Entries from April 2008 ↓

I’m a “relatively” diehard Windows Vista user. I’m not ashamed to tell people that I use Windows Vista - in fact, I think I kind of like Windows Vista a bit. More than XP anyway.

So, as a special surprise for everyone with Windows Vista out there, WPF is integrated into it. Meaning that these applications running on WPF is perfect for your computer - as long as your processor, RAM, and graphics card can handle them. I found a blog with a nice long list.

http://blogs.technet.com/james/archive/2007/06/15/where-are-all-the-wpf-applications.aspx

Have fun, and tell me what you think of them!

Microsoft’s got their work cut out for them. With a flopped operating system - by flopped, I mean not widely accepted nor comparably commercially-successful, not that it sucks - and the expectations of Windows 7 being of titanic proportions (it’s revolutionary, and it’s to be done in the next couple of years), Microsoft is going to have to completely blow us away, or lose customers by the flocks.

I’m not going to lie, I thought modular Windows was the best way to go. The article Ars Technica published really shook me up. All hope is not lost, however - Ars Technica assumed just one tiny thing that would make modular Windows suck: people would have to pay for it.

Free is the future of business, as Wired has stated. However, the only way I could see Microsoft actually implementing “free” would be giving away Windows and then charging subscriptions as Ars Technica had already suggested.

Thus, you might think I took it a bit out of context, but I think that it’s clear there are tons of other methods for companies like Microsoft to earn their money. The first one that struck my mind would be…

Advertising in Windows

It still might suck to some - but not as much as paying per module. Charge for that little banner at the corner of Windows 7, just like Microsoft charges for the little banner already implemented in Windows Live Messenger. It’s not going to be pretty, but everyone’s going to get used to it.

Just how much are they going to earn? Not enough - if the banner was as small or as un-intrusive as Windows Live Messenger’s. How about sticking one on the boot screen - it’s a pretty boring fifteen seconds without something to read, anyway. Or having Windows Sidebar’s gadgets flash around with bells and whistles? I’m sure that advertisers would be clawing by the dozens to try to get an advertisement on a certain region’s computers.

This also negates the possibility of pirating Windows. No more piracy - because you can really get the full-out version of Windows 7 for free. No CD-keys, no Microsoft “genuine” software crap. Sounds good, right?

The Solution:

Pay. You’ve got the power to turn off those damn bells and whistles, pay a hundred dollars just like you ordinarily would have for Windows 7. No more bells, no more whistles.

Charge the Developers

Make applying for developing a module for Windows go under two categories - the first for companies that will pay Microsoft a (possibly huge) premium and get free advertising banner boxed in their own application. The advertising banner thus introduces a medium for the developers to earn their own money.

The second category goes for freeware applications - which will be dominant in the sense that they are free, but still don’t have any advertisements on them. The freeware developer would then receive the credit he deserves, and probably a lot of donations too (even if it’s for something as simple as a school project).

Different Types of Modules

By now, you might’ve realized that I don’t see modules the same you might - I see every single application out there as a module. That might not be what Microsoft is up to, but I still think it’s an idea definitely worth thinking through. It’s going to be hard, and it’s going to be tough, and it’s definitely got the makings to stir up controversy, but it’s still an idea for free Windows that might not suck.

Actually, in retrospect, this all does sound kind of…dreary. Everything is controlled by Microsoft, as opposed to freedom that modules should be bringing. And people can dispel all that with just a $100 fee - is that enough to offset the revenue that advertising could bring in?

After all, it’s just an idea

The real world is leading the virtual world by example, and the virtual world could learn a few useful lessons. This banner/billboard idea is nothing new, but I think is still great solution for users that can’t afford (or don’t want to pay for) Windows and don’t mind advertising.

…err, the idea might not be too kind to developers though, it sounds kind of restricting.

I’ve always been a fan of album art - when Coverflow came out, I was dazzled.  When I finally got an iTunes account and could finally get album art, I was ecstatic.

Here’s a funky site for album art, and strictly that.  No artist biographies, no music, nothing but pure, unfiltered album art.  With people guessing that album art is a dying trend (I should hope not), you better come get ‘em while you can.

http://albumart.org/

With hackers, phishing, and all those shady computer geek repairmen (or women) out there, it’s hard to protect your computer and hard drive from prying hands and eyes nowadays. You’ve got those embarrassing baby photos of yourself? Maybe the latest Britney Spears CD? Do you write your own diary on your computer? Not to mention ideas for that small business you’ve been planning for, your list of passwords (although it’s not a great idea to put them on the computer), or maybe a secret program that you’re developing and planning to release?

I’m sure that entrepreneurs would not want their political or business enemies to find the last three, and absolutely no one would want to be found out keeping the first three. In all seriousness, how do you keep this kind of stuff safe? There are free password programs out there that will encrypt your folders for free. However, they offer no password recovery or support at all in this matter and can be a bit complicated to configure and navigate through sometimes. Introducing Folder Castle 2.1, a program developed by MagneticSoft natively for Windows Vista.

How’s it look?

Folder Castle 2.1 looks surprisingly simple for a password program. It’s just got three tabs (Objects List, Secure Storage, and Preferences) each with their own important configuration options. I feel that its Graphical User Interface camouflages well into Windows Vista, thus giving it a natural feel. Icons fit into Windows Vista sizes, and are surprisingly next-gen, making it all the more appealing to me. After all, when I use a password program, I have to trust it first - and it’s hard to do so with those 16-bit colours that the free ones offer sometimes. The MagneticSoft website also looks great - which is important, as again, trust has to be developed between you and the corporation’s website before you’ll trust them enough to purchase from them, right?

How’s it work?

Now I’m not going to lie - I previously had next to no idea of how passwords and algorithms work (I couldn’t even spell “algorhythm” correctly, haha). Here’s the simplest definition of algorithm that I couldn’t have said better myself.

An algorithm (pronounced AL-go-rith-um) is a procedure or formula for solving a problem

Source: http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci211545,00.html

This algorithm is on your side, and the hackers have to “solve” the problem, if I have correctly interpreted that idea. But what kind of algorithm does Folder Castle 2.1 use? Folder Castle 2.1 actually uses the Advanced Encryption Standard, proudly encrypting information also for the U.S. government. It’s also known as “Rijndael” - wow, what a funky word.

Rijndael (pronounced rain-dahl) is the algorithm that has been selected by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) as the candidate for the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). It was selected from a list of five finalists, that were themselves selected from an original list of more than 15 submissions. Rijndael will begin to supplant the Data Encryption Standard (DES) - and later Triple DES - over the next few years in many cryptography applications. The algorithm was designed by two Belgian cryptologists, Vincent Rijmen and Joan Daemen, whose surnames are reflected in the cipher’s name. Rijndael has its origins in Square, an earlier collaboration between the two cryptologists.

Source: http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid14_gci523541,00.html

So assuming that if a hacker does gain access to your PC, will he/she be able to break the encryption and steal your data? The chances are slim to none, but I’m definitely hoping it’s on the “none” side of things. According to the news though, Chinese hackers have already broken into the Pentagon’s files, which makes me question myself. But I do suppose that if you have made yourself such a powerful enemy, you should expect nothing less.

Before starting up the Folder Castle 2.1 control center, you will be asked to input the password that you created during the installation process. Hopefully you haven’t forgotten it, because you can’t do much without it (I’m sure support will take care of it though).

Back on topic - how’s Folder Castle 2.1 function? Folder Castle 2.1 actually employs two methods of security here - one is hiding the actual folder from prying eyes similar to what Windows can do, and the other method is an actual secure storage drive which is what most users will expect. Hiding the folder requires a password in order to un-hide it, which is great (unlimited number of hidden folders). Folders are selected to be hidden or un-hidden using the Objects List as seen above.

However, the secure storage drive is legendary - it is created by allocating storage from another drive on your computer or USB stick, and can be mounted or un-mounted at will. Basically, it’s a virtual hard drive. Pretty cool stuff going on here.

Basically, everything is run through the Folder Castle control center. Without the Folder Castle control center, we are nothing but cavemen without encryption.

Does it work?

Mostly without a hitch. It didn’t take me long to figure out the program, but the help files could certainly have been a bit more comprehensive on their part - I finally figured out how it was to be mounted on a USB drive.

The information can actually be stored on a USB drive - however, it can only be accessed with a computer using Folder Castle 2.1. Of course, you can simply download a trial version if you really need the information that badly, but it’s still not a bad system, if just a bit inflexible. I was actually impressed how it worked on my Windows XP computer from my Windows Vista one. Not bad, MagneticSoft. Not bad at all.

Also, Folder Castle 2.1 hardly took up any resources by today’s standards. It didn’t require anymore than five megabytes to run (on occasion it stayed at three) the Folder Castle Control Center.

Was it easy to use?

Again, mostly it was beautifully easy to use. The help files weren’t too helpful sometimes, but it was all pretty straightforward without many painful brain taxes. Thus, I give MagneticSoft a kudos for their ease of use with Folder Castle 2.1, especially in the area of passwords where people expect to have encounter with much geek jargon and command line execution (yipes!).

Should you get it?

Well, today is April 13, 2008. That means there are still 4 days for you to get it at a promotional price of $29.95, a discount of $10. You’re getting a piece of great software that is practical to use and purchase and is not too complicated to work with. If you ever run into problems, there’s always a dedicated staff of support and you can expect things from them. I personally would recommend getting it if you really are in need of a password program - but if you just want to try it out for the heck of it, I’m fine with that too.

The trial lasts for fifteen days and has a limited amount of hidden folders you can use. Get it here: http://magneticsoft.com.

If you liked the review or have any questions or comments about MagneticSoft’s Folder Castle 2.1, please feel free to leave a comment or drop me an e-mail - I’m still a bit new to the whole “reviewing” thing, so I’d appreciate advice or constructive criticism.

Of course, my applause to Anatoliy at MagneticSoft for making this review happen - I couldn’t have done it without your support and patience. Wow, I feel like I’m at the Oscars or something.

After yesterday’s post on the Samsung Instinct and how Samsung is the number one contender for Apple’s spot, I was delighted to discover that MacSurfer linked to my post. Upon doing some research, I realized this was a pretty rare honour and want to give them thanks for the link love.

I’m going to confess - I’ve been feeling a bit unmotivated lately when it comes to CutEdge to do a variety of reasons: I’ve realized that taking on the entire technological industry isn’t exactly the easiest thing to do. I’ve also been having a bit of trouble coming up with new content, and thus the Samsung Instinct really proved to be a catalyst to creating new content and ended up spawning this post. Also, my readership hasn’t seemed to be growing much, but thanks to MacSurfer I’ve experienced a spike in traffic (and hope to continue creating content that will make you readers proud).

I’m now focusing more on content than ever before, and realize that spending time marketing and all won’t matter if there’s no content to support me. Plus, I want to make content so great other people will share it - please, if you’ve got any comments, e-mail me or put ‘em down.

Oh, and proof - of course. No offense meant to any of the links above or below my point, just wanted to emphasize the CutEdge part of the image, haha.