Kaspersky Internet Security 2015—Multi-Device review: new interface, same excellent protection

Given that the average person owns several Internet connected devices, straight PC security doesn’t really cut it anymore. That’s why companies like Kaspersky are starting to offer cross-platform solutions for marginally more than their traditional PC-only antivirus programs.

For just $70 a year, Kaspersky Internet Security—Multi-Device 2015 protects up to five devices, including PCs, Macs, and Android phones and tablets. In addition to antivirus, you get some useful Android safety features such as anti-theft and loss protection, remote management, and automatic app scanning.

Kasperksy polished Internet Security's interface, but it remains touchscreen friendly.

Kaspersky remains one of the best antivirus programs on the market: Independent security research institute AV-Test found no major differences between the 2014 version of Kaspersky’s software (which received our highest score in this year’s security showdown) and the 2015 version.

Kaspersky Internet Security 2015—Multi-Device offers an array of protection for Android phones and tablets.

In AV-Test’s real-world tests, Kaspersky Internet Security—Multi-Device 2015 successfully blocked all 31 malicious URLs. In the “malware zoo” test, which evaluates a software’s ability to identify and block widespread known malware discovered within the last month, Kaspersky successfully detected and blocked 12,608 samples out of 12,618. The suite also got a perfect score for distinguishing between threats and non-threats. Performance-wise, the suite is similar to the 2014 software, which was one of the lightest programs in our recent round-up.

But while the software offers virtually the same protection, Kaspersky has revamped the interface. It’s still very touchscreen-friendly, with large buttons and toggle switches and larger-than-average checkboxes in the settings menu, but the overall look is more polished.

The main screen features a computer monitor—with a check mark denoting your PC is protected and a red X indicating it’s not—and four menu buttons: Scan, Update, Safe Money, and Parental Controls.

The Scan button takes you to a more detailed menu where you can run a full scan, quick scan, custom scan, scan your removable drives, or set up a scan schedule. Safe Money is Kaspersky’s online banking and payment protection software—selecting it allows you to add a list of websites you want to use with Kaspersky’s Protected Browser for extra ecommerce protection.

Kasperksy's main screen on a Mac.

Additional tools, accessed via a link in the lower right corner of the window, include “Browser Configuration,” a wizard that helps you optimize web browser settings; “Privacy Cleaner,” which clears your computer of recent commands and accessed files; and “Cloud Protection,” which connects you to Kaspersky’s Security Network and offers “instant response to new threats.”

Kaspersky always does a great job with its settings menu, which you can access by tapping the Settings link in the lower left corner of the main window. It’s organized into five categories (General, Protection Center, Performance, Scan, and Additional), and features touch-friendly controls and easy-to-understand explanations, even in the more advanced settings screens.

The bottom line

Kaspersky’s Internet Security—Multi-Device 2015 is easy to recommend if you’re a device junkie. Protection and performance are excellent, and this year’s interface is more polished than its predecessor without losing any usability. If you’re just looking for PC protection, you can save $10 with Kaspersky Internet Security 2015, which costs $60 for one year of protection for up to three PCs.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Webtrate review: An Internet blocker for people with absolutely no self-control

Webtrate $8.00 An effective distraction blocker if you're one of the few who can afford to work completely without Internet access.

Buy Now

As a freelance writer, I am intimately acquainted with procrastination. Once I finally sat down to write this article, I spent three hours checking email, getting into comment wars on Facebook, and generally avoiding having to download Webtrate, an app that I knew would block my Internet access and make me focus on the task at hand.

Webtrate is part of a growing trend: software that claims to increase your productivity by reducing distractions. In this case, the distraction Webtrate gets rid of is the Internet—unlike similar apps, which block time-sucking websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Buzzfeed on a case-by-case basis, Webtrate freezes you out of the Web altogether. This is not an app for the faint of heart.

Webtrate is the brainchild of Will Little, a playwright who discovered his utter lack of self-control after he was unable to complete a single play within one year. After realizing he was unproductive because he couldn’t stay offline, Little, along with a team of programmers and—surprise, surprise—freelance writers, created Webtrate to help boost his own output.

Getting started with Webtrate is quick and straightforward. I downloaded, unzipped, and installed it in under one minute. The program needs access to administrator’s rights, so you may need to enter your admin password during the installation process.

Webtrate opens as a small, blue window in which you can choose how long you want to be blocked from the Internet—from as little as one minute, all the way up to a masochistic 23 hours and 59 minutes. Webtrate also gives you two options for blocking the web. The first option gives you an “out,” because it only blocks the Internet until you restart the computer. The second option is iron-clad – Webtrate will continue to work even if you restart your machine. You can also enter a goal for your Internet-free time.

The Webtrate Work Plan window lets you track your productivity goals for each session.

The program will begin working as soon as you confirm your settings, though you may experience a slight lag—my PC froze for just a second. After this initial freeze, Webtrate didn’t appear to be particularly system-heavy, but I also wasn’t performing any CPU-intensive tasks.

When your Internet-blocking time is up, Webtrate will open a new window titled “Webtrate Work Plan.” Here, you can track your progress: you can tell Webtrate whether you accomplished your goals (your written goals will be displayed in the window), give yourself a star rating for effort, and detail what you actually achieved.

From there you can see graphs of your progress. The top graph displays your monthly “work achieved” and your average effort rating. The bottom graph displays your progress over the past year. These are only as accurate as you are. If you’re honest about the amount and quality of work you get done, here’s where you’ll be able to see if the Internet is actually what’s keeping you from being productive.

Graphs detail your progress for the month and year.

Webtrate is available for Windows and Mac OS X and costs $8 to download. It’s a solid application with a clean interface, and it does exactly what it sets out to do. That said, it has some shortcomings. For one thing, it lacks a timer, so there’s no way to see how long you have until you’re back online. On the one hand, this lends a Zen-like feel to the app—there’s no way to see the time, so you may as well not think about it. On the other hand, it’s annoying and problematic for people who work on deadlines or in collaboration.

Webtrate is also not for everyone. If you’re trying to finish a creative project, such as a script, book, or long-form article, Webtrate can help you stay focused and minimize all distractions. But if you’re a freelance writer or a telecommuter, it’s probably impossible for you to work completely Internet-less for long periods of time. Webtrate is an all-or-nothing deal and that limits its appeal.

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete review: Protection needs improvement

Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete ($52 for one year of protection on up to five PCs) offers an intuitive interface, very fast system scans, and a mobile security component. Unfortunately, it falls short where it counts: protection.

In our real-world (zero-day) tests, Webroot blocked just 82 percent of Web and email threats and unknown viruses—a comparatively weak showing, considering that half the suites in our roundup nailed all of them, and two others stopped 98 percent of the attacks.

Webroot did a better job of protecting against known malware (arising within 30 days of the testing), successfully blocking 99 percent of attacks. Microsoft Security Essentials blocked just 93 percent of known malware attacks). However, most of the other security suites in our roundup successfully blocked 100 percent of known malware attacks.

Webroot's polished, touchscreen-friendly interface is one of the highlights of its suite.

Webroot SecureAnywhere was overzealous in denouncing benign files as security risks, too. In our usability tests, the program flagged five legitimate programs (out of thousands tried) as dangerous.

Performance is a bright spot: Webroot SecureAnywhere earned a score of 0 on this measure, meaning that it won’t add any discernable time to your PC startups and shutdowns.

Once you’ve input your product keycode, installing Webroot SecureAnywhere becomes a one-click process. The main window is attractive and easy to understand at a glance. The entire window tints green if you’re protected, orange if you’re semi-protected, and red if you’re unprotected. In case that approach is too subtle for you, Webroot also posts a large banner that can be green, orange, or red, as well as a green checkmark, an orange exclamation point, or a red ‘x’ to reinforce your protection level.

The main window is divided into three sections. A white box under the protection-status banner shows scanning and subscription stats. Underneath that is a message and alert box with a quick link to Webroot’s online support site. To the right are several feature menus that you can tap to expand and gain access to some settings.

The clean, touchscreen-optimized interface is full of tappable buttons, tiles, and toggles. Clicking the Advanced Settings button will take you to a slightly less touchscreen-friendly menu. Webroot uses minimal jargon to explain most of the settings and features, and the menu is thoughtfully organized to make finding things easier.

If you have lots of PCs to protect, you’ll appreciate Webroot’s pricing structure, which covers up to five PCs for a year for $52.

Webroot is a breeze to install and it’s fairly user-friendly, but its protection falls a bit short of the competition’s. And when most of the suites we tested turn in fantastic performance, good just doesn’t cut it.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

AVG Internet Security 2014 review: a decent, lightweight antivirus suite

AVG Internet Security 2014 ($55 for one year of protection on one computer) is a decent security suite that gives adequate protection and adds little weight to your system. In our real-world testing scenario, the suite protected against 98 percent of all unknown (zero-day) attacks. It did an even better job of protecting against known malware, repelling 99 percent of those attacks. Still, half of the ten security suites in our roundup blocked 100 percent of zero-day threats, and all but three blocked 100 percent of known malware attacks.

AVG did well in our usability tests, not flagging any legitimate software or websites as dangerous. With a performance score of 3, it adds very little drag to your system.

AVG’s installation process asks you to choose a language, agree to license terms, enter your product key, and choose an express or custom install before getting down to business. It doesn’t ask to install any extra software (such as toolbars or browsers) or to change any settings (such as your homepage), however, so you should be able to click through these screens in a matter of seconds.

AVG's advanced settings menu is definitely for advanced users.

Compared to the other security suites in our roundup, AVG’s main screen looks a little cluttered. At the top of the screen it displays a large banner that’s green if you’re fully protected and red if you’re not. Under this banner are five large green tiles: Computer, Web Browsing, Identity, Emails, and Firewall. Each tile displays a warning if you are not secure.

Below this first line of tiles are five more tiles, slightly smaller and in teal: Fix Performance, Mobile Apps, Tablet Apps, Driver Update, and More from AVG. Two more tiles, in light teal, appear beneath those, containing buttons for scanning your system and checking for updates. Finally, the bottom of the screen hosts a white banner that lets you know how many days of protection you have left, depending on your subscription status.

This array of tiles makes AVG’s main screen seem a little overwhelming, and there’s no quick and easy way to get to the settings menu, either. The Advanced Settings area, which isn’t touchscreen-friendly, is indeed mostly for advanced users. AVG provides very few jargon-free explanations of its various settings.

AVG Internet Security 2014 offers good protection, but it’s perhaps most suitable for power users who want a lot of advanced options at their fingertips.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

McAfee Internet Security 2014 review: Intuitive interface, decent protection

McAfee Internet Security 2014 ($56 for one year of protection on up to three PCs) offers adequate protection and an intuitive interface. The installation process can be a chore, and finding specific settings can be difficult, but its main shortcoming is that it offers fewer features than some of McAfee’s other products, despite its higher price.

In AV-Test’s real-world protection tests, McAfee successfully blocked 98 percent of all zero-day malware attacks (including Web and email threats). Though quite good in comparison to Microsoft Security Essentials’ performance (71 percent of samples blocked in the same tests), that mark lags behind the perfect scores posted by Eset Smart Security 7, F-Secure Internet Security 2014, Kaspersky Internet Security 2014,  Norton Internet Security 2014, and Trend Micro Titanium Maximum Security 2014. Like most of the other suites, however, McAfee detected 100 percent of widespread malware that had been discovered in the month prior to the test.

In usability tests, the suite blocked a couple of legitimate software actions on suspicion that they were dangerous.

In AV-Test’s performance assessment, McAfee received a score of 5. This translates into slightly slower startup and shutdown times and some lag in opening programs.

McAfee Internet Security 2014's interface makes it easy to find your way around.

Installing McAfee Internet Security 2014 is somewhat arduous. First, the program scans for threats to ensure a smooth installation. Next, it asks you to log in to your McAfee account, using the email address and password that you used when you downloaded the program. Then it downloads the rest of the installer—which can take some time if you’re on a slow connection—installs the program, and requires a system reboot.

To its credit, McAfee Internet Security 2014 has among the best interfaces for Windows 8 touchscreens, with large buttons and banners that even clumsy fingers can easily tap. The main window has a large banner across the top that appears green if you’re protected, and red if you’re not. Below the banner are four large buttons for virus and spyware protection, Web and email protection, updates, and your subscription status. To the right of these buttons are three smaller buttons for data protection and backup, PC and home network tools, and parental controls.

Each section has its own settings menu—an arrangement that can be a bit confusing. Settings menus have clickable banners that you tap to open. Inside, they look like typical checkbox-and-radio-button menus. McAfee explains most of the advanced settings in simple language, and each menu features a ‘Learn more’ link that leads directly to the appropriate help section.

McAfee Internet Security 2014 offers reasonable protection and an intuitive interface, especially for Windows 8 users. But the company sells other products that offer greater functionality at a lower price. For example, McAfee All Access costs just $50 (for a limited time) and provides unlimited protection for all of your devices (including mobile), as well as online and social network protection. McAfee says that it continues to carry the Internet Security line for people who aren’t ready to switch to its all-inclusive products, which are equally effective against malware.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

F-Secure Internet Security 2014 review: bulletproof protection, bad user interface

Looking for ironclad protection? F-Secure Internet Security 2014 ($80 for the “lifetime” of your PC—up to seven years) is bulletproof, ranking among the best performers in AV-Test’s protection assessments. But its interface is another story: If you don’t think user-friendliness matters, wait until you see this suite.

Along with Eset Smart Security 7, Kaspersky Internet Security 2014, Norton Internet Security 2014, and Trend Micro Titanium Maximum Security 2014, F-Secure Internet Security 2014 offers the best protection of the ten security suites we tested. It protected our test systems from 100 percent of real-world (unknown, zero-day) malware attacks, including web and email threats, and it also shielded systems from 100 percent of widespread known malware attacks. F-Secure isn’t invincible—even Superman has a weakness—but it’s pretty darn close.

In usability tests, F-Secure identified five legitimate programs as threats during a routine system scan. That put it in a tie with Vipre Internet Security 2014 and Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete for the most false-positive flags in our roundup.

In AV-Test’s performance tests, F-Secure scored a 2, meaning that it imposed less strain on system resources than all but one of the other most effective malware-blocking suites, that one being Kaspersky Internet Security 2014.

No touchscreen-friendly tiles on this settings menu.

Installing F-Secure is arduous, with a few screens stretched across a long process. The first screen is a license and user agreement (no other suite has this). The second screen walks you through downloading the rest of the installer, which can take awhile if you have a slow connection. A third screen asks whether you want to participate in F-Secure’s real-time reporting program, and the fourth screen commences the actual installation process. F-Secure detects conflicting programs, such as rival security suites, and requests that you uninstall them before proceeding. And you’ll have to reboot your computer before the installation is complete.

Instead of using a big, touchscreen-optimized window, F-Secure opts for a small, unobtrusive launch pad that hangs out at the bottom of your screen. The launch pad has five buttons, for Computer Security, Online Safety, Safe Profile, Search, and F-Secure. Clicking Computer Security opens a window that’s closer to what you see in other suites: It provides a picture of a computer with a green checkmark (if you’re protected) or a red ‘x’ (if you’re not), and quick links to scan and settings. The window also includes tabs for tools (advanced scan, firewall settings, quarantined files) and statistics.

The settings menus are not designed for amateurs—they're full of checkboxes with little accompanying explanation. Each icon from the launch pad has its own settings menu, except ‘Safe Profile’ and ‘Search’, which are browser-based options.

We should also underscore F-Secure’s unique approach to pricing: Whereas most of the nine other suites in our security roundup charge between $40 and $80 for a single year of protection but offer coverage for between one and three systems, F-Secure charges $80 to cover only one PC—but its coverage lasts for seven years (only Vipre, which charges $50 for two years of coverage for a single system offers more than a one-year term of coverage). Its pricing structure makes F-Secure a real bargain if you have just one PC to protect.

F-Secure Internet Security 2014 may offer top-notch protection, but so do several other suites in our roundup. Unfortunately, the program’s antiquated interface mars an otherwise great product.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Norton Internet Security 2014 review: Polished security suite with excellent protection

Norton Internet Security 2014 ($80 for one year of protection on up to three PCs) looks great—and it offers excellent protection against all threats. Internet Security 2014 also provides mobile security, comprehensive parental controls, and system insights, so advanced users can track their PCs’ performance. But Symantec’s suite isn’t perfect: Its menus, settings, and features are geared a little more toward advanced users than toward security newbies.

In our protection tests, Norton Internet Security 2014 was excellent, on a par with Eset Smart Security 7, F-Secure Internet Security 2014, Kaspersky Internet Security 2014, and Trend Micro Titanium Maximum Security 2014. Norton successfully defended our test systems against all zero-day malware attacks and all zoo malware assaults. Norton’s algorithms didn’t block or erroneously warn against any safe websites, nor did it flag any legitimate software as dangerous.

In AV-Test’s performance test, Norton received a mark of 8, tied with Eset Smart Security 7 for the highest mark among the ten suites in in our roundup, and an indication that you can expect to see a significant performance hit—slower startup and shutdown times and lag when opening and installing programs—when the software is running.

Norton Internet Security 2014's interface is easy to navigate.

Installing Norton is a breeze, unless you have other security suites on your system (including trial versions). You must uninstall other antivirus programs before you can proceed with your Norton installation. Fortunately, Norton lets you uninstall incompatible programs from within its installer. The uninstalling process may require a restart, but a straight Norton installation does not.

Norton’s interface blends perfectly with Windows 8, with large buttons and toggles instead of tiny checkboxes. The main screen presents you with four large squares, for status (colored bright green if you’re protected, and red if you’re not), scanning, updating the malware library, and access to advanced settings such as network protection and parental controls. Along the top of the window are text links to other settings and services.

The settings menu is clearly designed for relatively advanced users. When you click the little question-mark boxes next to certain items, you jump to explanations on Symantec’s main support site, but Inline explanations—like those used in Kaspersky’s security suite—would have provided a more seamless experience.

Norton Internet Security offers excellent protection, albeit at some cost to PC performance. Its polished, touchscreen-friendly interface is a plus, but it isn’t especially accessible to novices.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

VIPRE Internet Security 2014: Adequate protection, interface needs a makeover

The name Vipre Internet Security 2014 sounds impressive. But this security suite ($50 for two years of protection on one PC) offers merely adequate protection, and its interface needs a makeover.

In our real-world (zero-day) tests, Vipre blocked 87 percent of unknown malware attacks, compared to 98 percent or better for most other products (only Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete fared worse than Vipre on this measure). Vipre performed extremely well against known malware attacks, however, successfully blocking 100 percent of them.

Though Vipre didn’t incorrectly tag any safe websites as threatening, it did flag five legitimate programs as dangerous in our usability tests. Only F-Secure Internet Security 2014, and Webroot SecureAnywhere (again) had as many false positives in our ten-suite roundup.

Vipre adds some bulk to your system resources, with a performance score of 7–that’s marginally better than Norton Internet Security 2014 and Eset Smart Security 7, but significantly slower than Kaspersky Internet Security 2014, F-Secure Internet Security 2014, and AVG Internet Security 2014, among others. With Vipre running, you may see some lag in startup and shutdown times.

Word links, checkboxes, and radio buttons don't fly in the touchscreen era.

Installing Vipre is a quick process, but it does require a system restart. The program identifies incompatible software, such as other antivirus programs, but it doesn’t require that you uninstall them before continuing (though it recommends that you do so).

The main console window has Vipre’s logo in the upper left corner, next to five tabs: Overview, Scan, Firewall, Manage, and Tools. The Overview screen shows you your protection level in four status indicators (scan status, protection, updates, and firewall). Each status indicator has a circle with a green checkmark (if you’re protected) or a red x (if you’re not), and a link to that status’s settings menu.

The other tabs offer more-advanced features, such as quarantine and scan schedules in the Manage tab, and ‘Social Watch’ and ‘History Cleaner’ in the Tools tab. Though the main buttons and tabs are touchscreen-friendly, most of Vipre’s interface is full of word links, checkboxes, and radio buttons.

Vipre’s settings menu needs a lot of work. You can access specific settings (such as settings specific to scanning, or to the firewall) from the main screen, but the menu is confusing, unintuitive, and not at all touch-optimized. The program doesn’t explain terms and features, though you can always click the Help button if you want to slog through VIPRE’s Help literature.

Vipre Internet Security 2014 pales next to the competition. The level of protection it offers is just adequate, and its interface lacks polish.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Kaspersky Internet Security 2014 review: An all-around performer

The best security suites are the ones you never notice, because they work silently in the background. But when you want to dig into the settings, you’ll appreciate dealing with a well-designed user interface that even a novice can understand.

Kaspersky Internet Security 2014 ($60 for one year of protection on up to three PCs) is one such suite. It offers great protection, and its design works well on touch and nontouch systems.

In AV-Test’s real-world battery of tests involving Web and email threats, Kaspersky blocked 100 percent of zero-day attacks, matching the performance of Eset Smart Security 7, F-Secure Internet Security 2014, Norton Internet Security 2014, and Trend Micro Titanium Maximum Security 2014, and making it one of the strongest security suites in our roundup. AV-Test’s baseline security program, Microsoft Security Essentials, blocked just 71 percent of zero-day attacks. Kaspersky also sailed through our malware zoo test (identifying and blocking widespread known malware that had been discovered within the previous month), stopping 100 percent of attacks.

Kaspersky Internet Security 2014: ready for touchscreens.

Kaspersky’s algorithm is tight: Internet Security 2014 didn’t flag a single nonthreatening website as risky, nor did it falsely block or issue warnings to users installing legitimate software. During system scans, Kaspersky didn’t flag any legitimate programs as unsafe. The most trigger-happy packages in our roundup—F-Secure, Vipre Internet Security 2014, and Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete—registered five false positives each.

Internet Security 2014 is also one of the lightest-impact suites in our roundup, scoring a 1 (a mark bested only by the far less effective Webroot SecureAnywhere suite) that reflects minimal adverse impact on overall system performance.

Installing Internet Security 2014 is easy. You have just four screens to click through, and the suite doesn’t try to push additional software or settings changes. The only potential hiccup during installation arises if Kaspersky detects “incompatible” software, such as a rival antimalware suite, in which case it asks you to uninstall the offending program. Uninstalling a competing suite may require a reboot, but simply installing Kaspersky’s suite does not.

Kaspersky’s interface is optimized for Windows 8 without having too distinctly a Metro style. Though buttons are large and easy to click, not every setting is a colorful square.

The main screen features a big computer icon with several large button icons beneath it. A checkmark on the computer icon indicates protection, and you can click the icon for details about any security issues. The buttons provide quick links for scanning your system, updating your security database, and accessing Safe Money, which protects your online banking and payment information. Tap an arrow to the right of these links for access to features including reports, parental controls, and quarantined files.

The top level of the settings menu is designed to meet the needs of regular people, with easy, touchscreen-friendly toggles and plain-English explanations for all settings. More-experienced users can click top-level settings to find additional options.

Kaspersky Internet Security 2014 is a well-rounded suite, with excellent protection, minimal strain on system resources, and a user-friendly interface. Its jargon-free settings explanations won me over last year, and now its protection capabilities are just as impressive.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Avast Internet Security (2014) review: short on security

Avast is a company perhaps best known for its free antivirus software. But paying for Avast Internet Security 2014 ($40 for one year of protection on one PC) will get you such premium features as a robust firewall, online banking security, and phishing and scam email protection.

Avast blocked 89 percent of zero-day (unknown) attacks in our real-world tests. That result may sound pretty good, but most of the suites in our roundup blocked 98 percent or more of such attacks. In our roundup, only Vipre Internet Security 2014 (at 87 percent) and Webroot SecureAnywhere Internet Security Complete (at 82 percent) fared worse in the real-world tests.

When it comes to known malware attacks, Avast looks better on paper, blocking 98 percent of those attacks, except that all nine other security suites in our test group blocked 99 percent or more of them. Avast’s detection system properly ignored all of the innocuous programs, websites, and installations that AV-Test threw at it.

Avast Internet Security has plenty of advanced options for those who like to tinker.

In AV-Test’s performance evaluations, Avast scored a low-impact 2—below average (in a good way) for a security suite. You system won’t take much of a performance hit by using Avast.

Installing Avast Internet Security 2014 takes you through just a couple of screens. Regrettably, one of those screens is a software push for installing Google Chrome as your default browser and the Chrome Toolbar for Internet Explorer. Ironically, one of the suite’s services is a browser cleanup tool that “removes annoying browser toolbars from your computer.” Avast’s installer relies heavily on the Internet, so the installation process can be time-consuming if you have a slow connection.

Avast’s interface is easy to use, but its multiple colors and font sizes say “freeware” rather than “premium security suite.” The main screen features a large banner that indicates protection level: A green checkmark is good, and a red x is bad. Under the main status are four buttons: ‘Quick scan’, ‘Browser cleanup’, ‘Mobile protection’, and an empty button that you can use to add a quick link to any feature (even help and support).

The rest of Avast’s options, including tools such as SafeZone (for banking and shopping protection), SecureLine (VPN), and a link to Avast’s online store, are discoverable through a menu on the left. VPN service is a nice extra: If you connect to a new network, Avast prompts you to select a protection level (private or public) to keep you safe while you’re browsing the Web.

Average users might find Avast’s settings menu intimidating. Few explanations accompany the top-level menus. The sheer quantity of advanced settings is daunting, and Avast’s explanations are geared toward fairly experienced users. Though the buttons and toggles are touchscreen-friendly, none of the menus let you tap and drag to scroll—you have to use the tiny, thin scrollbars instead.

Despite its clunky interface, Avast Internet Security 2014 offers many features you won’t find in other security suites. It could be worth considering if you favor range of features over ease of use.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Review: Trend Micro Titanium Internet Security 2013: An all-around winner

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

Trend Micro Titanium Internet Security 2013 ($50 for one year and three PCs, as of 12/19/12) certainly lives up to its name. This “titanium” security suite doesn’t let anything get through—in our tests, it earned excellent marks in just about every category. It also has a fairly user-friendly interface and a quick installation process, which makes it an all-around great pick.

In our real-world attack tests, which indicate how well an antivirus program will be able to block new malware attacks as it encounters them in the wild, Trend Micro’s suite completely blocked every threat that it faced. Needless to say, this means that the program will likely be able to keep you very secure, even when new malware programs are introduced in the future.

Trend Micro nabbed high marks in most of our other security tests. In our malware-zoo detection test, which exposes the program to a collection of malware that had been introduced in the preceding four months, Trend Micro’s package detected 100 percent of known malware samples. In our false-positive test, which checks to see whether a product mistakenly flags a known safe file as being dangerous, Trend Micro identified just one safe file (out of over 250,000) as malicious.

In addition, the suite did very well in our system cleanup test: It detected and disabled 100 percent of infections, and it managed to fully purge the system of 80 percent of those infections. This result puts it in second place, tied with G Data and Kaspersky, for total cleanup rate.

Trend Micro Titanium Internet Security 2013 is also a fairly speedy and lightweight program—most of the time. In our performance tests, the program added just 0.3 second to startup time (compared to a system that had no antivirus program installed), and 3 seconds to shutdown time. However, we found that it dragged down file copy operations more than most of its competition did.

The suite’s scan times were on the slow side, too, with an on-demand (manual) scan taking 1 minute, 50 seconds (as compared to the average time of 1 minute, 33 seconds), and an on-access scan requiring 5 minutes, 41 seconds (as compared to the average time of 4 minutes, 50 seconds).

Installing the Trend Micro package is a breeze—you have just three screens to click through and an optional registration screen (which asks only for your email address). Note, however, that the program does try to install three separate Firefox add-ons: a browser exploit prevention add-on, which blocks malicious code from running; a certificate add-on, which checks the safety of websites, links, and wireless network connections; and a toolbar add-on, which also apparently checks the safety of links.

Trend Micro’s user interface is relatively easy to understand, though it’s not as polished or attractive as AVG’s, F-Secure’s, or Norton’s. The main window has five tabs along the top: an Overview tab, and others for PC/Mobile, Privacy, Data, and Family. The Overview tab shows your protection status, along with some additional stats (such as how many threats have been stopped). This screen also has a scan button, a settings button, and a security-report button.

The PC/Mobile tab shows PC- and mobile-related security features, such as the system tuner and the rescue-disk creator, as well as links to get Trend Micro’s apps for your Android devices and Mac systems. The Privacy tab deals with social networking, the Data tab covers data security along with Trend Micro’s secure erase feature, and the Family tab holds parental controls.

The settings pane, which you can access via the first tab, features basic settings for virus and spyware controls, Internet and email controls, and exception lists. You’ll also find a button for other settings, such as system startup, network settings, and the background picture for your main window. Trend Micro’s settings don’t seem to be overly geared toward the advanced user, but the suite could still do a better job of explaining the settings and features within the program.

Overall, Trend Micro Titanium Internet Security is a great choice. This security suite boasts excellent performance, a quick installation process, a user-friendly interface, and speedy scans. Its settings pane is a tad confusing, but that’s a minor issue considering the protection you’ll be getting.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

AVG Internet Security 2013 Review: Adequate antivirus program gets a makeover

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

AVG has given its Internet Security suite a makeover for the new year. AVG Internet Security 2013 ($55 for one year, as of 12/17/12) now has a pretty, Windows 8-style tiled interface, complete with large, colorful buttons that are optimized for a touchscreen. That said, it seems as if AVG has put most of its effort into improving its program’s looks, as the suite managed a respectable, but below-average, showing in our tests.

In our real-world attack test, AVG completely blocked 94.4 percent of attacks and partially blocked 5.6 percent of attacks. This indicates how well the program will block new malware attacks when it encounters them in the wild, and this is a good score, actually. However, since five of the nine security suites we tested completely blocked 100 percent of attacks, this score still puts AVG in the bottom half of the list.

AVG’s ability to detect 97.8 percent of known malware samples seems respectable at first glance, but it’s actually the worst detection rate of all the suites we tested. All of the other security suites were able to detect at least 98.8 percent of malware samples, while the top contender in this category, Trend Micro Titanium Internet Security 2013, was able to detect 100 percent of samples. AVG also flagged five safe files (out of a pool of over 250,000) as being dangerous; while this isn’t a bad false-positive rate, almost all of our other tested
suites posted lower rates.

In our system cleanup test, AVG detected 100 percent of infections, but only disabled 90 percent, and only managed to completely clean up 60 percent. This isn’t a great rate—F-Secure Internet Security 2013 managed to completely clean up 90 percent of malicious files—but it’s also not the worst of the suites we tested.

AVG Internet Security 2013 is quick and fairly painless to install. It has just five screens to click through, and the program does not require you to reboot your computer. You do have to opt-out, rather than opt-in, of the company’s browser toolbar and SafeSearch. If you choose just to install the browser toolbar, AVG will still change your default search bar in Firefox to its SafeSearch bar.

AVG’s new interface is very nice—simple, clean, and totally in line with the look of Windows 8. The main window features large, brightly-colored tile-like buttons arranged in an easy-to-understand layout. At the top of the window is a protection status notification, which lets you know whether you’re protected (green) or in danger (red). Below this status lie five large green tiles.

These tiles are buttons that represent the suite's main security components: Computer, Web Browsing, Identity, E-mails, and Firewall. On each button there’s a little status notification that lets you know if that particular area is currently protected. Below these five green tiles are five smaller teal tiles that link to other security options and services from AVG: Fix Performance (installs AVG’s PC Tuneup program), Mobile protection (links to AVG’s free AV program for Android, iOS, and Windows Phone), Speedtest (links to Speedtest.net), TechBuddy (links to AVG’s remote tech-support program), and More from AVG (links to other
available AVG apps).

Finally, there are two turquoise buttons near the bottom of the screen: Scan now and Update now. The scan button lets you scan your computer or manage your scanning options, while the update button checks AVG’s website for updates to the program.

When you roll over any of the tiles or buttons, you’re presented with further information about that feature. This information pops up in the lower half of the window, underneath the rows of tiles. While this new tile look makes AVG’s software seem more user-friendly, the settings (in the Advanced Settings or Firewall Settings menus) are still a bit intimidating for non-advanced users.

The program itself is lightweight overall, but its scanners aren't the quickest. It adds about 1.5 seconds to startup time (as compared with a test PC that has no antivirus installed), and its overall impact on PC performance was low. The program completed our on-demand scan test in a mediocre 1 minute, 38 seconds (the sixth-best of the group), but its with on-access scan time of 6 minutes, 31 seconds was the worst of the suites we tested.

AVG Internet Security 2013 is a perfectly respectable antivirus program with a great new top-level user interface. But that’s the problem—in these malware tests, “perfectly respectable” doesn’t quite cut it, and we saw several programs that outdid AVG at nearly every turn.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

McAfee Internet Security 2013 Review: Proficient antimalware, super-quick installation

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

McAfee Internet Security 2013 ($40 for one year of protection on up to 3
computers, as of 12/19/12) didn’t manage top marks in our security suite tests,
but it’s still a fairly proficient antimalware program that will keep you relatively
well-protected. This security suite, which boasts a simple user interface and
a super quick installation process, scans your system quickly and efficiently.
However, McAfee’s uninspired design and average performance makes it a less
attractive choice compared to its competition.

In our real-world attack test, McAfee was able to completely block 94.4 percent
of attacks. Unfortunately, this means that it did let through 5.6 percent of
attacks, allowing our test system to get infected. This test indicates how well a
product will be able to block brand new malware attacks as it encounters them
in the wild—and of the nine security suites we tested, only two let such a large
percentage through.

That said, McAfee was competent at cleaning up malware infections once they
were already on the system. In our system cleanup test, the program detected
and disabled 100 percent of infections, and fully cleaned up 70 percent of
infections. Five of the nine security suites we tested performed better than
McAfee in this test, completely cleaning up at least 80 percent of infections.

McAfee had an excellent false positive percentage: It didn't flag a single safe file
(out of over 250,000 files) as malicious. It also did a very good job at detecting
known baddies: in our malware “zoo” detection test, it managed to detect 99.9
percent of known malware samples.

McAfee adds just a little extra weight to your system, performance-wise. In our
PC speed tests, the program added a little less than one second to startup time,
and about four seconds to shutdown time. McAfee’s scan times are slightly
higher than average: It takes one minute and 35 seconds to complete an on-
demand (manual) scan, and five minutes for an on-access scan (the automatic
scan that happens when you open or save a file to a disk). In both cases, that's
about average for the suites we tested.

Installing McAfee Internet Security 2013 is a breeze. There are just three screens
to click through, the program doesn’t try to install any extras (such as toolbars) or
change any of your settings (such as your default browser search), and it doesn't
require a restart is required.

McAfee’s user interface, though uninspired, is simple and easy to understand. It’s
not very attractive (the main window is gray with green and blue accents), but it
does have a large banner at the top that shows your protection status, along with
four small modules so you can quickly access important security areas. These
areas include virus and spyware protection, Web and email protection, updates,
and your subscription information. There are also three smaller modules that let
you quickly access McAfee’s other services, including data protection tools, PC
home and network tools, and parental controls.

On the right side of the main window are links to navigation and help. The
navigation section is where you’ll find the main settings, as well as information
about each of the suite’s features. You can also click the modules on the main
window to access settings for individual features. The settings menus are a
little difficult to navigate, but McAfee does offer up simple explanations for each
area, as well as a “Learn more” link that takes you to the a relevant online help
document.

McAfee offers decent protection and a user-friendly interface, but overall it’s
just average—nothing about it is too impressive, but it’s also not terrible. Its
protection, performance, and documentation are mediocre, while its user
interface is bland and uninspiring (though easy to navigate and understand). It’s
not a bad program, but there are better security suites out there.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

Review: Avira Internet Security 2013: Competent but confusing

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

Avira Internet Security 2013 is an acceptable antivirus program—if you happen
to be an expert in security jargon and working your way through a somewhat
unfriendly user interface. This particular security suite passed our tests (though,
not with flying colors) and even managed to come out on top a couple of times,
but it’s not for the average user.

In our real-world attack test, Avira managed to completely block 94.4 percent
of attacks, and partially block 5.6 percent of attacks. This indicates how well
the product will block new malware threats when it encounters them in the wild.
While this result is solid, it’s not good enough compared to the top competitors:
Five out of the 10 security suites we tested managed to completely block all
attacks.

In our malware-zoo detection test, which determines how well a product can
detect f known malware, Avira detected 98.8 percent of samples. Although
respectable, this percentage still puts Avira in the bottom half of the suites we
tested—six suites managed 99 percent or higher detection.

Avira was able to detect and disable 100 percent of malware infections in our
system cleanup test, but was only able to purge them completely about 50
percent of the time: That’s the worst cleanup rate of the suites we tested. Avira
did perform impressively well in our false positives test; it didn't flag a single safe
file as malicious.

Avira is a fairly lightweight program, and it won’t slow down your computer
too much. It adds less than a second to startup time (as compared to our test
computer without any antivirus software installed), and roughly two seconds to
shutdown time. Avira's suite did drag down file downloads more than we'd like,
though. It’s acceptably quick with on-demand scans (1 minute, 41 seconds, the
fifth-best of the group), and also fairly speedy with on-access scans (4 minutes,
26 seconds, the fourth-best of the group).

Avira’s installation process isn’t the quickest, but it’s fairly easy to get through.
There are about six screens to click through, and the last one requires some
basic personal information—your name, email address, and country. You are able to opt-out of installing the toolbar and Avira SearchFree (if you choose to
just install the toolbar, Avira will change your default search to SearchFree).
You’ll also need to restart your computer once the installation process is finished.

When you first restart your computer, you’ll be inundated with pop-up windows
from Avira as the program tries to determine which of your already-installed apps
should be able to access the Internet. This can be annoying if you’ve got a lot of
apps (including things like AIM and Yahoo Widgets), but luckily Avira remembers
what you choose to allow.

Avira’s user interface isn’t very straightforward. The main screen has a large
checkbox on top that shows whether your computer is secure, and smaller
checkboxes to show PC protection and Internet protection. The left side of the
screen has options for different types of protection (PC protection, Internet
protection, child protection, mobile protection), as well as an administration
section for scheduling scans and viewing reports.

However, clicking on any of these links in the left bar is just…confusing. Screens
are clearly set up for advanced users: For example, if you tap “Web Protection”
under the Internet protection section, it shows you non-user-friendly information
such as what the last scanned URL was. If you tap “Avira Firewall,” you’ll see
the current security level of the firewall and what that means—“Flooding and
Portscans are prevented.” While this information is great if you’re an advanced
user, it means nothing to the average consumer.

The settings are also difficult to access and very confusing. Each screen has
a “configuration” button, which requires you to turn on “Expert” mode (as if
you aren’t already in it?) and takes you to a terrifying, jargon-filled menu full
of checkboxes and nested menus. At least there are descriptions of different
settings in this screen (they pop up in a box when you roll over them).

At the end of the day, Avira Internet Security 2013 is a competent antivirus
program. But being merely competent isn’t a great thing, especially when it’s
combined with an interface that's for advanced users only.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

Review: F-Secure Internet Security 2013: First-rate protection and usability has a small performance price

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

F-Secure Internet Security 2013 (about $73 for one year and one computer, as of 12/19/12) came in first in several of our malware detection, blocking, and removal tests. It successfully blocked attacks, detected and disabled infections, and proved adept at cleaning up all traces of malware, landing at the top of this year’s security suite roundup.

In our real-world attack test, F-Secure completely blocked 100 percent of attacks. This test indicates how well the product will successfully block new malware attacks as it encounters them in the wild. But F-Secure wasn’t unique: Of the nine security suites we tested, four others also managed to completely block all attacks: Bitdefender, G Data, Norton, and Trend Micro.

F-Secure also put up great scores in our malware-zoo detection test: The suite detected 99 percent of known malware samples. This score puts it in the top five of the security suites we tested, though it’s at the bottom of that group (G Data, McAfee, Norton, and Trend Micro all posted detection rates of 99.7 percent or higher). F-Secure flagged just two safe files (out of over 250,000) as malicious, which is a good false-positive rate overall. However, since four of the suites achieved a perfect score in false-positive testing, and two suites flagged only one safe file as malicious, on this measure F-Secure still ends up in the bottom half of the list.

In our system cleanup test, F-Secure performed very well. In fact, it’s at the top of the list (alongside Bitdefender) after detecting and disabling all infections on our test PC and completely removing 90 percent of infections. So F-Secure should effectively dispatch any malware it finds on your machine.

While F-Secure does an excellent job of detecting, disabling, blocking, and cleaning up malware, all of this power comes at a price (a small one, to be sure): F-Secure added 6 seconds to startup time (compared to a system with no antivirus software installed)—the worst showing out of all of the suites we tested. It also added 5 seconds to shutdown time. F-Secure performed well in the rest of our PC speed tests overall, but it significantly slowed application installation.

Scanning speeds were better, though. F-Secure took second place in both on-demand (manual) scan tests (1 minute, 16 seconds) and on-access (automatic) scans (3 minutes, 50 seconds). Both results are better than average by a healthy margin.

The suite installs quickly and easily, with just four screens to click through and no restart required. It doesn’t install any extras (such as a toolbar), nor does it change any of your default settings. It does install a launcher, which is what you open when you double-click the program’s system tray icon. The launcher has three buttons to take you to different program screens: a computer-security screen, an online-safety screen, and a third for F-Secure’s website.

F-Secure’s user interface is sleek and easy to understand. It presents a large round checkmark (or X mark) that shows your protection status, as well as three modules for checking your security status, F-Secure’s extra tools and features, and statistics and reports. Below these modules is a scan button, an update button, and a settings button. The settings are fairly easy to get around, and each screen has a quick explanation of what the feature does and how it works.

With excellent protection and a user-friendly interface, F-Secure is definitely worth a look. This security package adds a little extra weight to your system, but if you can get past those performance issues, it’s a great program.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

Review: Norton Internet Security 2013: Solid performer with a polished interface

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal

Symantec’s 2013 edition of Norton Internet Security ($50 for one year and three PCs, as of 12/19/12) is a solid performer with a polished, touch-optimized user interface. This security suite didn’t totally dominate its competitors, but it did completely block, detect, and disable all malware in our real-world tests, and it performed well enough overall to snag second place in our roundup.

Norton’s excellent showing in our real-world attack test indicates that it should be effective at blocking brand-new malware attacks as it encounters them in the wild. As noted in the F-Secure review, of the security suites we tested, four others were also successful at completely blocking 100 percent of attacks: Bitdefender, F-Secure, G Data, and Trend Micro.

Norton produced stellar—though not absolutely perfect—results in detecting known malware. In our malware-zoo detection test, the program successfully detected 99.8 percent of known malware samples. Norton Internet Security also put up a perfect score in our false-positive test: It didn’t mistakenly identify any safe files, out of more than 250,000, as being malicious.

Norton does an acceptable job of cleaning up a system that has already been infected, but it missed some infections completely in our evaluation. In our system cleanup test, the program detected and disabled 90 percent of infections, and completely cleaned up 60 percent of infections. This is a decent but not fantastic showing—seven of our tested suites detected and disabled 100 percent of infections, and six cleaned up all traces of infection at least 70 percent of the time.

On the other hand, Norton Internet Security is a relatively lightweight program that won’t bog down your system. It added about half a second to startup time (compared to a PC that had no antivirus program installed), and also added 3 seconds to shutdown time; in all of our other speed tests, it was faster than average. Norton is faster than average when it comes to scanning speeds, as well. The package required just 1 minute, 19 seconds to complete an on-demand (manual) scan, and 2 minutes, 55 seconds to complete an on-access scan—both are times that represent better-than-average results.

Norton’s interface is very polished and simple, and the program installs with just one click. The main window has tilelike buttons, which look designed to work well with Windows 8 touch systems. You’ll find four tiles on the main screen: a tile that shows your protection status, along with information about your CPU usage; a ‘Scan Now’ tile; a LiveUpdate tile (which you’d use to install any updates to the suite); and a tile for advanced settings. You can also access the settings via the Settings tab, which is located at the top of the screen.

The settings menu is relatively easy to navigate, though it has more options than a beginning user really needs. Still, Norton does a good job of explaining different features and toggles, and a little help button (which takes you to Norton’s online support site) is always located next to confusing terms.

The 2013 version of Norton Internet Security is definitely worth a look, especially if you’re a Windows 8 user.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

Skype turns the Internet into your own personal telephone line

https://twitter.com/markoneill

Expatriate Scotsman now living in Wurzburg, Germany, freelance writer, frustrated future bestselling author, obsessed bibliophile. Other interests include trying to understand The Architect in the Matrix movies, decrypting codes and ciphers, and trying to persuade my landlord and my wife to let me have a Highland Cow for a pet.
More by Mark O'Neill

Skype is a free software app that for most people needs no introduction. It has been on the scene for nearly a decade and has transformed the telecommunications industry by offering a cheap way to make long distance phone calls.

Skype allows you to make telephone calls over the Internet. All you need is the app from the Skype website and a headset. If you want to make video calls, a webcam is also needed.

Installing Skype is a breeze so you shouldn't be put off using it by the thought of any complicated setup and steep learning curve. It really is just a case of installing the program, creating your user account and you're all set to go.

Calling other Skype users is free for as long as you want, wherever they are in the world, which is great if you have a child traveling the world or a spouse fighting with the armed forces.

View your contacts on the left of the Skype window and either call or instant-message them.

The only time you have to pay is when you are calling someone who doesn't use Skype, such as when you are calling a landline or a cell phone number. But even then, the rates are extremely cheap. With rates around roughly 1 cent a minute, it would be hard to get closer to free.

These low rates have driven many people to abandon their landlines in favor of using Skype. But you should be aware that call sound quality can vary at times, plus some countries do not allow calls to emergency services using Skype. So do your homework into these issues before ditching your landline.

As with any communication app of this kind, instant messaging comes as standard and is a pleasure to use. You can also send text messages (SMS) to cell phones (provided you have the necessary Skype credit) but sometimes these SMS messages are slightly delayed, so you should not rely on the service for any important time-sensitive messages.

With the new versions of Skype comes Facebook integration where you can view your Facebook News Feed in a separate window as well as being able to log into Facebook Chat. Another new feature is Skype Wi fi, which enables you to use your Skype credit to pay for wi fi hotspot access by downloading a smartphone app, logging into the provided hotspots, and paying for it with your Skype credit. You can also pin your most frequently used contacts to the top of your contact list for easy access.

For heavy users of the service, there is Skype Premium, or alternatively a subscription package where you can buy calling minutes to one pre-chosen country every month for a set price. Skype Premium on the other hand gives you group video chat and group screen sharing–-all for a price, of course.

But Premium allows you to buy a one-day temporary access so you can "try before you buy," which is nice if you are hesitating to commit to any long-term financial arrangements.

This is one software app that everyone should have on their computer. It may have its small downsides, but it more than makes up for them in other areas.

From PC World. Shop computer and accessories from Amazon here

Intel May Muscle into Crowded Streaming Internet TV Business

Intel is next in the long line of companies dreaming of killing cable and launching a streaming Internet TV subscription service, according to a Wall Street Journal report. The Journal says the company has been meeting with content providers, hinted at building its own set-top box and hopes to launch the service by the end of 2012.

Though details are sparse, it sounds like Intel isn't simply making a Netflix or Hulu knockoff. Instead, Intel is attempting to bump the infrastructure of traditional cable TV subscriptions onto the Internet with a "virtual cable operator" that would "offer U.S. TV channels nationwide over the Internet in a bundle similar to subscriptions sold by cable- and satellite-TV operators."

Overthrowing traditional cable has been a long-standing aspiration for many other bigger companies, so it's a little strange to hear that Intel -- typically content building the chips that power PCs, OS X machines, and now smartphones -- is trying to succeed where Apple, Microsoft and Google (Intel briefly supported Google TV with its processors) have all failed.

One problem I can see right away are how oversaturated we are with set-top boxes for streaming content. Unless Intel options out its cable service to other devices, likely in the form of apps, consumers would be stuck with yet another little plastic box to share bandwidth with Internet-connected TVs and stack atop their Apple TV, Roku, TiVo, and Xbox 360.

Also, in the marketing scheme of things, Intel has comparatively little brand awareness. It's a household name, but only in certain neighborhoods. And when consumers are faced with the choice of going with familiar and beloved brands, like Apple or Amazon, choosing Intel somehow seems all the less likely.

Then there's the money. It's expensive securing premium content and can get even more expensive trying to keep it -- just think of how Netflix lost Starz even after offering $300 million for a slightly longer contract. Plus, most premium content providers aren't willing to relinquish their goods for any price. HBO is a great example here. HBO has its own streaming service, HBO Go, which is slowly being released to other devices but still requires an old-school monthly cable subscription.

Not to say that Intel doesn't have the money; its current market value is $137 billion, and when you compare that to potential competitors like Netflix ($6 billion), Intel's chances of scoring premium goods improves. However, compare that to Amazon ($83 billion) or Apple ($521 billion), add in the Journal’s projected cost of yearly content licenses ($38 billion), and financial feasibility gets even more dubious.

From PCWorld. Visit Amazon Computer and Notebook Center here

Avira Internet Security Suite 2012 Review: An Adequate Safeguard Against Malware

We couldn't find anything truly wrong with Avira Internet Security Suite 2012 ($60 for one year, one PC as of January 29, 2012), which ranked 11th in our 2012 roundup of Internet security suites. After all, the package protects against malware adequately, and although the interface isn't perfect, it's certainly usable. But in a year when so many suites are excellent performers, being adequate isn't enough to keep pace.

In our tests, the Avira software put up decent overall scores in malware detection and blocking. It fully blocked 92.3 percent of brand-new malware in our real-world detection tests--a good result, though slightly below average for the products we tested. With known malware, it was able to detect 99.68 percent of samples; despite that better-than-average outcome, Avira's suite wasn't quite on a par with the top performers in this test, which detected over 99.99 percent of samples.

False positives are a nonissue: The Avira suite mistakenly flagged only a single known safe file out of a pool of over 250,000 as being potentially malicious.

It proved capable at dealing with malware infections, too, as it detected and disabled all active malware infections on our test system. That said, it did leave behind malware remnants 50 percent of the time--slightly worse than average next to its rivals.

Avira's package had a moderate impact on overall PC performance as compared with the other suites we looked at. Its performance was average or slightly better than average in most tests we performed, though it seemed to struggle in two particular cases. Our test PC with the Avira suite installed completed our download test in 3 minutes, 12 seconds, which was by far our worst performance in that regard. In contrast, the average completion time for other suites was around 53 seconds; and without any antivirus installed, our test PC finished this test in 37 seconds. In addition, the Avira product slowed file-copying operations on our test PC significantly, wrapping up that test in 2 minutes, 56 seconds. Our test PC with other security software installed finished this test in 2 minutes, 2 seconds on average; without antivirus software, the PC sped through in 1 minute, 28 seconds.

Scan speeds were about average next to the other suites we evaluated. Avira's on-demand scanner--which runs when you manually start a scan--checked 4.5GB of files in 1 minute, 29 seconds, good enough for sixth place and 30 seconds faster than the mean. Meanwhile, the on-access scanner--which runs when you open or save files--finished in 4 minutes, 40 seconds (a slightly better-than-average result).

Avira's interface is usable for the most part, but it's nothing to write home about. The installation process steps you through a fairly standard wizard, though it will check for incompatible software before you install it. Avira's suite underwent a mini-makeover for 2012, with a redesigned main status screen. This new panel is a definite improvement over last year's interface: It's nicely laid out, and it gives you a clear status indicator as to whether you're protected. A 'Fix Now' button makes it easy to correct issues, and you can easily toggle suite components off and on from this main screen. Once you delve beyond the main screen, though, Avira's interface feels designed with experts in mind. I wasn't a big fan of the Avira firewall's insistence on asking me whether programs had permission to connect to the Internet when they attempted to do so the first time--especially since I had no idea what some of the programs it referred to were.

All in all, Avira Internet Security Suite 2012 is a lot like the company's 2011 offering: It isn't flashy, but it will do the job. Even so, Avira must do better if it wants to hang with the top performers in the increasingly competitive race for security supremacy.

From PCWorld. Visit Amazon Computer and Notebook Center here

Tested: Firefox 10 Can’t Catch Up to Internet Explorer, Chrome

 

Today marks the official release of Firefox 10, which adds new developer tools and changes the design of the navigation bar to show the forward button only in instances where it can be used. Mozilla’s update gives us a perfect opportunity to reassess the browser playing field, and that’s exactly what we did, pitting Firefox 10 against Chrome 16 and Internet Explorer 9 in a series of tests. The results show that the Mozilla project still has a lot of work to do if it wants to take back the number two browser position from Google or the number spot from Microsoft.

Using a Dell Inspiron 14z with a Core i3 CPU and 4G of RAM, we ran two web-based browser benchmarks: SunSpider and Peacekeeper on Firefox 10, Chrome 16, and Internet Explorer 9. We ran each test three times and then took the average. After that, we measured browser open times and available screen real estate on an ASUS ZenBook UX31 notebook with a Core i5 CPU and a SATA 6Gb/s SSD.

The SunSpider test measures a browser’s ability to execute a series of complex JavaScript functions. Because most web pages contain a lot of JavaScript, this test effectively shows how quickly the browser can render pages or perform dynamic actions. A shorter time result is better.

Firefox 10 completed the test in 276.3 milliseconds, putting it in between the 312.4 notched by Chrome and the 247.5 we got on IE 9. It’s still not the fastest. 

Peacekeeper is a synthetic benchmark where higher scores are better. On that test, Firefox 10 turned in a score of 1536, which  trailed IE 9's mark of 1483 and Chrome 16's 2918.

One of the least talked about performance features of any browser is its ability to open quickly (or not). Every millisecond you spend waiting for a program to launch is a millisecond you’ll never have again. We tested all three browsers’ open times on the powerful ASUS ZenBook UX31, because it has a blazing fast Sata 6Gb/s SSD that allowed each program to open at its fastest possible time.The results confirmed that Firefox is still a slowpoke. Chrome 16 opened in an average of 1.8 seconds and IE 9 in just 1.1 seconds while Firefox 10 turned in a relatively sluggish 2.4-second average, an eternity in particle physics. 

The more space its toolbars take up, the less space each browser has left for viewing web pages. So our final test entailed capturing a screen on each of the browsers and determining how many pixels of screen real estate each navigation bar takes up. Firefox has the largest navigation bar, with a height of 62 pixels, while Chrome’s and Internet Explorer 9's measure 48 and 53 pixels, respectively. 

Firefox 10 by no means bombed on our tests, but it didn’t give anyone a valid performance reason to switch to it or stay with it. The Firefox 10 results are in line with our previous browser showdowns, which similarly showed IE pulling ahead of Chrome and Firefox in terms of SunSpider rendering, application open times, and screen real estate. Chrome is the leader in Peacekeeper, but Firefox only appears to be a follower in all of our tests.

From Laptopmagazine. Visit Amazon Computer and Notebook Center Here