Windows 7 is a great modern operating system. Most people have been praising it’s robustness and that it closes the gap on OS’s like Mac OS X while still staying somewhat similar to Vista and XP to not lose any users along the way. Yet according to the Sophos Blog, after a clean install of Windows 7 with the default UAC (User Access Control) settings on, 7 still became infected by 8 our of 10 common bugs/viruses. [A good overview of UAC in Windows 7 can be found here]

Is this really surprising? It doesn’t seem so to me. I have been using the Windows operating system for a long time now and Windows has always had some types of security issues.  Theses issues though are nothing that a little common sense and a decent, lightweight anti-virus program can’t fix.

Something strange here

Something that I have been wondering about for a couple of months now with all of the crazy Windows hoopla is this: since Microsoft has released their own totally free anti-virus suite, Microsoft Security Essentials, why don’t they just include it with Windows 7? You have to go the site here to download and install the software. The only reason that comes to mind to not include MSE with 7 is that they don’t want to completely dominate all markets.  Microsoft is probably a little tired of fighting monopoly battles.

What this means for you

Like I said before, it is not a big surprise that Windows continues to be prone to viruses even though it has a shiny new coating and name.  With OS market share of Windows 7 slowly rising with it’s release on the 10/22/09 more and more people may be put under the guise that “this version is the best and most secure.” That may be true, but when you speak of “most secure” in regards to Vista or XP you are not saying very much.

Case in point: make sure to download some decent, lightweight anti-virus software and don’t open and install files that you don’t recognize.

Some good, free anti-virus suites:

• Microsoft Security Essentials
• AVG
• avast!
• Panda

These are all free and good quality: let Rick tell you why free anti-virus is OK.

With Apple having around $34 billion worth of capital to work with and a worth of over $170 billion it is now wonder that Fortune Magazine would name Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, CEO of the Decade. Jobs has led Apple to new heights most recently with the iPod, iPod Touch, and the ground-breaking iPhone and App Store.

I highly suggest checking out the thorough article over at Fortune Magazine if you want to learn about all of Mr. Jobs’ tribulations and accomplishments during his rise as Apple’s CEO. There really is no one else that seems more suited for this award. So, congrats to Mr. Jobs; even I am feeling a little Apple ‘fanboyism’ at the writing of this post!

It appears that Verizon is going to keep up the old business model of nickel and diming it’s customers to death with the Motorola Droid, their flagship device, by charging $15 extra a month for MS Exchange support.  The net seems to be amazed by this; that Big Red is actually going to charge their customers more for services that they want to use. The real problem that the Droid is going to face won’t be pricing, it will be targeting.

More of the same, nothing to see here

Verizon is tied with AT&T for the most expensive plans in America as Sprint and T Mobile duke it out for the best price (value would be the wrong word here, at least in my area). Verizon has consistently charged the same amount of money for all smartphone data plans and add-ons; $29.99 for “unlimited” data plan on top of a $39.99 or higher voice plan and $15 extra for Exchange support (for Business accounts). This isn’t anything new and for consumers to think that “things will be different” now that Verizon is more “open and loving” with Android, they better think again or stay with Sprint or T Mobile.

Consumer Phone? The Droid?

This isn’t the only news with this story, something that struck me odd was that Brenda Raney, a spokeswoman for Verizon, said that the Droid is “a consumer phone.” The comment was used to explain that most consumers won’t be using Exchange and since the Droid is a “consumer phone” that customers need not worry about the higher priced data plan.

This is where Verizon is not thinking clearly and may really miss the target market with the Droid. From every review of the device that I have obsessively read, the Droid is not for a “typical” consumer. A “typical” consumer phone would be something that is user friendly like the iPhone. The Droid is not a phone that one can just pick up and instantly know what they are doing. For geeks the phone is great but this isn’t a “consumer” phone.  Anyone can take a look at the Droid commercials and understand that this phone isn’t targeted to everyone. Not everyone cares about “open development” let alone even know what the hell it means.

The Real Problem

The Exchange pricing for the Droid is not the real story here, the story is the misconception of what Verizon thinks that the Droid actually is. If Verizon keeps this kind of attitude towards the Droid, that it is an iPhone “killer” and a consumer phone, they are going to seriously frustrate a ton of customers that want a phone that can play cool games and play their latest MP3s. Verizon needs to recognize and appreciate the Droid for what it is, a smartphone with a lot of power and a large learning curve for standard consumers.

Can normal consumers use the Droid without frustation?

According to OS X Daily, Apple will update Snow Leopard to version 10.6.2 which will kill support for Intel Atom processor. This is an obvious attempt to thwart the efforts of OS X “hackers” from installing OS X on lower cost Atom based netbooks. Although the new update hasn’t been released yet OS X Daily and others say that it has been “confirmed”. Some are arguing that Apple has no right, but I say that they can do what they want with their own operating system.

Of course people are doing it

It isn’t a surprise, at least to me, that most people want a cheaper alternative to a fancy MacBook or iMac and a somewhat complicated but slick way to do it is to make your own Hackintosh.  There are several websites that have detailed instructions of how to make your own, and out of me not being sure of the legality of it all I won’t be able to post the direct links here. A nice Google search for Hackintosh or OS X on PC will give you several options to choose from if you are in to that semi-illegal thing.

Quit being the bully, Apple

Some people are arguing that Apple should be sued, yes Apple, for putting such a strong grip on their operating system. The argument includes how they are exhibiting monopolistic tendencies by locking out certain hardware and other vendors from using OS X.

Here is my take on the matter. Apple has developed a great operating system built on UNIX. It is very robust and “ahead of it’s time” (even though Windows 7 is starting to close the gap). The user experience is excellent and it works flawlessly on Apple hardware. Why would Apple want to get into the same game as Microsoft; trying to support a billion different combinations of hardware and the criticism that goes with that?

OS X is the product of some hard work by Apple developers and it is no surprise that they want to keep their OS from being used without the purchase of Apple hardware. I cannot blame them for locking out different hardware types.  They own the software and they can do what they will with it, plus Atom processors are wimpy anyways, so good riddance.