Apple's New Notebooks: What We Should Expect

By Charlie Sorrel

Photo: Umpa/Flickr

Tomorrow sees the unveiling of Apple’s new notebooks. What can we expect?

The official invitation, sent out just last Thursday, doesn’t offer much. We get the slogan, “The spotlight turns to notebooks” and a picture of a notebook, probably metal, partially illuminated by – you guessed it – a spotlight.

Reading the hieroglyphs of Apple’s promo material doesn’t bring much. Could the “spotlight” reference have something to do with the Mac’s Spotlight search function? Probably not.

Apple’s famous lock-down on product information has become less secure of late. Almost the only part of the iPod “Let’s Rock” event that wasn’t leaked beforehand was the shake-to-shuffle feature on the new Nano. This launch is shaping up to be just the same: Several Chinese forums have posted pretty convincing pictures of the case designs,

Both the MacBook and the MacBook Pro will be aluminum. The aluminum MacBook has been rumored since forever, and if we take the leaked shots as real, Apple is finally going all-metal in its Mac lineup.

We can also be pretty certain that the MacBook Pro will gain the chiclet-style keyboard of the Air and the stock MacBook, most likely in backlit black. Ditto the magnetic latch which holds the MacBook Pro closed — that little button is so 2001. The other advantage the current MacBook has over the MBP is the easy-to-swap hard drive. Along with the RAM, the HDD is a simple five-minute slot-in replacement. Expect to see this in the Pro.

Internally we can expect some more changes. Mac Cultist Leander Kahney hopes for 4GB RAM as standard in the MBP, and two in the MacBook. He also lists integrated NVIDIA graphics in the MacBook, something that rumor site Apple Insider corroborates, claiming to have “confirmed” the inclusion of NVIDIA’s MCP79. While this still shares the system memory, it is apparently faster and – probably more important for Apple – smaller than the Intel GMA950 which is currently used.

Touch Screen

So far, so evolutionary. What about surprises? The big expectation is a touch screen. We say no. Touch screens are just too hard to use in a notebook, unless Apple has also invented some kind of iSling to support your arm. We’d like to be wrong on this, but we doubt it.

Tablet Mac

Nope. We want it, desperately, but we don’t hink Apple is going to give it to us.

Netbook

This is more likely, although it won’t look like any of the other netbooks we know. Apple customarily comes late to the game, sitting and watching and then releasing its own, usually better, take on the current offerings. If Apple went to a party, it would turn up last and leave with the hottest girl there.

I think that the problem with an Apple netbook is the Intel Atom chip. Apple will be waiting for the new dual-core version. It’s entirely possible that Intel has already made a version for Apple, just as it released a smaller chipset early for the MacBook Air.

Another problem is screen size: Many application windows are just too big for a 10” screen”, so Apple would need to either update OS X (which neatly brings us back to the “resolution independent display” rumor of old) or add some fancy new workaround to the netbook, similar to the Air Disk for the MacBook Air.

We’d also expect to see some kind of 3G internet connectivity. Given that Apple has iPhone deals in place with telcos around that world, this should be pretty easy. And remember the musings from analysts about that $800 price point for a new MacBook? This could be achieved by a carier subsidy. A cheap Mac netbook with cheap, unlimited, always on data? Who wouldn’t buy that?

Original here

13 Great Free Backup Programs for Windows, Mac, and Linux

by Lee Mathews

Making sure you've got a reliable backup solution is a must for any user - and more so for an administrator. Why? Well, mostly because your users probably aren't very good at remembering to back up their own files. And so it falls to you to provide the right software for the job!

Backup software is a difficult category to tackle nowadays as the distinction between backup and synchronization apps has become a little blurred. Prices being what they are, my personal choice is to use external or removable hard drives for my backup chores - my current favorites are Bonkey and Cobian.

To make sure you've got plenty of options to choose from, I've split this list into three different categories so that you can choose from the options that are best suited to your environment.

Integrated Burning

Comodo Backup [win]
They do make than a great firewall. Comodo Backup is an excellent free solution. It has extremely flexible scheduling and notification options, supports FTP destinations, can burn multisession DVDs, and has a synchronization mode for quick realtime backups.

DFIncBackup [win]
As is the case with most backup applications, there's a free and paid version. The free one still handles CD/DVD backups, and it also does incremental .zip jobs as well - only backing up files that have changed or weren't present in your previous job.

SE Backup [win]
Sports a very simple interface, does CD and DVD burning and compression, and is available as a portable application. Scheduling isn't built in, but it supports command line launching with parameters which works very well with Windows' own Task Scheduler.

File Copy

Abakt [win]
Though it's no longer developed, Abakt is still a great choice. It's got a great file filtering system, supports 7zip and zip compression, file splitting, password protection, and does differential and incremental backups.

Areca [win]
Free, open source, and wicked powerful. Areca is loaded with features: compression, encryption, simulation, merging, transaction commit/rollback, filtering, and more. It's command line interface provides excellent automation options and Areca also supports scripting of post-job actions.

Bonkey [win] [mac]
The "Backup Monkey." If I was giving points for best mascot, this one would be a clear winner.

Bonkey runs on both Windows and Mac, and has a lot of great features. It supports email, FTP, and Amazon S3, compression, encryption, scheduling, and synchronization. It'll even back up MS SQL server databases.

Cobian Backup [win]
Apart from being a great application, Cobian's developer has an excellent tutorial online to help you get started. Though it is no longer open source, you may still download the last version that was (v8). There's also a portable version.

One of my favorite features of Cobian is its ability to handle pre- and post- job events. I use it to issue net stop and net start commands to ensure safe backups of our horrible, horrible point-of-sale system. Cobian also has the ability to control and monitor all its instances on your network from your own workstation.

JaBack [win] [mac]
Allows backup to FTP and email (as well as any drive on your computer or network), and sports a flexible scheduler. It also has a file monitor function that will perform backup operations whenever changes are detected.

Mathusalem [mac]
Offers FTP/SFTP, Amazon S3, WebDav, and SMB support for backups on OSX. Mathusalem can compress to zip and dmg, will resume failed uploads, and supports scheduling and command line launching. It's also open source.

Server-Based

Bacula [win] [mac] [linux]
Bacula is an enterprise grade network backup solution that runs on just about every platform imagineable. It's a much more complex system than the other options I've mentioned, but is extremely powerful and well-suited to a medium or large scale network.

BackupPC [win] [linux]
A Linux-based, client-free enterprise solution for backing up Windows and Linux machines. BackupPC uses SMB, tar, and rsync to extract backup data from client computers. It 's got a powerful web-based interface for administrators and users, and will even email reminders to users that have been remiss in performing backups.

It's a very flexible solution, and is open source.

NasBackup [win] [linux]
Uses a simple Windows GUI and rsync to perform backups from client machines to a central server. It'll do incremental backups, scheduling, compression, encryption, and the server offers useful per-client controls like limiting the number of versions to store and expiration dates. It also provides daily summaries via email.

Restore [win] [mac] [linux]
The self-proclaimed "reason backup was invented." It's definitely a great product, and full of terrific features. Its web interface is very easy to understand and use - and makes it easy for the mobile admin to monitor and control Restore from anywhere.

Restore supports FTP, WebDav, SSH/SFTP, and multiple revisions. It also provides powerful admin tools, making it easy to create and control users, groups, jobs, and scheduling.

Did I miss your favorite app? Share it with us...Admins everywhere will thank you!

Original here

Employees, not hackers, cause most corporate data loss

By Joel Hruska

Earlier this summer, we covered a report suggesting that the majority of corporate data loss comes from risky employee actions and systemic failures at the corporate level when it comes to implementing comprehensive IT security policies. Now, a new study from Compuware reports new information that supports Trend Micro's conclusions from back in July. The unsung heroes in the IT department, it turns out, may be doing a better job stopping outside hackers than they get credit for.

According to a new study (PDF, info required) from Compuware, IT departments should take a bow—only 1 percent of corporate data losses this past year were due to hackers. Unfortunately, the good news mostly ends there. Negligent employees are far and away the largest cause of data breaches, but IT managers also listed outsourcing and malicious employees (possibly ex-employees as well, one assumes) as two significant reasons why data breaches often occur.

Compuware reports that of the 1,112 IT practitioners it surveyed, 79 percent reported that their organization had experienced at least one data breach. That's an extraordinarily high number, but there are several intervening variables that may have inflated it.

• Compuware does not completely define the term "data breach." It provides an indication of what it means by describing a data breach as "the loss or theft of information about individuals such as consumer data, customer information, employee records, and so forth." That definition is more than adequate for a general discussion or description, but fails to address certain meaningful nuances.
• Compuware does not filter its results by magnitude; a breach that affected two million people is treated equally to one that impacted just two.
• Compuware does not filter by severity; this is where the subtle nuances of definition I mentioned earlier come into play. We know that a data breach involves the loss or theft of consumer data or employee records, for example, but no information on what, precisely, was stolen or exposed. If I'm a customer of JC Penney, and someone steals the list of customers who bought there over the past 24 months, I'm unhappy. If that list contained my home phone number and address, I'm concerned. If, on the other hand, that list contained my phone number, address, Social Security number, and credit card information, I'm downright worried, and may wish to take immediate action.

I raise these variables because the "gotcha!" of this particular story—79 percent of companies reporting data breaches—has, in my view, been somewhat distorted in the reporting. Compuware's figures may be perfectly accurate, but I'd be careful when drawing any conclusions from them—not every data breach is of TJ Maxx proportions.

In general, Compuware's study seems well-grounded and covers a number of interesting topics. Asked where their efforts are typically focused post-breach, a large group—41 percent of those surveyed—indicated that they participate in investigating, categorizing, and verifying the particulars of the incident. 18 percent of respondents indicate they were involved in remediation activities, 16 percent were tasked with training and educating staff or personnel, 11 percent conducted a root-cause analysis, and 10 percent established an incident response team.

I'm not sure what to make of that last, since incident response teams are emergency groups trained to respond when an emergency occurs. The fact that so many respondents were involved in specifically establishing one implies that 10 percent of the organizations surveyed didn't have them to begin with. Note the relatively low number of IT employees who were asked to spend time training fellow workers, as this will be important later.

Next up, we've got what I personally consider to be the most interesting information in the report, for all that it's largely gone unreported by the press. Having ascertained the roles IT personnel are most likely to play in the event of a data breach, Compuware asked them how confident they are in their own organization's ability to respond to such an event.

The majority of IT workers surveyed are clearly less-than confident in their employer's ability to monitor and detect information theft, even though they themselves almost certainly play a role in such efforts; 56 percent of respondents labeled themselves either "Somewhat confident" or "Not confident." As for the "Unsure" category, it's hard to imagine that the security professionals who opted for this category are secretly "Very Confident" or "Confident." As for why the breaches themselves occur, there's one category that stands out in particular:

Asked to name the leading causes of data breaches, IT staff couldn't run for the negligence category fast enough. Combine this with the fact that most workers don't trust their company to monitor the occurrence of data theft and the fact that relatively few IT staffers are tasked with employee training post-breach, the entire corporate security model begins to sway suspiciously.

The majority of IT professionals surveyed don't believe their employers can adequately monitor company resources for data breaches or prevent these breaches from occurring. Who's causing the breaches? Negligent employees. Given these two facts, one would expect to see the number of IT staff involved in employee training to skyrocket post-breach, as the company attempts to plug the hole, but again, evidence suggests this isn't happening; the majority of IT staffers are involved in fixing the technical aspects of the problem, with relatively few addressing the root cause of the issue.

This obviously makes some sense, given that the IT department wasn't hired to teach Security 101, but it may also indicate that company management hasn't grasped the true root of the problem. It's easy to bring in a consultant for some remedial security training, but without the explicit involvement of the IT department, such training will inevitably focus more on general bad practices and less on the specific situations that may have exposed customer data in this particular case. There's nothing in Compuware's report, meanwhile, that suggests this loop is changing, or that IT workers today feel more confident in their company's ability to deal with a data breach than employees did five years ago.

The report ultimately suggests that the vast majority of companies have security models that are semifunctional at best. Accountability is a hit-or-miss affair, confidence in the system as a whole is minimal, and the flaws that contribute to data breaches aren't confined to any single level of an organization. Not the most optimistic Friday read, I'll admit, but the results aren't all that surprising, either.

Original here