Replies

In the top line, where it reads “URI-“, copy the URL, then open it in your web browser. The app will download. That’s what worked for me, and now I have a transparent Task bar!

Ernie

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Cybertooth

The Classic/Extended Control Panel looks as if it will give me access to many Windows ‘features’ I want/need. Additionally, the Bonus Software in this item, Translucent TB gives me the look-&-feel I wanted for my taskbar! Both of these apps are very useful for me. Thank You!

Ernie

I came to the Ask Woody newsletter as a Langa List subscriber when the two newsletters merged. I’ve been an avid reader ever since. I’ll miss Woody Leonhard, and I wish him God Speed as well as those he left behind,

Ernie

3 users thanked author for this post.

LongTimer, jburk07, AJNorth

After reading this item, I linked it on Facebook, and suggested that office-holders at all levels of government should read it, and take action to protect our children. My two sons are not endangered by social media because they were adults before the smart phone came into existence, but if I, and they were younger, I’d want protective measures to be in place, if for no other reason than the fact that such a law would give me a valid reason for not allowing them to use a smart phone until they reach the minimum legal age.

Ernie

2 users thanked author for this post.

rizzquery, WSbobby-p

Alex5723 wrote:

Defender never was equal or better than the best A/Vs on A/Vs tests, and surly not better than Kaspersky.

I beg to differ. To validate my assertion, I googled “How does Microsoft Defender compare to other AV suites based on test ratings”, and received this response:

“According to independent testing organizations like AV-Test and SE Labs, Microsoft Defender <mark class=”QVRyCf”>generally performs very well compared to other antivirus suites</mark>, often receiving top marks for protection, with scores consistently near the highest possible rating, sometimes even achieving a perfect score in protection categories while maintaining good performance and usability; however, some premium third-party antivirus solutions may offer slightly more advanced features or a wider range of security tools.”

Even though premium AV suites may offer a few slightly more advanced features, and/or a wider range of security tools, they still do not offer significantly better protection, ovreall. For home users, Microsoft Defender is entirely suitable/adequate, not to mention, free.

Ernie

2 users thanked author for this post.

Noel Carboni, b

I’ve had my doubts about Kaspersky for many years. I used it around 2010, until I learned that it’s a Russia-based corporation. Because I then had, and still d0 not have, any trust n the ethics of the Russian government, and what pressures they may put on Kaspersky, and members of its staff, I switched to a free alternative. Then, in 2015, when I started testing Windows 10 as a Microsoft Insider, I started using Windows Defender. As time passed, it became known as Microsoft Defender, and improved in performance, so today, it’s poses perhaps the lightest load on Windows, and provides protection that’s equal to, or better than, the best AV suites available. My thinking is that if I can get AV protection that’s as good as anything else available, for free, why pay for anything ese?

My2Cents,

Ernie

rc primak wrote:

So how is telling them to stop doing business and to stop providing updates within the US not shutting them down here?

It is, but they are still free to do business elsewhere. The U.S.A. isn’t the only tech market in the world. Kaspersky’s still free to do business elsewhere, if they choose. Besides, the U.S. government doesn’t have the power to shut them down worldwide, even if we wanted to. On the other hand, other nations have the right to take similar action, if they feel that Kaspersky’s a threat to their national security, as we do.

Ernie

Alex5723 wrote:

Hundreds of companies have been hacked, and private info was taken this year, and none has been ordered to shut down.

No one, including the U.S. government, has ordered Kaspersky to shut down. The U.S. government has only ordered Kaspersky to cease doing business within our borders. Context, and accuracy matter.

My2Cents,

Ernie

You’re entitled to your opinion, but it’s not Kaspersky that I don’t trust as much as I don’t trust the Putin Russian government. How do we know that Kaspersky’s not being pressured into not disclosing any nefarious activity their government may be conducting in the background? This may sound as if I’m going into conspiracy theory territory, but I won’t put anything past Putin, and his cronies.

My2Cents,

Ernie

4 users thanked author for this post.

WSGeo, wavy, SueW, Cybertooth

Interestingly, after posting my previous reply, I received a new Ask Woody Newsletter, and this time, the link to this item worked as expected.

First, I want to thank you for making it available.

Second, I think Kaspersky’s response to the United States Government’s action indicates one reason why it was necessary, not only as a security protection for the government itself, bur also as a protection for the people of the United States. For any Ask Woody readers outside the U.S.A., I strongly recommend you very carefully reconsider your decision about using any Kaspersky software. Such a response quite clearly indicates that Kaspersky has absolutely no interest in the security of their users, but, like most corporations, are most interested in their bottom line, and perhaps in following any (possible) Russian government mandates that may have been issued (I have no evidence of this last supposition, but it makes sense to me).

Ernie

3 users thanked author for this post.

Cybertooth, teuhasn2, cesmart4122

I saw that, so why is it the featured item in my free Ask Woody newsletter?

Ernie

I know I’m getting the free version of Ask Woody, but this item is today’s (10/14/2024) featured item for the free version, and when I click the link to read online, I get a “Not Found” error message. I simply think you should know,

Ernie

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will Fastie

Of course, I do, but then again, I never assume that any corporation will have my best interests in mind. A corporation’s only obligations are adherence to the law, and to their stockholders. Sadly, in many cases, adherence to the law only comes into play if they don’t think they can get away with whatever shenanigans they want to try in their pursuit of ever greater/increasing profits.

My2Cents,

Ernie

That’s interesting, and I agree that that’s the way it should be. If it’s not saved to the computer owner’s/user’s Microsoft account, where else would it be? I’m just wondering,

Ernie

Alex5723 wrote:

But Microsoft doesn’t give you the choice to intentionally activate BitLocker.

I don’t have BitLocker enabled on my computer now. I know that Microsoft is starting to do this automatically now, or will start to do so with the 2024 update. My comment was intended for user who want BitLocker encryption enabled on their computers, but don’t have it enabled now. I was briefly describing what happens when you choose to enable it yourself, and how/where you can/should save/store your BitLocker recovery key(s).

Ernie

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Alex5723