logitech tk820 keyboardI like to try and keep my computer and everything up to date.  I mean, I wasn’t necessarily excited to try Windows 8 although I am starting to like it a little bit more, but as far as hardware and stuff, I like to have stuff that is fun and new.  I also tend to want to try out a lot of the new stuff that I see.  For example, one of my favorite things are the mouses that have buttons on them that you can set up to do other things.  They make it easy to assign something to them so you can perform something by pressing the button with one of your fingers.  The only thing I don’t like about that is some of them have the buttons set up to where I will hit them when I don’t want to use them, so for that reason it’s important to get one that you like.  Keyboards are another area where there are some cool styles.  For example, you’ve probably all seen chiclet style keyboards.  If not, those the kind where the keys are lower and don’t stick up as high, similar to what you find on a laptop.  And then of course there are the ones that are kind of rounded that are supposed to be more comfortable to use.  And then there is a new one that I just heard about when I was looking  online and I came across a Logitech TK820 review that has a touchpad built into the keyboard.  Look at it!  How cool is that though?  Touchpads might not be my favorite method of moving the cursor about but I do think that is a pretty cool feature and I would like to try it out.

Logitech tends to make some good stuff and they are one of the brands I see most often when I go to the store.  There aren’t many Logitech products that I actually do own, but I usually consider them when it comes to making a new purchase.  But this new keyboard is kind of strange and I definitely think I want to try it and see if I like it.  The only touch pad I’m used to is the one on my tablet and I don’t even really use that one that much, although it’s fun for checking email or whatever if you’re not at your desk.  The other thing I have been seeing recently are really small keyboards, but I don’t know if that is just a new fad or if that is something that is going to become the norm as people start to like them.

Type password vs. click ok. Now, type password into a window that runs in user-space, or click ok on a screen that runs in a memory space you’re not allowed to step into. I honestly cannot see how anyone that is remaining completely objective can claim to hate Vista UAC and not claim that Apple’s is just as bad.

OSX just doesn’t have the security problems that Windows does. all of the people who fail to recognize this are just ignorant. for years people have been saying that when Apple’s OS has the market share to justify hackers spending time on writing malware for it that everything would come crashing down on them…. but it hasn’t. OSX continues to gain market share and definitely has enough to be worth attacking, but you never hear a peep about anything like you do with Windows.

And again, with the OSX implementation, you put in your password once and it lasts for a while. with Vista, if you were doing the exact same thing, you would be intruded upon god only knows how many times.

2 things… 1) if you are constantly being harassed by OSX’s UAC, you are doing something wrong. what are you changing that often to be bothered? they are so much more intelligent about what you would be bothered about than Microsoft whose UAC was flagged for all kinds of stuff. 2) i’m sure that Microsoft made it so easy to turn off because it is a horrible piece of junk. again, the best thing you could say about Vista’s UAC is that it is easy to turn off. lol. how could you possibly argue then that it isn’t a piece of junk? if it didn’t suck, leave it on.

are you hearing that people are having problems or are you stumbling across the various articles talking about how insecure OSX is? when you read about Windows insecurities you are reading about people whose computers have been compromised and are now part of a bot net or about people whose computers are all but dying due to the various malware that is on it. if you read about OSX insecurities, you are generally reading theoretical discussions about possible insecurities that are rarely exploited.

i remember reading an article that was posted on this forum about how OSX is less secure than Windows because the writer counted the number of security reports on some website for Windows and OSX and saw that there were more for OSX. it was the most ignorant article i can remember reading outside of readers digest. if you looked at most of the security reports for OSX, most were either place holders for security problems that weren’t found yet or were security problems with 3rd party applications such as various Adobe products. then, for the Windows side, each security report covered a multitude of issues that were resolved with a single patch. so, to compare the security of the OSs based on numbers was BS.

That is a level of implementation that I’m not concerned with. Microsoft could easily have implemented their own more secure version without harassing you indefinitely with their stupid “are you really sure you want to do that? i mean really sure. come on. are you positive? have you really thought this through? do you really, really, really want to create your own directory in c:\program files? and then do you really want to name it something in particular?”

The only security i really want from those things is to make the user think twice about what they are doing, not stop some sort of malware from infecting the system. also, it stops other people from installing (which is what always breaks my parents’ and brother’s computers when my young cousins want to install their stupid software).

MS was in a tough spot. They have all those programs out there needing administrative access because of all the hacks required to get windows apps to run across versions over the last couple decades… and yet they were under mucho pressure to improve security. So they just decided to inconvenience the user with admin access warnings until all the software providers updated their software. Its not just about security, its about “This program hasn’t been updated to our new way of doing things, doesn’t this PISS YOU OFF?” Its advertising for updates from vendors.

Maybe they should add a disclaimer to the confirmation window that says “…if you are seeing this message very often, please contact the software vendor to request that they update their software.” That would take the heat off Microsoft in an instant.

It’s a level of implementation you should be concerned with, because something that asks the user to confirm they are in control of the machine doesn’t do any good if a machine process can trick the OS into thinking the user is in control when he’s not.

Yes, I agree that Microsoft applied UAC to things that don’t need it; something is wrong with the rule system they cooked up to determine which settings need UAC and which don’t. I made that point a couple of times myself. But it’s all pointless if it isn’t actually secure.

More time consuming? i used OSX for a while, enough not to be a noob, but not enough to be the best, and i had no issues at all with their UAC. i had vista for less than a week and i was about to smash my brand new laptop because of Microsoft’s incredibly intrusive and utterly horrendous implementation. so, you are completely bass ackwards on that one.

Vista’s UAC is not going to stop viruses and malware. This is Windows. Every door they close leaves 4 other windows (pun not intended) open for malware programmers to sneak their code though.

All UAC is going to do is help keep machines running a little better by A) making someone think twice before they make that change and B) by preventing those without access from installing software or making changes that they shouldn’t be making. So, once you acknowledge that you recognize the changes you are going to make are possibly dangerous, it should leave you alone. But, because it doesn’t, so many people shut off their UAC and break the biggest new security enhancements that their bad programmers came up with.

My friend recently told me that he snooped and read his girlfriend’s diary.  As you may expect, he found some stuff that upset him.

I told him that as someone who has done an insane amount of blogging/journaling, I can say this without hesitation….what is said in a journal/diary post is COMPLETELY different than what is said in a personal interaction with another person. Diaries and journals are not MEANT to be shared with other people…they are not communication with others, it is communication with your self…and a way to resolve and mange internal issues, emotions, and situations BEFORE you have the face-to-face interaction.

And the reason why people do that is because taking the time to reflect internally before responding is a FANTASTIC way to make sure you resolves your own issues before communicating with someone else.

In other words, having someone read your personal thoughts in a journal is to have that someone take those thoughts completely out of context. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT SHE WAS THINKING WHEN SHE WROTE THAT. And, if she didn’t communicate that TO you, it probably means that she resolved it internally and didn’t NEED to communicate that to you.

So, for you to snoop on her private thoughts is for you to take raw thoughts out of context. This is why snooping is usually a terrible idea. Because you don’t know the context of those thoughts and/or how those thoughts were resolved.

My friend is upset because what she wrote in her journal seems to have blown everything out of proportion.

That is exactly what a lot of people do. This is the problem with text. Unless you’re talking to the person directly its nearly impossible to correctly translate the inference and context of what’s written. You can’t “hear” if someone is genuinely hurt, or sarcastic. There’s subtext in HOW we say what we say, and half the time what we SAY (or write) isn’t the best most accurate way to translate how we actually feel. When you say it TO the person, and they don’t understand, they have an immediate opportunity to ask for clarification. The speaker, then has the ability to change direction and modify their words in an effort to be better understood. And that change in direction could be all one needs to really SEE what the other person means. And it could be completely different than how it originally sounded. But in sneakily reading her private thoughts you’re jumping to conclusions based on what she didn’t say, and taking your own meaning from the scant selection of words she chose. Which, for all you know, she was in the heat of the moment, venting to herself and perhaps if asked about the incident today, might feel entirely different than her words on the day of the event. We all find clarity after a moment has cooled and we have time to process.