H
HEMI-Powered
Today, Laoliao made these interesting comments ...
Worked at Chrysler and retired in 2002. One way or another, I've
been involved with computers since my engineering school days
1965-69. Early in my Chrysler career I embarked on CAD/CAE/PC
support and did a 10-year stint as a professional FORTRAN
computer programmer. Later, I became first a supervisor and then
a manager responsible for all CAD/CAE/CAM/PC support for all of
Chrysler Engineering and part of Manufacturing. I ended my career
with the interesting job of Engineering Information Security
Manager and manager of Engineering Standards. In my personal
life, I programmed extensively on the old Apple ][ series of
computers in BASIC and assembler, then later on a PC, I
programmed in DOS BASIC and Turbo Pascal and wrote a screen saver
using Visual Basic 3.0 for Win 3.1. I would not classify myself
as a true expert, especially in today's very complicated IT
(information technology) world and even my info security
knowledge is out-of-date because of the explosion of bad stuff
trying to do damage to your PC or steal your identity.
A bit more for your backup situation. True Image is an
outstanding tool for imaging a full system or doing incrementals.
It is fast and produces compact image files. Plus, you can create
either/both a set of 8 floppies that you can boot TI from in case
your system is totally dead and a bootable CD. USB support is in
these two boot-up methods but I also periodically burn a dual-
layer DVD-R to contain my images in case I cannot get to one of
my externals for any reason. At the time I bought TI, I also
evaluated Ghost. Lots of people use and like it. It seemed to me,
though, that the favorable comments for True Image vs. Ghost ran
about 4:1 when I asked in a couple of support NGs.
I don't use anything fancy to do my data backups, just plain
Windows Explorer to copy the folders on my two extended
partitions where all my data is segregated from Windows and my
apps.
To your questions: malware is the broad term for viruses, trojan
horses, spyware, anything bad that might infect your system and
do damage or allow a bad guy to suck off confidential info.
"mal" comes from "bad" and "ware" comes from "software".
I don't know what you mean by "is data backup service very
popular in your country", but perhaps you mean "do most people
have a backup regimen they follow?". If the latter is what you
mean, I would say NO, most people do NOT back up their systems at
all, or if they do, it is haphazard. The time most people think
about it is right after they've had a HD crash or gotten badly
infected with some virulent malware. Another time people think
about it is when buying a new system and they want to transfer
the data.
Which reminds me: during my periodic backup routines, I export
the favorites and cookies from Internet Explorer 6 to a folder on
my HD and I copy all the .dbx files that contain my Outlook
Express E-mail message files in folders to my HD. Also, I use XP
Pro's Files and Settings Transfer Wizard to copy ALL of the major
settings Windows keeps for the things I have customized and would
like to retain if I need to reinstall Windows. But, I do NOT copy
all of the files it can backup because it is very inefficient at
that sort of thing.
One last thing: I do NOT automatically buy every new version of
my application software nor do I upgrade immediately to any new
version of Windows. I let other people who are the early adopters
do what I call "beta testing with their Visa cards" meaning they
find and report bugs to the developer on software they paid good
money for. So, I waited over a year to upgrade from XP Pro SP1 to
SP2 and I won't go to Vista until my next PC in 2008 and when at
least the first SP (Service Pack) is released for Vista.
Likewise, I do NOT upgrade the hardware drivers for my video
card, printers, and scanner unless necessary. Here's why:
Around 1995, I suddenly realized I was spending more time getting
the bugs out of my software and beating it into submission to get
it to work reliably than I was getting useful work from my PC.
That was OK in my hobbyist days, but I discovered about that time
that I was more interested in the work a PC could do for me than
I was in playing with it. So, I stopped and now take a very
cautious approach. I use two sayings to define my opinion: "if it
ain't broken, don't try to fix it" and "never give Murphy an even
break". This means that if the upgrade doesn't fix a bug I know I
have or offer some significant benefits, I just stay with what I
have. And, when I have my nephew build me a new PC, I always go
with state-of-the-art minus one version, meaning not bleeding
edge for processor, mother board, video card, any of that stuff.
I still have my frustrations but in general, my two PCs (the
other is my wife's) are VERY stable.
BTW, backups are like your local fire department. You definitely
want to have firemen but you hope you never need their services
to put out a fire in your house. In PC terms, you spend time and
money on backups hoping that you never really need to do it but
if disaster strikes, you are as reasonably protected and can
recover as best anyone can.
One more item: NEVER set Automatic Updates in Windows to full
auto! I have mine set to "Remind me when updates are ready but do
not download or install." The reason I do this is because it does
happen that Microsoft's Critical Updates sometimes have serious
bugs or wreck parts of your system. So, again, not wanting to
give Murphy an even break, I monitor these tech support NGs to
see if anything went wrong with particular updates before I
install them. The reason for not allowing full auto is best
expressed by friends who went to bed with a fully working system
but woke up to a system with minor or major damage or a PC that
was completely unusuable because Windows, their video card
driver, or something else had been updated overnight and had a
fatal bug.
Some call me paranoid about this stuff and maybe I am, but I
prefer the term "cautious". How much of what I suggest and
anything others suggest to you, again, depends on how much data
you have, your tolerance for frustration, and your time available
to rebuild your system of disaster does strike.
If you have more questions after reading all of this, ask away,
and good luck!
First, I am an American born and raised in SE Michigan, USA.
Worked at Chrysler and retired in 2002. One way or another, I've
been involved with computers since my engineering school days
1965-69. Early in my Chrysler career I embarked on CAD/CAE/PC
support and did a 10-year stint as a professional FORTRAN
computer programmer. Later, I became first a supervisor and then
a manager responsible for all CAD/CAE/CAM/PC support for all of
Chrysler Engineering and part of Manufacturing. I ended my career
with the interesting job of Engineering Information Security
Manager and manager of Engineering Standards. In my personal
life, I programmed extensively on the old Apple ][ series of
computers in BASIC and assembler, then later on a PC, I
programmed in DOS BASIC and Turbo Pascal and wrote a screen saver
using Visual Basic 3.0 for Win 3.1. I would not classify myself
as a true expert, especially in today's very complicated IT
(information technology) world and even my info security
knowledge is out-of-date because of the explosion of bad stuff
trying to do damage to your PC or steal your identity.
A bit more for your backup situation. True Image is an
outstanding tool for imaging a full system or doing incrementals.
It is fast and produces compact image files. Plus, you can create
either/both a set of 8 floppies that you can boot TI from in case
your system is totally dead and a bootable CD. USB support is in
these two boot-up methods but I also periodically burn a dual-
layer DVD-R to contain my images in case I cannot get to one of
my externals for any reason. At the time I bought TI, I also
evaluated Ghost. Lots of people use and like it. It seemed to me,
though, that the favorable comments for True Image vs. Ghost ran
about 4:1 when I asked in a couple of support NGs.
I don't use anything fancy to do my data backups, just plain
Windows Explorer to copy the folders on my two extended
partitions where all my data is segregated from Windows and my
apps.
To your questions: malware is the broad term for viruses, trojan
horses, spyware, anything bad that might infect your system and
do damage or allow a bad guy to suck off confidential info.
"mal" comes from "bad" and "ware" comes from "software".
I don't know what you mean by "is data backup service very
popular in your country", but perhaps you mean "do most people
have a backup regimen they follow?". If the latter is what you
mean, I would say NO, most people do NOT back up their systems at
all, or if they do, it is haphazard. The time most people think
about it is right after they've had a HD crash or gotten badly
infected with some virulent malware. Another time people think
about it is when buying a new system and they want to transfer
the data.
Which reminds me: during my periodic backup routines, I export
the favorites and cookies from Internet Explorer 6 to a folder on
my HD and I copy all the .dbx files that contain my Outlook
Express E-mail message files in folders to my HD. Also, I use XP
Pro's Files and Settings Transfer Wizard to copy ALL of the major
settings Windows keeps for the things I have customized and would
like to retain if I need to reinstall Windows. But, I do NOT copy
all of the files it can backup because it is very inefficient at
that sort of thing.
One last thing: I do NOT automatically buy every new version of
my application software nor do I upgrade immediately to any new
version of Windows. I let other people who are the early adopters
do what I call "beta testing with their Visa cards" meaning they
find and report bugs to the developer on software they paid good
money for. So, I waited over a year to upgrade from XP Pro SP1 to
SP2 and I won't go to Vista until my next PC in 2008 and when at
least the first SP (Service Pack) is released for Vista.
Likewise, I do NOT upgrade the hardware drivers for my video
card, printers, and scanner unless necessary. Here's why:
Around 1995, I suddenly realized I was spending more time getting
the bugs out of my software and beating it into submission to get
it to work reliably than I was getting useful work from my PC.
That was OK in my hobbyist days, but I discovered about that time
that I was more interested in the work a PC could do for me than
I was in playing with it. So, I stopped and now take a very
cautious approach. I use two sayings to define my opinion: "if it
ain't broken, don't try to fix it" and "never give Murphy an even
break". This means that if the upgrade doesn't fix a bug I know I
have or offer some significant benefits, I just stay with what I
have. And, when I have my nephew build me a new PC, I always go
with state-of-the-art minus one version, meaning not bleeding
edge for processor, mother board, video card, any of that stuff.
I still have my frustrations but in general, my two PCs (the
other is my wife's) are VERY stable.
BTW, backups are like your local fire department. You definitely
want to have firemen but you hope you never need their services
to put out a fire in your house. In PC terms, you spend time and
money on backups hoping that you never really need to do it but
if disaster strikes, you are as reasonably protected and can
recover as best anyone can.
One more item: NEVER set Automatic Updates in Windows to full
auto! I have mine set to "Remind me when updates are ready but do
not download or install." The reason I do this is because it does
happen that Microsoft's Critical Updates sometimes have serious
bugs or wreck parts of your system. So, again, not wanting to
give Murphy an even break, I monitor these tech support NGs to
see if anything went wrong with particular updates before I
install them. The reason for not allowing full auto is best
expressed by friends who went to bed with a fully working system
but woke up to a system with minor or major damage or a PC that
was completely unusuable because Windows, their video card
driver, or something else had been updated overnight and had a
fatal bug.
Some call me paranoid about this stuff and maybe I am, but I
prefer the term "cautious". How much of what I suggest and
anything others suggest to you, again, depends on how much data
you have, your tolerance for frustration, and your time available
to rebuild your system of disaster does strike.
If you have more questions after reading all of this, ask away,
and good luck!