I try not to recycle articles however meeting people on a weekly basis who would more than happily sell a computer on eBay after having simply used Windows to delete their old data has convinced me that in this instance it is necessary.

“
With data security becoming a greater issue on a daily basis it’s important to make sure that you securely remove all your data from your hard drives before you decide to sell your hard drive or donate it towards a charity of your choice. For a great amount of time there have been programs available which can miraculously restore data from a damaged floppy disk, with being the token computer guy in the house at university and still people using this decidedly unreliable format I became familiar with the programs used for restoring corrupted or deleted data from the diskettes.

Technically, just deleting a file isn’t sufficient to get rid of it permanently; when you delete a file from say Windows XP or any other OS you’re not truly deleting the file. To understand this you need to have a rough idea of how file allocation tables work (this is based on the current format of your hard drive). Unfortunately formatting the drive isn’t necessarily sufficient as data can still be relatively easily restored using an unformatting program which are available readily on the Internet.

Ryan Carson, Refresh Creations Ltd
“

Unlike the change from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95 or from Windows ME to Windows XP there are no revolutionary changes. Windows XP users will notice the most difference in terms of the look and feel of the software as visually it looks very similar to Vista, perhaps just a little more intuitive.

Using this software you get the impression that finally Windows may have ‘come of age’ with this release. When pitched against this new release, Windows XP looks clunky, badly aged and flawed by comparison and although visually Vista holds its own a little better, in terms of performance it still looks as though the wheels are about to fall off. I wasn’t against Vista as much as some others however I will admit that due to the fact it was hungry for resources you always got the impression it was about to ‘fall over’ as soon as you started doing anything slightly demanding.

I’m running the 64-bit version of Windows 7 on a relatively new laptop and the comparisons against Vista are startling; faster start up times, less hard drive access, greater stability and even improved battery life. Although I’m unsure whether it would be faster than XP or not, it is worth bearing in mind that this eight year OS never really gained momentum for 64-bit support and as such it could possibly do with being retired even if just to wave in a new, faster era of 64-bit applications.

Ignoring the arguably most important developments in terms of speed, security and stability, it is the little changes and additions that I appreciate most. I like the ability to ‘peek’ back at the desktop by hovering down the bottom right hand side of the start menu, the auto preview when you flick between applications using & and the rotation setting that can be used to change your wallpaper automatically every couple of minutes.

Visually it looks gorgeous; the semi translucent taskbar and menu headers along with various other visual effects make the OS look a lot less flat than XP. Although it’s not a million miles away from Vista, it is certainly more ‘polished’ and due to the noticeable speed increases it doesn’t give you the nagging impression your machine is crawling to a halt as a result of a few visual effects.

I also love the way you can ‘pin’ applications to the taskbar. For example, if you pin Firefox to your taskbar area then the icon will always be visible next to the start menu in what would have been traditionally been the ‘quick launch’ area. The similarities end there however as when you click this icon it the application launches but doesn’t create a new group within your taskbar; the quick launch icon essentially becomes the menu group if you wish to click back to your Firefox session or launch another instance of the browser. Windows 7 handles multiple instances of one application by ‘stacking’ the icons within the taskbar rather than relying on the incredibly inefficient grouped application menus used in XP and Vista.

The application can be accessed from the Accessories folder from the programs section of the Start Menu and the version you will be using is dependent on your version of Windows. Those who have Windows XP with the latest service pack installed (this will have most likely been done automatically) will be using version 2.1 however if you own Windows Vista then you will be using version 6. This skip in version numbers is due to the fact that 3, 4 and 5 were skipped to bring the program version number in line with that of the Operating System (Vista is the release name for what is essentially Windows 6.0).

Windows Movie Maker is ideal for those that want a program which will allow them to edit their home movies both simply and effectively. It is geared more towards the home user than the professional so whilst features present in more advanced software applications may be missing, this will be compensated for in both speed and ease of use.

The layout consists of a simple storyboard which you then drop in your existing video clips with the ability to split up longer files as you see fit. This view can then be changed to a timeline so that you have full control as to how long any particular clip is present on screen, the choice and timing of the background music as well as being able to select any appropriate titles which will overlay at any particular moment.

When shifting between scenes, rather than just flipping from one section of film to another, you can select transitions so that sections can blend seamlessly together. You are also able to instantly apply a number of effects to individual clips including simple tools such as brightness increase and picture rotation as well as more advanced effects such as pixilation, focus shift and picture warping. You can make sections of your film appear older by adding a sepia tone or selecting individual scenes to appear as though they are being played on an old projector.

Whilst most popular formats are supported, there are a few widely used formats such as MOV, MP4 and 3GP which have been left in the cold. If your digital camera or camera phone uses one of these formats then you will have to obtain a converter first off to make it in to something more suitable such as an MPEG or AVI format. There are plenty of free of charge applications which will be able to easily achieve this available from a site such as Freeware Files (www.freewarefiles.com).

One impressive feature is the ‘Auto Movie’ function which allows you to import an entire movie file which Windows Movie Maker will then edit for you based on a predefined style – it will analyse the movie, split it down in to multiple scenes then automatically apply effects, transitions and background music along with titles. This function isn’t infallible as it relies on a certain degree of calculated guesswork but nevertheless this is an impressive way to quickly and easily create an edited product.

Once finished, your movie can be saved to a file which can then be stored, distributed or uploaded to the Internet or alternatively it can be burnt to a DVD. The results you get won’t be studio quality but will certainly stand apart from the long, unedited and wholly unprofessional movies that are often produced at the end of a summer holiday.

If I can just clarify to my readership that Windows Vista is a good Operating System and in terms of bugs and security vulnerabilities it’s light years ahead of how Windows XP was this far into its distribution cycle. I’m not saying that you should rush out and buy it tomorrow if you’re happy with XP, but all I am saying is that if buying a new machine and you’re given the choice then definitely go the Vista route.

Other than which edition you’re going to get (Home Basic, Home Premium, Business or Ultimate) there is an equally important consideration in whether you’re going to go for the 64 bit or 32 bit version of Windows and unfortunately this is a consideration that’s often overlooked.

Ultimately your choice may have already been made for you by the system manufacturer; if your system only has a 32-bit processor then you can only use the 32-bit version of Windows. Those lucky enough to be buying a 64-bit processor will have the choice of going for either the 64 or 32-bit version of Windows and as such this article will be focusing on these users. If you’re not sure what on earth I’m talking about here I should probably explain a little more about what a processor is and how it works.

The processor could be considered the most central part of your computer and is responsible for performing the billions of calculations that are performed every time you use your machine. There are a number of measures that can be applied to a processor to determine how powerful it is but one of the primary considerations is how many bits of information it can handle at any one time. My old Commodore 64 could handle 8 bits of data at once, most current PC processors can handle 32 bits and the newer, more powerful models can often handle 64 bits.

I feel that this oversimplification could be misleading as there are of course a million other factors that play a part in the performance of the processor; another important consideration for example is how many thousands of times a second the processor can move these bits of information around. Suffice to say, a 64 bit processor should perform better than a 32-bit processor of similar specification as long as it’s using software written to take advantage of the additional data handling capability.

As these processors are backwards compatible, you can install a 32-bit version of Windows on your 64-bit processor but as a result your machine will not be able to take advantage of this additional data bandwidth and you will be essentially handicapping your new processor; this is where the 64-bit version of Vista comes in to play. Whilst it is true that Microsoft did release a 64-bit version of Windows XP it unfortunately never gained any real support and as such was never developed in to a viable platform.

With 64-bit processors becoming commonplace and with a large wave of support for these new, more powerful versions of Vista it looks like 64-bit computing has finally arrived so now there are important decisions to be made. I think I have explained the primary speed advantage however there are also a number of other benefits from making the switch and rather predictably a large number of disadvantages. As this decision is an important one I plan next week to go over both sides of the argument so that you can decide which version is right for you.

My first observation would be that I am completely unable to ascertain why such a development took so long – Microsoft started production on their new OS way back in 2001 and it seems bizarre to me that it took their best programmers until 2007 to come up with the finished product. As much as I liked Windows XP there is no escaping the fact that an update was well overdue and now we’re left asking ourselves whether was it worth the wait?

So that I can get them out the way I want to make my criticisms known from the start. First off Windows Vista eats low powered machines for breakfast; I had a relatively new AMD Sempron 2800+ with 512mb of RAM and a 64mb graphics card which Vista just annihilated. A couple of hardware upgrades later (1Gb of additional RAM, 256mb graphics card) and the new OS is running perfectly – for some this hardware upgrade cycle isn’t a problem but those with low powered machines on a limited budget should beware.

I also don’t like the fact Microsoft have given a choice of five different versions to choose from as this can only serve to confuse the end and additionally we in the UK we are paying such a disproportion amount extra when compared with our US cousins.

Despite having said the above, yes, I do like Vista and no, given the choice I wouldn’t go back to Windows XP.

When you first install Vista the only real differences you notice is the shiny new graphical interface which in many ways is more gimmicky than genuinely useful. For example there is an alternative to <ALT + TAB> for cycling through the opened programs that displays all the opened applications you have stacked one at a time in 3D. Additionally items such as the tops of windows, the start menu and so forth are semi opaque and features such as these don’t really offer me any real advantages other than to look pleasing to the eye. I suppose if you spend your days, like I do, looking at a computer screen then such features will make serve as an improvement as if you’re to spend your time using an Operating System it might as well be pleasing to look at.

Most the real improvements won’t even be noticed by the end user but that doesn’t mean to say that they’re not important. Microsoft was hit hard in Windows XP with viruses such as the Blaster Worm which crippled PC’s all over the world and served as a nice little revenue stream for computer repair people everywhere. When it came to creating Vista Microsoft actually gave early versions of the Operating System to software hackers and simply told them to ‘break it’ so that hopefully any major security issues would be discovered before the software was finalised.

Two features I do particularly like are as follows. When using a flash memory drive you can allow Vista to use it to cache commonly used programs and data. This reduces the need for Windows to use relatively slow ‘virtual memory’ on your hard disk so your system speed should be increased as a result. Additionally the search functionality is so, so much better than under Windows XP – I found it infuriating how long it took to search for an item under XP but in Vista when I look for something it searches my hard disk and outlook messages in a matter of seconds rather than minutes.

There have been many improvements to the applications present within Windows which I’d like to cover but unfortunately as I have already overrun my space for this week you’ll have to wait until next Friday for the second part of this Vista roundup.

Whilst I’m not saying there is anything wrong with this new version, it does seem strange that Microsoft has taken so long to include features that have been freely available for years through alternative browsers. In the interests of a fair review however I will detail the new features this new browser will offer for users still using Internet Explorer 6.

The main emphasis on the new browser seems to revolve around four main features – Improved security, tabbed browsing, RSS feeds and simplicity.

With Internet Explorer 7 Microsoft has managed to close the numerous security vulnerabilities present in the previous version although how long it will be before numerous holes are found in the new browser is yet to be seen. The browser also benefits from a built in anti-phishing filter to protect users against fraudulent websites such as those that masquerade themselves as PayPal or an online banking service in an attempt to fool you in to giving them your personal information. The security issues present in the older version of Internet Explorer would explain why Microsoft will be making sure that this November anybody using automatic updates in Windows XP will have the new browser installed automatically.

Tabbed browsing which has been available for many years through the likes of Firefox and Opera allows users to have several different websites open in tabs using just one Internet Explorer window. The quickest way to open a new tab whilst browsing is to either hold <CTRL> whilst clicking a link or hit Alt & Enter if you wish to open up a new blank window. To navigate around the tabs simply click the relevant tab from the just below the address bar within Internet Explorer.

RSS feed support is present in the browser and rather than just matching the features present in the current version of Firefox Microsoft has actually improved on them. I have covered RSS feeds before in Click so won’t dwell too far but for those readers who are unaware, RSS feeds are an easy way to subscribe to news and articles websites and so this new addition is welcome.

In terms of simplicity the interface has been streamlined so that all the menus are hidden by default and instead have been logically replaced beneath several different icons – For example, the Page icons drops down a separate menu which lets you copy, paste, change the text size and so on. Personally I hate this new interface as it completely disregards the standardisation which makes most Windows applications so easy to navigate. Die hard users such as myself who prefer the old style can revert the interface to something more familiar although I have kept the new interface running for the time being to see if I can be converted.

All in all this new version of Internet Explorer doesn’t really do enough to put Microsoft ahead of alternative browsers available and whilst I have installed it on my machine I will probably stick with my old, faithful Firefox for now. If you are still using Internet Explorer 6 you should without fail download the newer version now from www.microsoft.com as to not do so would be denying yourself of several years of progress.

Personally I have always stayed away from participating in this kind of customisation because the majority of software on the market is either supported by advertising, costs money or is extremely bloated and slows down your machine. As you know I hate software that loads when you start the machine and a lot of the theme managers that I encountered sat continually in memory managing your themes. That attitude of mine changed recently when researching software that I could write about for this weeks article when I found a tiny little program that will modify Windows so that you can easily add unsigned (not Microsoft) themes so that you can then download any of the freely available designs without having to resort to using third party software to install them for you.

To locate this program either do a search on Google for ‘UXTheme Multi-Patcher 4.0’ or I found a copy of it online at http://www.windowsx.cc/download/nw_uxpatcher.zip – Simply download and run the file and then when Windows complains that some files have been replaced with unrecognised versions simply hit ‘cancel’ and then reboot your machine. You are now able to go to any of the Windows XP theme websites and start downloading and installing customisations for your machine.

I would recommend that your first port of call be http://themes.belchfire.net as all the themes available on this site are completely free to download – the site is well designed and is sponsored by minimum advertising. Online you will not only find several hundred themes that you can download but also boot screens, logon screens and wallpaper along with icons to replace the standard ones used for programs, utilities, your toolbar and taskbar. Searching through such a comprehensive resource list is made easier by allowing you to enter certain keywords or to filter your selection by specifying whether to sort by popularity, date, rating or the artist. Once downloaded simply go to your display settings (Control Panel > Display) then click on ‘Appearance’ and browse for your theme in the location you saved the saves. If you feel like using one of the more advanced utilities for managing your profiles these are also available to download although do note that some of them to require payment.

Of course, you don’t need to stop there; using a decent search engine such as Google to locate further themes or to discover tools that will allow you to create your own. Do make sure that with any programs you download that you do read the instructions FULLY as we are messing around with the way that Windows looks and behaves and you obviously want to make sure that you’re comfortable with what you’re doing.

If you have quarter of an hour to kill this weekend; give it a go. You may decide that you don’t like your new look Windows but it can be changed as many times as you like or even reverted back to its previous state should customisation not be right for you.