Tuesday, November 17, 2009
words that r immortal
look to the master,
follow the master,
walk with the master,
see through the master,
become the master.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
what happens to file which are deleted from a pc
Most of us consider deleting a file permanent. After all, you can’t see it in the directory structure so it’s definitely not there. Unfortunately (or well, fortunately, depending on how you look at the situation) when it comes to computers, seeing is not necessarily a premise for believing. A file doesn’t get permanently destroyed and eradicated from your memory by simply deleting it from the directory structure. Instead, it is kept safe in a free memory area, stored in case you change your mind and need your file back. What gets deleted is the link pointing towards the file, so if you would compare a file to a book page, deleting the file does not tear the page out of the book, but rather deletes the page’s index from the table of contents, represented by the file system here.
Still, your hard disk space is not infinite, so eventually the space your deleted files gets crammed into will fill up and no more “closet” space will be available. What the operating system does in such a case is overwrite the old deleted files with newer deleted files, so there’s a certain time limit in which you could recover your lost data. For example, if you deleted a file from your hard drive a year ago, the chances are slim that you’ll find it intact in the “closet” area. Instead, if you deleted it yesterday there’s no chance it got overwritten.
Of course, data recovery techniques have been constantly improving and specialists can now recover the data even after it has been overwritten! Some companies boast the fact that they can recreate files that have been deleted and subsequently overwritten in the lost memory sector by up to 10 times. However, after 10 overwrites, there’s a good chance that the data that is recovered is not entirely intact and some parts might be missing.
Just like there are programs that help you recover deleted data, there are other ones that help you permanently delete it! Sometimes you’ll want to permanently destroy some data you stored on your PC and your closest resemblance to a paper shredder is such a data deletion tool. As data recovery technology is on a constant rise, there’s a chance bits and pieces of your “permanently deleted” data can still be found, so it’s best not to count entirely on that if you really, really don’t want someone to find out what you stored on your hard disk.
Monday, August 24, 2009
microsoft-student partener

Hey friends what do you think about it.......As i think its a better way to become technologically sound in campus but many of you may think that why only Microsoft, there are other stuff also like oracle,IBM,Google,Intel etc....but dear starting with Microsoft isn't bad idea. Latter on we see what else are coming...look seeing the present scenario its a good initiative...So cm on BE A MSP :)
Sunday, August 23, 2009
google....what is it?
100 most dangerous websites for your PC
Internet security company Norton Symantec has come up with a list of Top 100 Dirtiest sites, which could infect your computer with Malware is a software that can damage or compromise a computer system without the owner's consent. Natalie Connor, spokeswoman of the anti-virus company, said that even visiting any of the named websites could expose a computer to infection and put the personal information into the hands of unwanted people. "What people don't realise is when you type in a website, you're bringing down information on a page and with it could be malware," News.com.au quoted her as saying. The list was compiled with the help of global data collected on Norton Safe Web, a site that analysed websites' security risks. Norton released a sample of the dirtiest websites: 17ebook.com, aladel.net, bpwhamburgorchardpark.org, clicnews.com, dfwdiesel.net, divineenterprises.net, fantasticfilms.ru, gardensrestaurantandcatering.com, ginedis.com, gncr.org, hdvideoforums.org, hihanin.com, kingfamilyphotoalbum.com, likaraoke.com, mactep.org, magic4you.nu, marbling.pe.kr, nacjalneg.info, pronline.ru, purplehoodie.com, qsng.cn seksburada.net, sportsmansclub.net, stock888.cn, tathli.com, teamclouds.com, texaswhitetailfever.com, wadefamilytree.org, xnescat.info, and yt118.com . The infected sites had on average 18,000 threats and 40 per cent of the sites had more than 20,000 threats, while 75 per cent of websites on the list were found to be spreading malware for over six months. According to Connor, most websites in the list had adult content with unprintable names, suggesting they contained hardcore pornography. Some others sites include those on ice skating, deer hunting, catering and legal services. Hackers can apparently obtain personal information using keystroke-logging software from both PCs and Mac computers. | |
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Google Chrome: Does the World Need Another OS?
When Google first launched its Chrome Web browser, many of us immediately saw Chrome as Google's extension of an operating system. Now, that prophecy is fulfilled with news of Google's plans to open-source the Chrome OS code later this year with view to have it available in the second half of 2010. But immediately, this raises fundamental questions about what, exactly, defines an operating system, and what will distinguish Android, the open-source mobile OS spearheaded by Google, from Chrome OS.
The idea of an Android-based netbook OS is not new then, and makes the news of Google Chrome all the more unsurprising. However, why Android? What's to stop WebOS for making a go of it on a larger, more powerful device than the Palm pre? Why wouldn't Apple pipe its iPhone OS 3.0 (based on the same kernel as Mac OS X) to a tablet or other portable device? Thus far, the sort of Google-to-Web integration we've seen from Android on smart phones, and from Chrome on the PC, just hasn't seemed all that unique.
For example, the current Chrome browser for Windows gives some insight into the blurring lines between desktop and Web browser. Chrome lets you create shortcuts on your Windows PC to any Web page or Web application, for example (this feature is not yet available in the Mac version of Chrome). When Chrome first came out, this felt fresh. Now, however, I'm less impressed--Apple's iPhone OS 3.0 lets me do that, too, on my iPhone 3GS.
Chrome OS vs. Current Options
Before I can understand the value of a Google-owned, Chrome-based operating system, I'd have to understand what it offers to me as a user that will be different from any of the options available to me today. In Google's blog posting announcing Chrome OS, the company notes "Google Chrome OS is a new project, separate from Android. Android was designed from the beginning to work across a variety of devices from phones to set-top boxes to netbooks. Google Chrome OS is being created for people who spend most of their time on the web, and is being designed to power computers ranging from small netbooks to full-size desktop systems. While there are areas where Google Chrome OS and Android overlap, we believe choice will drive innovation for the benefit of everyone, including Google."
I spend most of my time on the Web, but the above, admittedly early, description does nothing to help differentiate Android from Chrome OS. Indeed, I question the language: Android users are more likely than anyone to be heavily tied into the Web, given the always-on connectivity on mobile devices.
So, what, exactly, might be the difference between Android and Chrome OS, and how might that challenge Windows? Presumably, for Chrome OS to truly be a competitive option to Windows 7 on full-blown laptop and desktop configurations, you'd need for Chrome to have wide device driver support for components and peripherals--a sandbox Google hasn't really played in before. Without such device support, Google could run into issues with far-flung devices such as printers or graphics cards. The company might even need Windows virtualization for Chrome OS: After all, users who rely on Windows apps might still need to access those apps on any Google-based device.
And speaking of apps, while Google notes that apps for Chrome OS would work on any other browser, it still opens questions about what the advantage of a browser-based app would be to begin with. Look at what happened with Apple's attempt at browser-based apps: It fizzled and was completely forgotten once iPhone OS 2.0 hit last summer with full support for locally-stored applications. Chrome OS may have an early advantage that the iPhone lacked, in that HTML 5 has support for locally-stored data for Web apps; however, this yet-to-be implemented approach still might not help you if you're at 38,000 feet over Lincoln, Nebraska, and don't have any Web access.
High Hopes
Another statement from Google got my attention: "We hear a lot from our users and their message is clear--computers need to get better. People want to get to their email instantly, without wasting time waiting for their computers to boot and browsers to start up. They want their computers to always run as fast as when they first bought them. They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files. Even more importantly, they don't want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware, or have to worry about constant software updates."
These points are true, especially the one about software updates. But I don't know anyone who'll want to only store data in the cloud; nor do I know anyone who would use a device as a primary computer if it won't work with the host of devices one might attach. And to assume that a new Google OS won't require constant software updates is a bit presumptive: Google has pushed out Android updates big and small; and Apple is continually updating is iPhone OS 3.0.
I do think that Android and Chrome OS can have a place on devices, and I believe these will give competing operating systems, mobile or otherwise, a run for their money--if, and only if they have apps that provide cross-platform compatibility with the Windows universe. But I'm not convinced that even Google can challenge Windows (or Mac OS X for that matter) on netbooks or larger devices. The device and software compatibility issues loom large here. And until Google can sell users on the advantages of its Chrome OS over other competitive options, I think the company could have an uphill struggle for carving out the niche it clearly has targeted with Android and Chrome on mobile and non-PC devices.
Microsoft Windows 7, Google Chrome OS, the first netbook with Android--these are just a few of the interlinked developments we have to look forward to in the third quarter of the year. It's going to be a busy fall, after all.
thanks from 'pcworld'


