking software comes in a variety of packages costing from around NZ$200 for a student edition climbing to NZ$1500 for a corporate package. (Prices are in New Zealand dollars, roughly 50 cents US).

In addition to a powerful computer – Nuance recommends a 2.4GHz Pentium Dual Core, anything less will deliver disappointing results – voice recognition systems need a good microphone. In theory they can work with a PC’s internal microphone. In practice it usually isn’t worth the bother.

Memory is less important

Memory isn’t so important if you’re running an older operating system, but if you’re running Windows Vista, you’ll need well over 1GB of Ram. Pretty much any PC sound card will do so long as it can handle recording.

All the commercial specialist voice recognition programs are available in packages that include microphones, usually on headsets. You can also buy digital voice recorders bundled with speech recognition software – these can be great for taking voice notes when you are out and about.

You may already have voice recognition on your computer. The latest versions of Microsoft Windows and Office have baked-in speech recognition. It’s not as quick, as polished or as customisable as NaturallySpeaking, but at least Microsoft’s tools give you an opportunity to test the technology before parting with any cash.

You couldn’t realistically use any existing voice recognition products to write a book unless you were patient. Nor are they likely to replace good typing skills in the near future. Nevertheless they are more than adequate for composing emails and short memos. What’s more, when voice recognition tools are integrated into a computer’s operating system, they can control functions such as opening and closing files or selection commands from menus. In fact, voice recognition tools are widely used by people with disabilities – especially the blind and other people with seeing difficulties.

* Not likely to be fiction much longer?
There’s a bit of poetic licence here. The ACT voice recognition system I saw in London in 1981 could only ‘learn’ ten words. A salesman told me proper voice recognition was around “two years away”. It’s nearly 30 years on, and while the programs are massively better, they still need polish before being acceptable to mainstream users. Maybe two more years will do the trick. As for ‘natural language processing’… that’ll take longer.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Nuance Takes On Microsoft and Google With IBM Deal
• Nuance and IBM to license and integrate speech technologies
• Nuance Acquires Jott (xconomy.com)

As the late 1990s flicked over into the early 2000s, Linux briefly looked like it might challenge Microsoft Windows as an alternative operating system for everyday PC users. The open source operating system has come a long way since those days. And Microsoft scored a huge own goal with the confusing, incomplete and frequestly downright annoying Windows Vista.

Yet Linux has barely managed to break out beyond its hard core following of geeky devotees. Indeed Windows now faces bigger threats to its monopoly than Linux. Meanwhile Linux struggles to gain traction. It’s not hard to see why.

It’s almost a decade since I wrote for the now defunct Australian Linux Today website run by Internet.com. At its peak, posts would attract many thousands of reads, often tens of thousands of reads, and hundreds of comments. Being slashdotted is addictive.

Apart from the odd loon, most of the discussion and debate was passionate, informed and intelligent. Internet.com couldn’t make Linux Today pay, at least not in Australia. The parent Linux Today site lives on under the Jupitermedia banner.

In a way, the demise of the Australian Linux Today site is a direct consequence of the broader problem with Linux and its inability to reach a wider audience. We had bankable traffic, but nobody in the Linux business was buying our advertising. That’s because nobody in the Linux business has much of a marketing budget. That’s because hardly anyone in the Linux business makes money from the open source operating system. Which is turn is down to the fact that Linux is given away. There was no profit to support the kind of thriving ecosystem that underpins Microsoft Windows.

There’s not much today either. Or, perhaps more to the point, there’s not even the money to fund the kind of thriving ecosystem that underpins planet Google, mobile computing and the world of Web 2.0 websites-cum-services-cum-applications that now  threaten to outflank Windows.

Linux, open source software, or something similar, underpins most Microsoft challengers. And Vista’s annoyances aside (more about them another time) the threat of Linux and open source did much to prod Microsoft into improving its act. Today the company and its products are massively improved.

Today’s Linuxes (is that a permitable plural? Perhaps I should write Linuxen) are good. There’s not much in Vista the latest version of Ubuntu, 8.10 fails to provide. Kubuntu is possibly better. Fedora and Open maybe less consumer-friendly, but are still plausible options.

It’s great that companies and people freely donate their own time and energy to open source projects. Long may that continue. Linux users operate at the cutting edge and continue to pioneer new ideas and technologies that will permeate into the mainstream. But I can’t see Linux ever climbing out of its geeky gravity well and being truely mainstream. That day has passed. Linux may find its way under the bonnet (hood if you’re American) of mainstream technologies, but I doubt it will ever be the face of day-to-day computing.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Waiting for the Next Generation of Open Source Business Models
• Reasons to Switch from OS X or Windows to Ubuntu
• The Open Source Crystal Ball
• OS shoot-out: Windows vs. Mac OS X vs. Linux