Showing posts with label Notebook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Notebook. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

Windows 8.x Wireless Networking Issues

One of the more useful features of Windows 7 that has been completely removed from Windows 8.x for no apparently decent reason is the "Manage Wireless Networks" Control Panel applet.  It provided you with a wealth of knowledge and gave you the ability to, as its name suggests, manage wireless networks.

So, with the demise of this useful feature, along came the Kerkia group with their WinFi application to return the functionality of this tool in a nice, usable interface.  It allows you to re-order, delete, import and export network profiles and it also allows you to change a network profile between Current User and All Users.  All User profiles will connect before any user has logged in to the computer.

In addition to this, there are some "netsh" commands you may well find useful if you like doing things via the command-line:



Showing Wireless Profiles

 netsh wlan show profile

- output will be something like:

Profiles on interface Wi-Fi:

Group policy profiles (read only)
---------------------------------
None
User profiles
-------------
All User Profile : SSID1
All User Profile : SSID2
Current User Profile : SSID3




Deleting Wireless Profiles

netsh wlan delete profile SSID2

- output will be something like:

 Profile "SSID2" is deleted from interface "Wi-Fi".



Exporting Wireless Profiles

To back up all Wireless Profiles
netsh wlan export profile folder="%UserProfile%\Desktop"

To back up all Wireless Profiles on a particular interface
netsh wlan export profile interface="interface name" folder="%UserProfile%\Desktop"

To back up a specific Wireless Profile on all interfaces
netsh wlan export profile "profile name" folder="%UserProfile%\Desktop"

To back up a specific Wireless Profile on a specific interface
netsh wlan export profile "profile name" interface="interface name"
folder="%UserProfile%\Desktop"


Note:
  • Substitute profile name (SSID) in the command with the actual SSID network profile name that you want to export as a backup.
  • Substitute interface name in the command with the actual name of the interface that the wireless network is on that you want to export as a backup.
  • If you want to back up the Wireless Key (password), add "key=clear" after the profile "profile name" section in each of the above commands (needs administrator rights)
For example:
netsh wlan export profile "SSID1" interface="Wi-Fi" folder="%UserProfile%\Desktop"



Exporting Wireless Profiles

To restore a Wireless Profile for the Current User only
netsh wlan add profile filename="\path\to\file.xml" user=current

To restore a Wireless Profile for All Users
netsh wlan add profile filename="\path\to\file.xml" user=all


Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Windows Experience Index - Windows 8

The WEI scoring system has changed a fair bit since it was introduced in Windows F^HVista and the version that's in Windows 8 extends the Windows Experience from a highest result of 7.9 (as per Windows 7) up to a top of 9.9.  Here's the link to my Windows 7 Experience Index post.

For a decent read about what the Windows Experience Index involves, have a read of this. It doesn't go into a lot of technical depth, however it is enlightening.

Now, I have a few computers here right now that I'm running Windows 8 on and below I've listed the scores as well as scores from other people's computers that I've been able to verify. I'm particularly interested in the HDD/SSD and RAM scores for use in regular daily office use. CPU usage is rarely ever an issue (on modern PCs), but more so as a comparison between tablets, ultrabooks, notebooks and desktops to see if one could be usable for extended periods.  The component/figure in bold is the base score (determined by the lowest subscore).  Also, as more figures are obtained, I'll add them to this table.

(If you want to send me details to add to this list, please send the following:
* Screen capture of Control Panel\System and Security\System
* Screen capture of Control Panel\All Control Panel Items\Performance Information and Tools
* Screen Capture of Device Manager showing your HDDs (and highlighting the Primary HDD if you have more than 1 installed)
* A zipped HTML output from CPU-z
as all of the above give me the detail I need to complete this table.)

SystemComponentScore
Alan Burchill's Desktop
Win 8 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 2700K @ 3.50GHz
RAM - 16GB RAM
Graphics - Unknown
Gaming Graphics - Unknown
Primary SSD - Intel X25-M 160 GB
7.9
7.9
7.5
7.5
7.6
Roy Adams' Dell M4700
Win 8 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 3740QM @ 2.70GHz
RAM - GB RAM
Graphics - Intel HD 4000
Gaming Graphics -Intel HD 4000
Primary SSD - Samsung PM830 256 GB
7.9
7.9
6.7
6.7
8.1
Hilton's Desktop
Bus Speed O/C to 166 MHz
Win 8 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 920 @ 2.67GHz
RAM - 3*4 GB A-RAM PC-12000 (1600 MHz)
Graphics - 2 * Gigabyte HD4850 Fanless
Gaming Graphics - 2 * GV-R485MC-1GI
Primary SSD - A-RAM AR120GBE 120 GB
7.5
7.5
7.2
7.2
7.7
Dell XPS L501x Notebook
Win 8 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7-740QM @ 1.73 GHz
RAM - 2*4GB HMT351S6BFR8C-H9 (667 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT435M 2GB
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT435M 2GB
Primary HDD - Toshiba MK6461GSY 640 GB
7.1
7.4
5.6
6.6
5.9
Dell XPS 12 Notebook
Win 8 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7-3537U @ 2.00 GHz
RAM - 2*4GB DDR3 (667 MHz)
Graphics - Intel HD 4000 2GB
Gaming Graphics - Intel HD 4000 2GB
Primary SSD - LITEONIT LMT-256M6M 256 GB
7.1
7.4
5.4
6.4
8.1

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Mobility Computing - Microsoft & Apple

As will be patently obvious to anyone who has read anything I've written on tech in the past, I'm most definitely not an Apple fanboi nor do I wear the rose-colored glasses that the Microsoft mindwashed crowd wear, either - I simply call it as I see it.

Back when the Symbian OS was considered half decent, Microsoft had their Windows Mobile SmartPhone OS and RIM had Blackberry.  Right up front I'm going to pretty much ignore RIM and Blackberry here as I operate in the SMB world and in this market, RIM has never held a market share percentage easily distinguishable from zero.  Symbian was OK, but nothing to write home about.  I tried it on a few handsets and was never really a fan.  Microsoft's Windows Mobile - though bloated and ugly by today's standards - was quite usable as a SmartPhone OS and had email that connected quite effectively to Exchange Server for business users.  Aside from the terrible Office Mobile suite, Windows Mobile basically worked.

And then through a number of version upgrades, a trend became glaringly obvious - Microsoft had pretty much abandoned any idea of making this usable.  After seeing this trend and hoping I was misreading it, I eventually wrote this article in June 2008 where I accused Microsoft of treating Windows Mobile like a redheaded stepchild.  Around 15 months later in September 2009, Steve Ballmer admitted that he screwed up with the SmartPhone market and that they were going to address this.

Windows Phone 7 was announced in February 2010 and devices running this OS were finally available for sale in October 2010 - 8 months later.  Even now, in June, 2012, Windows Phone barely makes a blip on the radar of Mobile OS usage - even the Nokia Series 40 OS out-ranks it!

Microsoft had already effectively killed off their Windows Mobile platform by simply ignoring it so when Windows Phone 7 finally launched, the fact that all Windows Mobile handsets and applications were incompatible with it wasn't a big deal to *most* people.  One big reason for this is that most of those who were previously using a Windows Mobile handset had since bought an Apple iPhone or one of the Google Android handsets.

Microsoft released the "Mango" Windows Phone 7.5 upgrade in late 2011 and a minor "Tango" update in early 2012.  On June 20, 2012, Microsoft announced Windows Phone 8 and an upcoming and final update to the Windows Phone 7 platform - Windows Phone 7.8 - that will backport some of the features of Windows Phone 8, but not application compatibility.

WTF???

That's right - Microsoft has announced that Windows Phone 8 will run on a different CPU architecture - partly because they couldn't shoe-horn a decent OS into a single core CPU (iOS and Android can, though) - which means that any new Windows Phone 8.x applications will not run on Windows Phone 7.x handsets.  What's worse, though, is that this means that all currently available Windows Phone 7.x handsets will absolutely not be upgradeable to Windows Phone 8.

So, anyone who has bought a Windows Phone 7.x handset is now SOL when it comes to worthwhile OS upgrades - they are simply not going to happen.  Sure, the few people who own Windows Phone handsets will be disappointed by Microsoft shafting them once again, but as there are < 5% of SmartPhone users running Windows Phone 7 handsets, this will not have any great affect on the OS share of Windows Phone as a whole.

Now, will running the Windows 8 kernel on a SmartPhone under Windows Phone 8 be viable?  Well, it will be optimized to run on a quad core CPU (which not only means that it NEEDS serious grunt, therefore battery drain, it is also reasonable as mobility CPUs are migrating past dual core to quad core now anyway) and it may mean that Metro apps that will run on Windows 8 and Windows RT could also run on Windows Phone - that would be nice.  We'll have to wait and see...

Apple, on the other hand, has just announced that iOS 6 will be released soon and it supports all of their currently selling devices.  Not all features will be made available, however, and whilst some of these are for performance reasons, a number are purely corporate decisions, which is causing a bit of a stir with many commentators claiming that not properly supporting current devices where possible is not acceptable.  Just wait until they see what Microsoft's done to all of their currently available Windows Phone handsets!  :)

Android - well, there's a conundrum.  The vast majority of Android users are on rather old versions of the operating system and very few are running the current release - Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0.x) - because the many and varied devices running Android require their manufacturers to customize ICS for their devices before having it released.  Manufacturers like Toshiba who are glacially slow to release ICS for their Thrive (AT100) tablets are causing their customers to look at other manufacturers for future devices.  Why would you buy another device from the manufacturer who has just shafted you on the device they are currently selling?

And now Android Jelly Bean (4.1.x) has been "announced" on the Samsung Galaxy Nexus smartphone.  Google really needs to try and get their shit together here and ensure developers are releasing updates for their devices in a timely fashion - there are still quite a number of Froyo and Gingerbread devices being sold without any ability to upgrade, not to mention the Honeycomb devices still being sold.

So, will the new Windows Phone 8 work?  Microsoft's currently making a last ditch attempt at re-entering the mobility market.  They once owned and then ignored away their SmartPhone market share to Apple/Android and they have previously pretty much owned the tablet market with Windows XP Tablet Edition and the tablet features in F^HVista and Windows 7 even though they have completely disregarded touch functionality up until Metro.  This will be an interesting time for Microsoft in the mobility market - with the newly announced Microsoft Surface Windows RT/Windows 8 tablets and Windows Phone 8 they have one last chance to show the world that they have something decent to offer.  If the Windows Surface tablets omit integrated 3G/4G functionality, though, it shows how little Microsoft actually understands about mobility today.

... and now for some rather telling graphs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system showing the mobility space as it currently stands today.  Notice that there's no "Microsoft" anywhere on those graphs...

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Monday, January 31, 2011

Crucial SSD vs Momentus XT SSD/HDD

After updating my Wookie Experience (well, ok, Windows Experience Index) page with Nick Hodge's updated General Melchett system, I had a bit of a look at the Crucial CTFDDAC SSDs and was a little surprised by their active (ie, non-idle) power consumption.  Now, as there's rarely any agreement on which specs to release on different products, there are a number of holes in this table comparing the Crucial CTFDDAC 2.5" 256GB SSD, the Momentus XT 2.5" Hybrid 500GB HDD/SSD and the Samsung HD103SJ 3.5" 1.0TB HDD, but you get the idea...

SpecCrucial 2.5" SSD
CTFDDAC256MAG
Seagate 2.5" Hybrid
Momentus XT
Samsung 3.5" HDD
HD103SJ
Idle Power0.094W0.8W6.3W
Standby Power0.4W1.0W
Spin Up Power1.0A2.2A
Read Power2.1W2.4W7.2W
Write Power4.3W2.3W7.2W
Avg Seek Power2.2W6.7W
Avg Operating Power1.1W
Sound Level Idle0dB23dB27dB
Sound Leel Seek0dB26dB29dB
Operating Shock1500G350G300G
NR Error Rate1 sector in 10^14 bits1 sector in 10^15 bits
Avg Access TimeUnder 0.1ms
Avg Latency4.17ms4.14ms
Avg Seek Time11ms8.90ms
Random Read Seek11ms
Random Write Seek13ms
Sequential Read (Max)355MB/sec (6Gb/s)
265MB/sec (3Gb/s)
Sequential Write (Max)215MB/sec (6Gb/s)
215MB/sec (3Gb/s)
To Host Rate (Max)300MB/s300MB/s
To Media Rate (Max)123MB/s250MB/s


Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Friday, October 29, 2010

Future Directions of Technology Seminar Series

Please click here for more information on the on this series of seminars that SMBiT Professionals Brisbane will be presenting throughout Queensland and the Northern Territory in November 2010. If you're a Small to Medium Business owner and want to learn more about The Cloud, Virtualization, Communications and Greening of IT, please register to attend one of these sessions as there will be some information that will be pertinent to your future use of technology. If you have other colleagues who may benefit from these seminars, please feel free to pass this email on to them and invite them along, too – the more the merrier!
These seminars are aimed at the Business Owner and others involved in the *use* of Information Technology in the business, not the *management* of the Information Technology – so there will be as little “baffling us with technogeek speak” as we can possibly have – we want to inform you of the technologies and what they can mean to your business, not scare you off with technoblahblahblah mumble, mumble, mumble.

Oh, and please ignore the scary photos – none of are as bad as those photos make us appear! OK, so, well, maybe we are! ;)

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Monday, September 27, 2010

The system could not access your credential management server

On HP desktop and workstation computers that don't use biometric logins, I normally uninstall all of the HP ProtectTools stuff.  Well, I used to up to and including Vista and for some reason stupidly thought that maybe in Windows 7, HP had got their software working properly.  Apparently, this assumption was incorrect.

The main issue that I've seen in the past is that the HP ProtectTools suite seems to bork occasionally which then results in the error message I named this blog entry after: "The system could not access your credential management server..." and also occasionally the following error message: "The server is not responding properly. Verify that the Credential Manager server is properly installed on the target server."  There's then no way you can log in to this system - either locally or onto the domain  Fun, fun!

Well, the fix (temporarily) is to disable the HP Credential Manager during login and long term is to uninstall the HP ProtectTools suite to leave the system able to work properly and reliably.

So, here's the drum:

1. At the login screen, click on the Log on with Wizard... link




2. Using the Logon Wizard, check the "Do not Log On to Credential Manager" option under the "More..." button




3. Log on using a Domain Administrator account (or a Local Administrator account)




4. In "Control Panel\Programs\Uninstall a program", click on "HP Protect Tools Security Manager Suite" and click Uninstall.  If prompted to uninstall various other Suite components first, please do so.  Reboot and you'll be able to log in normally again!




Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Deciphering Intel Core CPU Numbers

Intel's Core CPU Processor Numbering isn't obvious - there's Core i7 CPUs with 4 cores and also with 6 cores, some have dual channel RAM and some have triple channel, and then there's the i5 and i3 ranges.  And then there's the mobile variants!  FFS, can't these guys come up with something that makes *ANY* version of sense to a sane man at a quick look?

I think not - well, not since they dropped their clock speed linked CPU numbering, which made a lot of sense to a lot of sane people.

So, here's my attempt at explaining Intel CPU Numbering:  Confusing jibberish.

Now, here's a slightly more detailed attempt:

CPU SeriesModel Series# Cores# ThreadsCacheSocket TypeDie SizeTurbo Boost# RAM Channels
i7 Desktop Extreme980X61212MBFCLGA136632nmYes3
i7 Desktop Extreme9x5488MBFCLGA136645nmYes3
i7 Desktop9x0488MBFCLGA136645nmYes3
i7 Desktop8x0488MBLGA115645nmYes2
i5 Desktop7x0448MBLGA115645nmYes2
i5 Desktop6xy244MBFCLGA115632nmYes2
i3 Desktop5x0244MBFCLGA115632nmNo2
i7 Mobile Extreme920XM488MBPGA98845nmYes2
i7 Mobile8x0QM488MBPGA98845nmYes2
i7 Mobile7x0QM486MBPGA98845nmYes2
i7 Mobile6x0244MBBGA1288
(620M also PGA988)
45nmYes2
i5 Mobile5x0243MBBGA1288, PGA988 (varies)32nmYes2
i5 Mobile4x0243MBBGA1288, PGA988 (varies)32nmYes2
i3 Mobile3x0243MBBGA1288, PGA988 (varies)32nmNo2

There are (obviously) some other differences, such as VT-d, TX and AES New instructions between the CPU models, however they *all* have VT-x - the ability to support hardware-based virtualization.  For more detailed specifications on these processors, click on the link for their CPU Series.

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Monday, January 04, 2010

SSD vs SSD vs SSD vs Velociraptor

OK, here's one of the best comparative reviews I've seen on any technologies in quite some time.  Tom's Hardware recently compared an Intel X25-M G2 160 GB SSD, a Transcend SSD25D 64 GB SSD, a Kingston SSDNow V-Series 64 GB SSD and a Western Digital Velociraptor 300 GB hard drive (running at 10,000 rpm).

Now, we all know SSDs have a number of advantages over hard drives, yet high-rpm hard drives have some wins over SSD.  So, this review won't stun you with the facts you already know, but it does give a good balance of synthetic and real-world benchmarks.  And the results, while not anything you'd not expect, are still well worth looking at.

So, if you're considering an SSD for your system, take a wander through this review before you drop cash on a card.

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Friday, December 04, 2009

Windows Experience Index - Win7

Here's the link to the new Windows 8 Experience Index post.

The WEI scoring system has changed a fair bit since it was introduced in Windows F^HVista and the version that's in Windows 7 is a result of the responses of many reports to Microsoft from users and beta testers around the world.  One of the changes is that the WEI scores in Windows 7 now go from a bottom-feeding 1.0 all the way up to 7.9.

For a decent read about what the Windows Experience Index involves, have a read of this. It doesn't go into a lot of technical depth, however it is enlightening.

Now, I have a few computers here right now that I'm running Windows 7 on and below I've listed the scores as well as scores from other people's computers that I've been able to verify. I'm particularly interested in the CPU and RAM scores for use in regular daily office use. Not that CPU usage is really ever an issue (on modern PCs), but more so as a comparison between netbooks, notebooks and desktops.  The component/figure in bold is the base score (determined by the lowest subscore).  Also, as more figures are obtained, I'll add them to this table.

(If you want to send me details to add to this list, please send the following:
* Screen capture of Control Panel\System and Security\System
* Screen capture of Control Panel\All Control Panel Items\Performance Information and Tools
* Screen Capture of Device Manager showing your HDDs (and highlighting the Primary HDD if you have more than 1 installed)
* A zipped HTML output from CPU-z
as all of the above give me the detail I need to complete this table.)

SystemComponentScore
Laz' Sandy Bridge Desktop
CPU @ x45 = 4.50 GHz
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 4.50 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB CMZ8GX3M2A1600C8 (833 MHz)
Graphics - MSI R5970-P2D2G 2GB
Gaming Graphics - MSI R5970-P2D2G 2GB
Primary SSD - A-RAM AR120GBE Elite 120GB
7.8
7.8
7.7
7.7
7.9
Laz' Sandy Bridge Desktop
CPU @ x45 = 4.50 GHz
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 4.50 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB CMZ8GX3M2A1600C8 (833 MHz)
Graphics - MSI R5970-P2D2G 2GB
Gaming Graphics - MSI R5970-P2D2G 2GB
Primary HDD - Seagate Momentus XT 500GB
7.8
7.8
7.7
7.7
5.9
Georgia's 2600K Gamer
Not overclocked
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB F3-17000CL9-4GBXM (800 MHz)
Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1GB
Gaming Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1GB
Primary HDD-WD3200AAKS-OOB3A0 320GB
7.7
7.8
7.6
7.6
5.9
Dell 9010 SFF
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 3770 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB HMT351U6CFR8C-PB (800 MHz)
Graphics - Intel HD4000 64MB
Gaming Graphics - Intel HD4000 64MB
Pri SSD - Samsung PM830 2.5" 7 128GB
7.7
7.7
6.5
6.5
7.9
Hilton's Desktop
Bus Speed O/C to 166 MHz
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 920 @ 2.67 GHz
RAM - 3*2 GB Corsair CM3X2G1600C7 (833 MHz)
Graphics - 2 * Gigabyte HD4850 Fanless
Gaming Graphics - 2 * GV-R485MC-1GI
Primary HDD - Samsung HD103UJ 1 TB
7.6
7.9
7.3
7.3
5.9
Nick's General Melchett
Desktop PC
Win 7 Ultimate x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 4*4 GB GSKill F3-12800CL9 (667 MHz)
Graphics - Radeon HD5750 1GB
Gaming Graphics - Radeon HD5750 1GB
Primary HDD - WD10EACS 1 TB
7.6
7.9
7.2
7.2
5.9
Laz' Sandy Bridge Desktop
Everything at defaults
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB CMZ8GX3M2A1600C8 (833 MHz)
Graphics - MSI R5970-P2D2G 2GB
Gaming Graphics - MSI R5970-P2D2G 2GB
Primary HDD - Seagate Momentus XT 500GB
7.6
7.8
7.7
7.7
5.9
Nick's General Melchett
Upgraded Video, SSD
Win 7 Ultimate x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 4*4 GB GSkill F3-12800CL9 (667MHz)
Graphics - Radeon HD6870 1GB
Gaming Graphics - Radeon HD6850 1GB
Primary SSD - Crucial CTFDDAC 256 GB
7.6
7.6
7.8
7.8
7.9
Dell Optiplex 990SF
Onboard Intel Video, HDD
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 2600 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB Samsung PC3-10700 (667MHz)
Graphics - Intel OnBoard 1GB
Gaming Graphics - Intekl OnBoard 1GB
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS757550A9E364 500GB
7.6
7.6
5.5
4.9
5.9
Bill’s Dell M6600
Stock purchase from Dell
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU – Intel i7-2720QM @ 2.20GHz (800MHz)
RAM – 2 x 4 GB Nanya PC3-12800 (800MHz)
Graphics – nVidia Quadro 3000M
Gaming Graphics – nVidia Quadro 3000M
Primary SSD – Samsung PM830 256 GB SSD
7.5
7.7
7.1
7.1
7.9
Anthony’s Dell M6600
Stock purchase from Dell
Win 7 Ultimate x64
CPU – Intel i7-2729QM @ 2.20GHz (800MHz)
RAM – 2 x 4 GB DDR3 2 1066MHz
Graphics – nVidia Quadro 3000M
Gaming Graphics – nVidia Quadro 3000M
Primary SSD – Samsung SATA 2 256 GB SSD
7.5
7.6
7.1
7.1
7.6
Luke's Gaming PC
Win 7 Pro x64
SSDs as supplied in RAID-0
CPU - Core i7-950 @ 3.07 GHz
RAM-3*4GB CorsairCMX6GX3M3C1600C7 667MHz
Graphics - nVidia GTX 460 (768MB)
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GTX 460
Primary SSD - Kingston SNVP325S2128GB
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.4
6.9
HP Z400 Workstation
Win 7 Default Install
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Xeon W3550 @ 3.07 GHz
RAM - 3*2 GB Hyundai PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia Quadro FX 1800 (768MB)
Gaming Graphics - nVidia Quadro FX 1800
Primary HDD-Seagate ST3500418AS 500 GB
7.4
7.7
6.7
6.7
5.9
Derek's Desktop
Autotune O/C to 145 MHz bus
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i5 750 @ 2.67 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Corsair CMG4GX3M2A1600C7
Graphics - Gigabyte HD5750 (GV-R575D5-1GD)
Gaming Graphics - Gigabyte HD5750
Primary HDD - Samsung HD103UJ 1 TB
7.4
7.6
7.3
7.3
5.9
Nathan's AMD Desktop
(Updated RAM, Video)
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - AMD Phenom II X4 965 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Kingston PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
RAM - 2*4 GB Corsair PC3-10700H (667 MHz)
Graphics - ATI Radeon HD5770 1GB
Gaming Graphics - ATI Radeon HD5770 1GB
Pri HDD - Hitachi HDS721010CLA332 1 TB
7.4
7.5

7.4
7.4
5.9
Dell Optiplex 790SF Desktop
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Intel Core i5-2400 @ 3.10 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Samsung PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
Graphics - ATI Radeon HD6450 1 GB
Gaming Graphics - ATI Radeon HD6450 1 GB
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9250410AS 250 GB
7.4
7.5
5.1
6.3
5.9
Nathan's AMD Desktop
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - AMD Phenom II X4 965 @ 3.40 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Kingston PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
Graphics - ATI Radeon HD4290
Gaming Graphics - ATI Radeon HD4290
Primary HDD - Hitachi HDS721010CLA332 1 TB
7.4
5.9
4.6
5.6
5.9
Derek's Desktop
(non-o/c)
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i5 750 @ 2.67 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Corsair CMG4GX3M2A1600C7
Graphics - Gigabyte HD5750 (GV-R575D5-1GD)
Gaming Graphics - Gigabyte HD5750
Primary HDD - Samsung HD103UJ 1 TB
7.3
7.5
7.3
7.3
5.9
Rob's Desktop
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Quad 9550 @ 2.83 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Transcend PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GTX 260 (896 MB)
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GTX 260
Primary HDD - WDC WD3200AAKS 320 GB
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.2
5.9
Bill's Media PC
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Quad 9550 @ 2.83 GHz
RAM - 2*4 GB Kingston PC2-6400 (400)
Graphics - Gigabyte HD4550 (512MB)
Gaming Graphics - Gigabyte HD4550
Primary HDD - Samsung HD103UJ 1 TB
7.3
7.3
5.1
6.2
5.9
Georgia's Alien Gaming PC
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 820 @ 1.73 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Elpida PC3-10700 (667)
Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260M (1GB)
Gaming Graphics - Gigabyte HD5750
Primary HDD-Seagate ST9500420AS 500 GB
7.2
7.4
6.8
6.8
5.9
Hilton's Streaming Slim PC
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Quad Q9400 @ 2.66 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Kingston PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 (1GB)
Gaming Graphics - Galaxy GT240
Primary HDD - Seagate ST380817AS 80 GB
7.2
7.2
6.7
6.7
5.3
HP dc7900
Out of the box, or ATI 10.2
Win 7 Pro x86
Weird - faster RAM than in x64!!!
CPU - Core 2 Quad 9400 @ 2.66 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB HP RAM
Graphics - HP ATI Radeon HD 4550 256MB
Gaming Graphics - ATI Radeon HD 4550 256MB
Pri SSD - Samsung MMCRE64G5MXP-0VB 64 GB
7.2
7.2
5.1
6.2
5.9
HP dc7900
ATI 10.2 Driver
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Quad 9400 @ 2.66 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB HP RAM
Graphics - HP ATI Radeon HD 4550 256MB
Gaming Graphics - ATI Radeon HD 4550 256MB
Pri SSD - Samsung MMCRE64G5MXP-0VB 64 GB
7.2
5.9
5.1
6.2
5.9
HP dc7900
Out of the box
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Quad 9400 @ 2.66 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB HP RAM
Graphics - HP ATI Radeon HD 4550 256MB
Gaming Graphics - ATI Radeon HD 4550 256MB
Pri SSD - Samsung MMCRE64G5MXP-0VB 64 GB
7.2
5.9
4.5
6.2
5.9
Dell Latitude E6320 Notebook
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7-2620M @ 2.70 GHz
RAM - 2*4GB Samsung CH9 (667 MHz)
Graphics - Intel HD3000
Gaming Graphics - Intel HD3000
Primary SSD - Samsung PM810 240 GB
7.1
7.5
6.4
6.4
7.6
Dell XPS L501x Notebook
Win 7 Ult x64
CPU - Core i7-740QM @ 1.73 GHz
RAM - 2*4GB HMT351S6BFR8C-H9 (667 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT435M 2GB
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT435M 2GB
Primary HDD - Toshiba MK6461GSY 640 GB
7.1
7.4
6.6
6.6
5.9
Dell Vostro 3700 Notebook
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7-720QM @ 1.60 GHz
RAM - 4+2 GB PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT 330M 1GB
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT 330M 1GB
Primary HDD - Toshiba MK5056GSY 500 GB
7.0
7.4
6.4
6.4
5.9
Andrew's Asus M60J Notebook
+Intel MLC SSD
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 Q720 @ 1.60 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Samsung PC3-8500F (533 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT 240M
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT 240M
Primary SSD - Intel SSDSA2M160G2GN 160 GB
7.0
7.3
6.4
6.4
7.6
Andrew's Asus M60J Notebook
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i7 Q720 @ 1.60 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Samsung PC3-8500F (533 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT 240M
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GT 240M
Primary HDD-Seagate ST9500325AS 500 GB
7.0
7.3
6.4
6.4
5.7
BillG's Media Center PC
Gigabyte H55N-USB3
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core i3 550 @ 3.20 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB Corsair PC3-10700H (667 MHz)
Graphics - Intel i3 Integrated
Gaming Graphics - Intel i3 Integrated
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS725050A9A364 500 GB
7.0
5.9
4.9
5.2
5.9
Anthony’s Dell M6500
Stock purchase from Dell
Win 7 Ultimate x64
CPU – Intel i7-720QM @ 1.60Ghz
RAM – 4 x 2 GB 667 MHz DDR3
Graphics – nVidia Quadro FX 2800
Gaming Graphics – nVidia Quadro FX 2800
Pri SSD - Samsung PB22-J53 FDE 256 GB
6.9
7.4
6.8
6.8
7.3
Lyn's
Inspiron 15R Notebook
Win 7 HP x64
CPU - Core i5 2410M @ 2.30 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC3-10700 (667 MHz) Samsung
Graphics - Intel HD 3000
Gaming Graphics - Intel HD 3000
Pri HDD - Seagate ST9640320AS 640GB 5400
6.9
5.9
4.7
6.1
5.9
Chris'
Lenovo T410 Notebook
Win 7 Ult x64
CPU - Core i7 620M @ 2.67 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-8500F (533 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia NVS 3100M 256MB
Gaming Graphics - nVidia NVS 3100M 256MB
Pri SSD - Samsung MMCRE28G8MXP-0VB 128GB
6.8
5.9
5.0
5.9
6.9
Don's Asus U30Jc Notebook
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Intel Core i3-350M @ 2.27 GHz
RAM - 4 GB Kingston PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
Graphics - Intel GMA HD
Gaming Graphics - Intel GMA HD
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9320423AS 320 GB
6.3
5.9
4.6
5.1
5.9
Jim's HP 6730 Notebook
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo T9600 @ 2.80 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - Intel Mobile 4 Series Express
Gaming Graphics - Intel Mobile 4 Express
Primary HDD - WD WD3200BEKT-60F3T1 320 GB
6.3
5.5
4.1
3.4
5.9
Andrew's Toshiba Satellite A350
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53 GHz
RAM - 2*2 GB PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650
Gaming Graphics - ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650
Pri HDD - Seagate ST95005620AS 500 GB NAND
6.1
6.1
5.2
6.1
5.9
Laz' Media Center PC
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo E6750 @ 2.66 GHz
RAM - 2+1 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GS
Gaming Graphics - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GS
Primary HDD - Seagate ST3500830AS 500 GB
6.1
6.1
4.7
5.6
5.9
Daniel's Lenovo X200 Notebook
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53 GHz
RAM - 4 GB Micron PC3-8500 (1066 MHz) RAM
Graphics - Intel Mobile 4 Series Express
Gaming Graphics - Intel Mobile 4 Express
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS723232L9SA60 320 GB
6.1
5.9
4.1
3.4
5.7
Andrew's Lenovo M57p
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo E6750 @ 2.66 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - Intel GMA 3100 (Q35 Express)
Gaming Graphics - Intel GMA 3100 (Q35 Express)
Primary HDD-Hitachi HDT725025VLA380 250 GB
6.1
5.9
2.3
3.2
5.4
Quark Automation Laptop
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Duo P8600 @ 2.40 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-5400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - Intel GM45
Gaming Graphics - Intel GM45
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9320421ASG 320 GB
5.9
5.9
4.1
3.9
5.9
Don's Compaq dv6730 Laptop
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Duo P8400 @ 2.26 GHz
RAM - 4 GB OCZ PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3430
Gaming Graphics - ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3430
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9500420AS 500 GB
5.9
5.9
3.9
5.3
5.9
Laz's Old Desktop
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 2.40 GHz
RAM - 2+1 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - ATI HD4890
Gaming Graphics - ATI HD4890
Primary HDD-Seagate ST350064 1NS 500 GB
5.8
5.8
7.7
7.7
5.4
Rod's HP Elitebook 2530p
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo L9600 @ 2.13 GHz
RAM - 2 GB Hyundai PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - Intel Mobile 4 Series Chipset
Gaming Graphics - Intel Mobile 4 Series
Primary SSD - Intel SSDSA1M080G2HP 80 GB
5.6
5.5
3.5
3.3
7.7
Tony's Lenovo R61 Laptop
Win 7 Ult x64
CPU - Core 2 Duo T7500 @ 2.20 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - Intel Mobile 965 Express
Gaming Graphics - Intel Mobile 965 Express
Primary HDD - WD3200BJKT-00F4T0 320 GB
5.5
5.5
3.5
5.8
5.9
Nathan's Latitude D620
Win 7 Ult x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo T7200 @ 2.00 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia Quadro NVS 110M
Gaming Graphics - nVidia Quadro NVS 110M
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9120823AS 120 GB
5.0
5.0
3.7
3.5
5.2
Rachael's Acer
Aspire 5542G
Win 7 HP x64
CPU - AMD Athlon Dual Core M300 2.00 GHz
RAM - 4 GB Hyundai PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - ATI Mobility Radeon HD4570
Gaming Graphics - ATI Mobility Radeon HD4570
Primary HDD-WD WD50 00BEVT-22ZATO 500 GB
4.9
7.0
4.9
6.3
5.9
Catherine's Compaq
Presario CQ61
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Celeron Dual Core T3100 @ 1.90 GHz
RAM - Single 2 GB PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce Go 7300
Gaming Graphics - Mobile Intel 4 Series Express
Primary HDD - WD WD2500BEKT-60V5T1 250 GB
4.8
4.8
3.2
3.3
5.9
Alan's Old Pentium-D
Dell DXP051, 30s boot time
Win 7 Pro x64
CPU - Pentium D @ 2.80 GHz
RAM - 4*1 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce GTX 460
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce GTX 460
Primary SSD - Intel SSDSA2M160G2GC 160 GB
4.5
5.6
7.1
7.1
7.6
Andrew's Toshiba
SatPro P100
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo T5500 @ 1.66 GHz
RAM - 2 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - nVidia GeForce Go 7300
Gaming Graphics - nVidia GeForce Go 7300
Primary HDD - Fujitsu MHV2120BH PL 120 GB
4.5
4.5
3.6
3.4
4.5
Margaret's Acer
Travelmate 8371
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core Duo U9400 @ 1.40 GHz
RAM - 4 GB Samsung PC3-8500F (533 MHz)
Graphics - Intel 4 Series Express
Gaming Graphics - Intel 4 Series Express
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS545032B9A300 320 GB
4.3
4.9
3.2
3.2
5.3
Hilton's M400 Tablet
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core Duo T2300E @ 1.66 GHz
RAM - 4 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - Intel 945
Gaming Graphics - Intel 945
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS541080G9SA00 80 GB
4.1
4.7
3.6
3.2
4.3
Nathan's Dell Latitude 13
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Core 2 Duo U7300 @ 1.30 GHz
RAM - 1*4 GB Samsung PC3-10700 (667 MHz)
Graphics - Intel GS45 Mobile Series 4
Gaming Graphics - Intel GS45 Mobile Series 4
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9320423AS 320 GB
3.9
4.8
3.2
3.2
5.9
Pete's IBM T43 Laptop
Win 7 Ent x86
CPU - Pentium M 1.86 GHz
RAM - 1.5 GB PC2-4200 (266 MHz)
Graphics - Intel 915GM
Gaming Graphics - Intel 915GM
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS541040G9AT00 40 GB
3.6
4.4
1.9
1.0
4.4
Hilton's N570 Slate
Win 7 Ultimate x86
CPU - Intel Atom N570 1.66 GHz
RAM - 2 GB PC3-8500F (533 MHz)
Graphics - Intel GMA 3150
Gaming Graphics - Intel GMA 3150
Primary SSD - KingSpec KSD-SMP.1-032MS 32GB
3.4
4.6
2.7
3.0
5.9
Hilton's M200 Tablet
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Pentium M 1.60 GHz
RAM - 2 GB Kingston PC2700 (166 MHz)
Graphics - GeForce FX Go5200
Gaming Graphics - GeForce FX Go5200
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9808211A 80 GB
3.0
4.1
1.0
2.4
4.1
Pete's IBM T41 Laptop
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Pentium M 1.60 GHz
RAM - 2 GB Kingston PC2700 (166 MHz)
Graphics - Standard VGA
Gaming Graphics - Standard VGA
Primary HDD - 7200 rpm
2.9
4.1
1.0
1.0
5.0
Andrew's HP Mini 5102
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Intel Atom N450 @ 1.66 GHz
RAM - 1*2 GB DDR3 (SO-DIMM)
Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 3150
Gaming Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 3150
Primary HDD - WD WD3200BEKT-60V5T1 320 GB
2.3
4.6
3.0
3.0
5.9
Nathan's Tega V2 Tablet
(2 Touch Points)
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Intel Atom N455 @ 1.66 GHz
RAM - 1*2 GB Samsung PC3-10700 (667) DDR3
Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 3150
Gaming Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 3150
Primary SSD - SanDisk SSD P4 64GB
2.3
4.6
3.0
3.0
5.9
Mark's Tega V2 Tablet
(2 Touch Points)
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Intel Atom N455 @ 1.66 GHz
RAM - 1*2 GB DDR3 (SO-DIMM)
Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 3150
Gaming Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 3150
Primary SSD - SanDisk pSSD-S2 64GB
2.3
4.5
3.1
3.0
5.3
John's HP Mini 5101
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Intel Atom N280 @ 1.66 GHz
RAM - 1*2 GB Samsung PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 950
Gaming Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 950
Primary HDD - Seagate ST9320423AS 320 GB
2.3
4.5
2.0
3.0
5.9
Gary's HP Mini 2140
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Intel Atom N270 @ 1.60 GHz
RAM - 1*2 GB Samsung PC2-6400 (400 MHz)
Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 945
Gaming Graphics - Mobile Intel GMA 945
Primary HDD - Hitachi HTS543216L9A300 160 GB
2.2
4.5
2.1
3.0
5.2
HP 2133 Mini-Note PC
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - VIA C7-M 1.60 GHz
RAM - 1*1 GB PC2-5300 (333 MHz)
Graphics - VIA Chrome9 HC
Gaming Graphics - VIA Chrome9 HC
Primary HDD - Fujitsu MHZ2120BH G2 120 GB
1.5
3.9
2.0
3.0
5.2
Fujitsu Lifebook U1010 Tablet
Win 7 Pro x86
CPU - Intel Atom 110 @ 800 MHz
RAM - 1*1 GB DDR2
Graphics - Intel 945GMA
Gaming Graphics - Intel 945GMA
Primary HDD - Toshiba MK4009GAL 40 GB
1.5
3.9
1.0
3.0
3.7
Toshiba Satellite Pro 4600 Laptop
Win 7 Ult x86
CPU - Pentium III E 900 MHz
RAM - 1*512 MB PC133 (333 MHz)
Graphics - Trident CyberBladeXP
Gaming Graphics - Trident CyberBladeXP
Primary HDD - Toshiba MK4026GAX 40 GB
1.3
1.5
1.0
1.0
4.3

Saturday, February 07, 2009

What Microsoft seems not to understand about security

Back in the Microsoft Dark Ages, when Windows 9x roamed free, Microsoft Bob was still a fond memory to those on its project team and security was a word Microsoft had not yet truly learned the meaning of, we didn't expect them to release anything that was designed with security as a primary concern. After all, they didn't really understand what it was.

Scroll forward to 2009 - a totally different era in the computing world. Vendors such as Quicken are (amazingly) starting to realise that their clients want to run their desktops securely (kinda sorta - there's big issues with the QuickBooks PDF engine if UAC is enabled in Windows 7 Beta 1), the average user is starting to understand that running as a local administrator means they act as a magnet to filth like AntiVirus 2008, AntiVirus 2009 or whatever other moniker it goes by this week, the average sysadmin is starting to understand that having everyone's computer in the company running with all users as local administrators isn't sane, business owners are starting to realise that the value of the data on their notebooks often far outweighs the value of the notebooks themselves and the owners of some small businesses realise that without any real security for their network and data, they have no real chance of surviving. Does Microsoft understand this? Apparently not.

I recently blogged my thoughts on the state of affairs regarding the Windows 7 Firewall default configuration (here) and referenced the issues I had with the Windows Vista Firewall default settings (here and here) and received (in part) this reply from Scott Roberts, the Lead Program Manager for Windows Network Security:


You might not be aware that we have added a number of new, on by default, items to the Windows Operational Logs. This avoids overloading the base logs.

You can view them by using the following paths:
Firewall : Event viewer -> Applications and Services Logs-> Microsoft -> Windows -> Windows Firewall with Advanced Security -> Firewall
Connection Security: Event viewer -> Applications and Services Logs-> Microsoft -> Windows -> Windows Firewall with Advanced Security -> Connection Security

There are also, other, non-default verbose versions of these logs that can be enabled in the WFAS MMC.

We were not able to justify the security benefit, management overhead, and usability impact to enable, by default, the outbound firewall’s ability to block all traffic not already permitted. It is fairly simple to enable for corporate administrators and IT Pros. You can enable this in a handful (~6) clicks from the start menu. Simply right click the node ‘Windows Firewall with Advanced Security’ properties once you launch the tool, click properties, and then select Outbound Connections ‘Block’.

While I understand that this doesn’t address your feedback about making this the default I can share with you that we reviewed this issue in great detail. The realities of the OEM channel somewhat mitigate the impact of this in the consumer space and our GP controls mitigate it the managed space.

First, let me say that I do appreciate Scott taking the time to read my blog and reply on this point, I'm not sure that I can see much sense in his answer in today's environment (as compared to the Microsoft Dark Ages, where it would have been the expected answer). Whilst Scott and his team may not have been able to justify the overhead, security impact and usability impact by enabling outbound filtering in the Windows Firewall, many, many home users and pretty much every single business user can justify it.

One of the things that we've done where possible is to not only block outbound smtp traffic at the gateway firewall from all IPs except the on-premise Exchange (or other) mail server, but to block outbound traffic to ports other than 20 and 21 (ftp), 22 (ssh), 80 (http), 443 (https), 444 (CompanyWeb-2003), 873 (rsync) and 4125 (RWW-2003) so that rogue applications are extremely limited in what they can do to send confidential data outside the network.

In addition to this outbound filtering, some of the other steps we take are:

  • configuring user accounts as "Limited User" not "Local Administrator" (where possible)
  • run a decent AntiVirus product on all desktops and servers
  • externally filter emails to reduce inbound spam and malware issues
  • use Group Policy to configure the users' Windows Firewall and other security settings
  • keep the desktops and servers regularly updated
  • ensure the staff at our client sites understand that if an email arrives with an attachment they are not expecting - *any* executable, anything that *feels* vaguely weird, or anything that comes from someone they don't know, they are not to open it but let us know or just delete the file and ask the original sender if they meant to send it (and if so, send it again, still contacting us if they feel it may be fishy)

Probably the main reason (if not the only reason) that Windows XP users ran a non-Microsoft firewall on their desktop was that the Windows XP Firewall provided no outbound blocking whatsoever. So, Microsoft claimed they learned from this and released the Windows Vista Firewall with outbound blocking. or so they claimed. As I mentioned previously, oubound filtering was disabled by default and *far* from easy for the home user to work out how to enable. So many users keps up with their third party firewall application because it provided security that was simply not built in nor easily configurable in the operating system (where it most definitely belongs).

So I bring this issue to people's attention so that we can all learn from this. We can learn that Microsoft still doesn't take desktop security all that seriously and Microsoft can learn that we want them to take desktop security seriously.

Then they release Windows 7 Beta 1 and have the same default security (or rather insecurity) settings - no outbound filtering enabled by default. They claim that this is because they couldn't justify the security it added compared to the usability it removed. Seriously - how many people want a bucketload of non-standard (ie, mainly those I listed above) ports open on their desktops? Obviously, this is easy to address - just as Microsoft addressed the "Automatic Updates" issue with Windows XP SP2 - put up a screen suggesting that although the default is to allow all traffic outbound to every destination on all ports, Microsoft recommends that users enable outbound blocking, and clicking on "this" button will do that for all non-standard traffic. This would allow ftp, http, https, pop3, networking, home groups and all other *standard* protocols and ports to work as expected yet block all other ports. There would obvioualy need to be a Control Panel applet to configure this - unlike the Advanced Firewall applet that isn't available through the Control Panel.

Really, how hard could that be?

And whilst I'm going on about Microsoft not understanding desktop security, I remember speaking to Michael Risse (Vice President, Worldwide Small and Midmarket Business Group) and Robbie Upcroft (Product Manager - SMB Servers, Australia) at WPC in July 2008 in Houston and also emailing Steve Ballmer (and being totally ignored, might I add) during his Keynote address when he was espousing the value BitLocker can add to an organization's security, about the lack of BitLocker in Windows Vista Business. I know a number of other people have bought this up as being a serious oversight. The issue is that SMB owners cannot see any real value in buying SA for a desktop OS as when their machine dies or is replaced at the end of its viable lifetime (usually 3 - 4 years), they need (as in are required) to buy another OEM OS anyway - which will be whatever's current. So SA is pretty much useless as they will be *extremely* unlikely to upgrade their OS without upgrading their desktops. SA provides BitLocker via Vista Enterprise. Vista Ultimate (the home user's "big boy" Vista also provides BitLocker. Vista Business - the OS that would be specified and installed on more Business laptops than any other version of Vista (yet less than the number of XP copies installed on business laptops) fails to include BitLocker.

Oversight? Massive. Planned oversight? No doubt. How else will they be able to justify (sic) selling SA on desktop OS licenses?

Now with Windows 7 on the horizon, Microsoft has made the same planned oversight - to not include BitLocker in Windows 7 Professional - the Windows 7 version that will most likely be installed on SMB laptops. This means that SMB laptops will need either SA (not likely at all) or Windows 7 Ultimate (aka a home user OS) to get BitLocker security for their files.

Can anyone see any sense in this at all? Anyone?

What is Microsoft thinking? Back in March 2005 they released The Trustworthy Computing Security Development Lifecycle which detailed their much trumpeted "SD3+C" ideology of "Secure by Design, Secure by Default, Secure in Deployment, and Communications". Not allowing Vista Business nor Windows 7 Professional users - the majority of business users - to have access to BitLocker achieves *NONE* of these goals and actively works against all of them.

Are we going to sit back and let this happen or are we going to let Microsoft know that treating SMB clients' security with this disrespect is unacceptable?

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Windows 7: Let's Confuse The Marketplace

It seems that Microsoft won't listen to anyone at all. The gaggle of versions othat Vista had, as well as its truly underdeveloped state, helped to confuse and concern the marketplace into not wanting to run Vista. Oh, and its massive increase in baseline hardware helped achieve those results, too.

Now, it seems that Microsoft has chosen to ignore the massive community input that they received about making the variations of Windows 7 limited to one home version, one business version and one Software Assurance-only version (that DOESN'T remove functionality). What would make sense was having Windows 7 Home, Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7 Enterprise. And, OK, having Windows 7 Basic for emerging markets with below-spec hardware would also be useful. But no, Microsoft seems to have released 6 different Windows 7 versions. Insanity reigns supreme under the leadership (sic) of Steve Ballmer, not technological leadership which they used to have.

Have a read of the Engadget blog for more information of the many and confusing (for consumers) versions of Windows 7 that will be made available. Again, as in the past with Vista, we'll stick with Home Premium for all home users and Professional (nee Vista Business) for all business users. Business-based media devices will run Windows 7 Ultimate. We'll ignore the rest of these options so that we can keep the confusion away from our clients who, after all, just want an OS that works - they don't care what it is called, how many versions it has or anything other than the fact that it supports their applications - after all, an OS is a layer between your hardware and your applications.

And, while I'm at it, it seems that Microsoft has chosen to shun the Windows 7 Professional user's need for security. They stupidly left BitLocker out of Vista Business and have again stupidly left it out of Windows 7 Professional. For a company claiming to be "secure by design, secure by default" they have designed the operating system that most professional people will use to not have drive encryption security - meaning we'll *still* have to sell Windows 7 Ultimate, with all the Media Center fluff in it for any business laptops. Sure, Media Center is decent, but why do we have to buy that just to get BitLocker encryption when it *SHOULD* be included in Windows 7 Professional?

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Apple MacBook Wheel

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/apple_introduces_revolutionary

"I'll buy almost anything if it's shiny and made by Apple." Brilliant.

This didn't cost US$30 million to produce, get canned halfway through the series, use a has-been comedian who was paid US$10m for doing nothing except help Bill Gates give a great example of how out of touch Microsoft is with the man in the street, and manages to show the Church of Apple for what it really is. :)

This is comedy gold! :)

Regards,

The Outspoken Wookie

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Tablet PCs - dunno...

OK. That may be a little misleading.


It isn't that I dunno if the Tablet PC form factor (format, way of life, whatever) is valid. It is - everything (well almost everything) has a place - and I can imagine quite a number of situations where it would be (a big part of) an ideal solution.


It is just that I dunno if the Tablet PC form factor will work for me or for the rest of us here at the Quark Group.

We're getting to the point where we need to deploy a CRM application and some project management software, amongst other things. We also need to keep better records of the work that we do - now, I'm not saying that we're bad at keeping records - we've got loads of info on our client sites and jobs here, it is just that we need a more structured way to keep all of this information and have it readily accessible to us all when and where we need it.

In particular, *I* need to find a way to keep *my* records better - I often use a piece of paper at a client site when we're discussing something to scratch notes, diagrams, serials, phone numbers of cute girls, requests and general information on and then have every intention of transferring all of this information into the relevant documentation here at the office. The problem is that often between this client site and entering this information into the computer, "stuff" happens (another client, the weekend, the paper migrates south on my desk and finds a warm place to hibernate for a week or two) which results in my not entering this information into the computer as quickly as I originally intended.

So, we've started using Outlook and in particular the Notes section of an Appointment to enter this information into - and this is where our Windows Mobile 5 PDAs have found yet another use. However, I still can't get everything in there as easily as I'd like - small keyboard, too small a page for many diagrams, and other excuses I care to make up as I go. WHat information is in there, however, syncs automatically to Exchange and is also relatively easy to pull into other documentation, reports and jobsheets.

I have been thinking for a while now about getting a new laptop and replacing my desktop with it. I have a trusty old Toshiba Satellite Pro 4600 Pentium III/900 laptop that goes most places with me and has done so for quite a few years now. It is easily enough to use onsite and when away from the office for a few days to check emails, run diagnostics on client sites and things like that, but there's no way I could use it as my main PC (screen res is too low and it just isn't fast enough) and no way we can use it to demo much to clients (too slow).

So, looking at a new laptop. Do I get a large, heavy, powerful laptop (17", Core 2 Duo, 4 GB, loads of HDD space, preferably 2 drives) and run my life from this unit? Do I get a smaller, 15" Core 2 Duo, 2 GB with heaps of HDD space to run most things on except serious Virtualization demonstration environments (that the 17" beast could do) and remote into the office to access the demos there? Do I look for a smaller, 12.1" Core 2 Duo laptop with 2 GB and enough HDD space and replace my older laptop with that, still keeping my desktop?

First, the mega gruntmeister. 1920*1200 LCD or nothing. 4 GB RAM. Whatever fast HDD that comes with it used as a secondary and the main HDD will be a Hitachi E7K200 or a Seagate equivalent when they make one. No *need* for a second monitor, but another display sure won't hurt. What *WILL* hurt, however, is my back from lugging this thing around everywhere with me. It will be easily able to handle a full SBS+TS+XP+XP demo to a client (or replace XP with Vista Business, whatever takes my fancy). It won't be fun to pull out at a coffee shop for a quick demo - it will take up most of the table. Not so much fun.

OK, so let's look at replacing my ageing Tosh SatPro with a newer unit. 1600*1050 is probably what I could live with as a minimum widescreen resolution for daily use (out of the office) with another display as a secondary in the office. It still isn't going to be particularly light and with a screen that small it won't be easy to demo much to a client - it'd be better with a small projector or plugged into an LCD of theirs. My back would not need as much physio/chiro which is a bonus. It wouldn't be able to handle a full SBS+TS+VB+VB demo unless I threw more RAM at it. In a coffee shop, it still isn't that great - takes up a more reasonable amount of table space, but the screen is getting a little pokey for 2 or 3 people around a coffee table.

Now we're down to the 12.1" or so notebook that's easy to lug around, running at 1400*1050 or so, which is kinda nearly almost 1600*1050, will definitely require a second desktop display if this were to replace my desktop and can't really be used to demo outside a coffee shop unless there's a projector in my car boot. It takes up less space than a dinner plate at a coffee shop, though! Most likely of all three units to make it to EVERY job I do and still bearable to use on a daily basis when out of the office. Actualy, as to demos, if it had 4 GB, it would likely have as much grunt as the 15" unit above, or extremely close to it.

(OK, I have to admit that I *can* live with a 1024*768 15.4" LCD display as the Satellite Pro 4600 has shown me, but that doesn't mean I enjoy it.)

And this is when I started to look at my options and decided that of all these, the 17" although it would be nice, really isn't something I'd like to lug around all day. The 15.4" is the worst of both worlds (still heavy and with a screen res I could scrape by with, but not really like), leaving the 12.1" being too small to *really* demo on (display-wise) but light enough to lug around all day and grunty enough as well as absolutely requiring a second screen if I were use this as a desktop replacement.

So, now, having decided that in reality, smaller actually IS better, I had a rethink of what I was looking at getting a notebook upgrade for. I wanted one to help me organise my record keeping a little better. And what do I do? I write stuff on paper all the time. How will replacing the SatPro help? It likely won't (although, I could use it to demo things to clients). So really? Waste of money for what I really need.

But, 12.1" brings Tablet PCs into play. Now, there's something that could be well useful as they are basically a big, thick, heavy (compared to a paper pad) digital piece of paper. We have Wi-Fi access at most client sites, so this big, thick piece of digital paper would be able to sync back to the office, and when we don't, we have GPRS/3G/HSDPA access which will also work fine.

Of course, as notebooks get smaller their proces go up, and add Tablet PC capabilities into the unit and it goes up quite a bit again. This makes a Tablet PC approximately the same cost as the big gruntmeister box. Hhmmm... OK. That means we're looking at shelling out somewhere in the vicinity of AU$3500 - AU$4500 on this setup, so we had better know it will deliver what it promises.

For a laugh, I decided to look on eBay for an M200 - the older sibling of the M400 Tablet PC I'd been eyeing off recently - to see what they were going for. They had a Pentium-M CPU and a max of 2 GB RAM as well as a dismal 32MB nVidia onboard video card (poor Aero performance), but they'd also give us an idea of what this form factor could actually achieve. My eBay exercise turned out to not be as silly as I had initially thought - there were a number of M200 units available for prices varying up to AU$1750. Included in this list of items was one that I eventually bought for AU$651.27 (including freight) which was a Pentium-M 1.5 GHz, 512MB RAM, 40 GB HDD unit - all up, well worth the price to see if this would work out for us.

So, including adding some extra RAM to it and swapping the 80 GB PATA from the SatPro into this, it cost a smidge over AU$1000. Well worth it, methinks, to see if this will let us know one way or the other as to the usability of Tablet PCs for both myself and the rest of us.

And then I bought a docking station - making the grant total a smidge under AU$1200. Again, well worth it as we'll also see how useful the docking stations are when it is at home back on the desk in the office.

We've also had a few clients asking us about the usefulness of a Tablet PC in general and in their business more specifically. Well, now we'll have some real world experience to back up our recommendations which is always a better place to come from. Other people's experiences are valuable, but often not as valuable as your own. :)

So, I'll keep posting as I see how this works out for me.

And on that note, sitting here with an empty glass of bourbon and listening to sigur rós, I think I'll "refill and chill" a little more.

Regards,
The Outspoken Wookie