The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review on Bitdefender Total Security 2015

Regarded as one of the best technical Windows internet security suites for PC and laptop, and Total Security 2015 lives up to that rep.

Bitdefender is widely regarded as one of the best technical Windows internet security suites. Its Total Security product offers a very good range of the features you rightly expect in a security suite. The 2015 version aims to make life even easier for customers by introducing Profiles, which adapt the software for particular tasks, like playing games, watching movies or general office work. Also see: Best internet security software 2014.

After installation, you’re presented with a very Windows 8-looking tiled interface. Rather than having a lot of tiles slide awkwardly through the Bitdefender window, as in the 2014 version, here there are three large tiles and four subsidiary ones, giving quick and easy access to all the program’s key functions.

The modules provided by Bitdefender Total Security 2015 cover AV, anti-malware and anti-spam, tune-up, online banking protection, a 2-way firewall, parental control, online backup and anti-theft provision.

Online backup, which Bitdefender Total Security 2015 refers to as Safebox, is handled from the My Bitdefender online site, which is unusual – it’s more usually set up and managed locally. 

It works by syncing the files and folders you select with off-site storage and offers 2 GB of space. This is paltry in a Bitdefender Total Security 2015 package catering for three PCs, though you can, naturally, buy more. 

System optimisation looks at three different areas that might need attention: disk, Windows Registry and privacy. 

After we’d adjusted the default settings to leave browser caches and history alone, Bitdefender Total Security 2015 still managed to recover 8.7 GB from our test system, which is worth having back. You can run the optimiser with a single click.

The anti-theft features include locating, locking down and wiping a stolen laptop, although still no facility to take a photo of the person using it. While testing on a desktop PC, we tried the locate facility, which repeatedly reported we were in a suburb of Doncaster, a place we’ve never knowingly visited (although we’re sure it’s very nice). Since this writer is based in Devon that’s not very encouraging.

The Profiles, apart from the Standard one applied by default, are for work, games and videos. They postpone protection and maintenance tasks which impair performance and put off automatic Windows updates. Like many tasks in Bitdefender Total Security 2015, you can leave selection of the correct profile to AutoPilot, which automatically manages the IS suite when engaged.

Our tests showed a fairly low scan rate of 54.5 files per second, but good file fingerprinting, dropping the number of files scanned from 79,145 to 14,703 on a second scan.

We measured very little resource hit, too, with just a 10 percent impact on our copy test, when also running a background scan with Bitdefender Total Security 2015.

The German test site AV-Test (www.av-test.org) has awarded Bitdefender Total Security 2015 top marks in its test groups for the last three years, which is a notable achievement.

Most recently, using the 2014 product, the product managed an overall score of 17.5/18.0, which breaks down into a perfect 6.0/6.0 for Protection, the same for Usability and 5.5/6.0 for Performance.

Performance looks at how much the software affects the overall speed of the system it’s run on, and here it gave just a 1 second knock-back, against 5 sec for the group Bitdefender Total Security 2015 was tested in, as a whole. A very good result.

The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review: Logitech K480 Keyboard Works with Anything You Own

It’s a truth as universal as it is annoying; if you want all your devices to work with a specific keyboard, well, you’ll probably need either one for each, sign on for precisely one device ecosystem, or get used to swiping in words. Travelers in particular are driven insane by this problem, so Logitech decided, quite cleverly, to solve it with the K480.

Swiss Army Keyboard

There are two problems with modern portable keyboards. The first is, as we noted, device compatibility. Ask anybody who’s had to install drivers just to get a basic keyboard to work, the various device ecosystems out there don’t play well with each other and seemingly want to drive you insane.

Logitech solves this with some clever design. You can switch between three different places to send your words, so that regardless of whether you’re all Apple, or a mix of Apple, Chrome, and Windows, you’ll be able to use the keyboard and get the point across. Basically, if it uses Bluetooth, you’re all set to type.

At The Trough

The second problem is keeping all your stuff organized; you’ve got your phone over here, your tablet over there, and your laptop in front of you… and many keyboards want to be docked solely at your tablet. How does Logitech solve this? Simple: It puts a trough at the top of the keyboard that can easily be used to stand up both your tablet and your phone, and to type away at both of them with ease.

A Keyboard For The Multitasker

Multitasking, or at least sorting through your various tasks properly, can be a profoundly annoying experience, and Logitech deserves credit for looking at how we actually use our gadgets and creating a keyboard that fits in with them. If that’s something you need, it starts at just $50.

The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review on How Anqor Gets You Online

If you travel, you know the pain of getting online wherever you go. Either you pay offensive tethering charges when you really shouldn’t be, or, in some cases, it’s just impossible to access the Internet unless you’ve got an in-country SIM card. As we’re increasingly global, this is increasingly annoying, but there’s one Kickstarter, Anqor, that supposedly has the solution.

Always Online

The Anqor itself is fairly straightforward, as a device. It’s about the size of a novelty paperback you get as a gift, and relatively light, although that’s just the prototype; the end goal device is roughly the size of an iPhone. And it works relatively simply, as well; it connects to a 3G or 4G network in the area you’re in, connects to up to ten of the devices you have handy, and we’re off to the races. It’s how it connects that’s more interesting.

SIMulated Card

As we all know, to access a local mobile network, you need a SIM card, which is profoundly annoying. What the Anqor does is determine where you are, riffle through the company’s library of SIM cards, upload the profile, and you’re done. The tradeoff, of course, is that this doesn’t come cheap. Global travelers looking for this convenience will be paying roughly $52 a month for the library, although you can pause a subscription at any time, and for just one country, it’ll be a more reasonable $16 a month.

Online Anywhere

If you’re a world traveler, you know from experience that you’ll be running around juggling SIM cards anyway, so you may as well clean some of the clutter out of your life. And, if you never leave the country but your job requires constant Internet access, this might be worth it as well. The device, without data plan, will start at around $270 if you get in early on the Kickstarter.

The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review: The Bluetooth Tracking Gadget

The only thing missing from Tile, the Bluetooth tracking gadget, is more users (review)

In 2013, a crowdfunded project known as the Tile became a smash hit, racking up over $2,500,000 in funding from nearly 50,000 backers. The secret to its success? Simple: The Tile promised to help users locate any object attached to the coin-sized Bluetooth-connected tag priced at $20.

I signed on as a backer mostly out of curiosity. After all, compared to some crowdfunded tech projects like the Pebble, the 3Doodler or the Micro 3D printer, the $20 Tile seemed like a no-brainer.

So I committed my cash and then, just like thousands of others, I began a very long wait for my Tile to arrive. I had almost given up hope of ever seeing a Tile in the flesh when finally — nearly a year after having backed the project — my Tile showed up last week.

“So far we’ve delivered to over 50,000 people,” Nick Evans, Tile’s co-founder and CEO said in an interview with VentureBeat.

I guess I was lucky to be amongst the first third of buyers. Evans sympathizes with those who feel the wait has been too long, “I’ve pre-ordered items too and there can be a lot of frustration, like, where is this thing? We’re working as hard as we can to get everyone’s Tiles to them.”

First impressions

My neighbor ordered a Tile at the same time I did and his showed up the same day as mine. “It’s a lot bigger than I expected,” he said. It’s true: The Tile looks and feels a lot larger in real life than it did in the photos and videos that Tile posted to its website during the funding period.

Wondering why both my neighbor and I (and other reviewers) had the same reaction, I checked one of the ads that was — and is still — used to promote the Tile. Sure enough, the image Tile chose does an excellent job of masking the Tile’s thickness. The ad makes it appear as though the Tile is barely thicker than a coin — or a key for that matter.

The actual dimensions are 37mm x 37mm x 5.3 mm. The effect is that, when attached to a keychain, the Tile feels more like the largest object on your ring, not just another key.

Evans claims there was no attempt to mislead customers and that the Tile used in these promotional images is the same size, shape and thickness as the units that have been shipped: “That’s the actual size. We of course wanted to advertise the correct size […] we didn’t want people to be disappointed,” he says.

How it works

Getting a Tile set up is very easy. After you download the free Tile app (iOS only, for now), enable Bluetooth and location services, and register for a free Tile account, the app prompts you to add your first Tile.

To do so, simply press and hold on the “e” portion of the “tile” word on the Tile until the Tile emits a little tune and hold the Tile close to your iOS device when prompted to do so. Your Tile is now paired. You can add up to 8 Tiles per account.

The Tile app will always show you the last place it “saw” (i.e., where it was in direct Bluetooth contact with) your Tile and how long ago it saw it.

A killer community

I gave my Tile to my neighbor to take with him to work. My Tile app was able to locate it perfectly.

Above: I gave my Tile to my neighbor to take with him to work. My Tile app was able to locate it perfectly.

So what happens when your Tile can’t be located by going back to the last place your app saw it?

Tile calls it the “Community Find” feature. Turns out, every person who keeps the Tile app open on their iOS device becomes a node in a much larger Tile network.

Annual renewal

The other drawback to the Tile is its non-user-replaceable battery. Because Tiles are sealed, which gives them a splash-proof exterior, there’s no way to access or replace any of its innards, including the battery. Tiles are only good for one year, after which Tile will get in touch to facilitate the return of your now-dead Tile and presumably give you the option to re-up for another year for another $20.

This works out to about $1.66 per month per object tracked, on an indefinite basis. Is it worth it? I guess it depends on what you’re tracking and how often you think you might misplace it.

Conclusion

The $20 Tile is a device that does exactly what it claims: It helps you locate misplaced objects using your smartphone in a way that is easy and intuitive.

For most people, even though the Tile is only effective for a year, it offers a convenient, expandable and soon — according to Evans — shareable way to track your most commonly lost articles.

Visit our facebook page and follow us on twitter @CorlissTech.

The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review: Closing the High-Tech Gender Gap

This year’s Lemelson-MIT Prize winner discusses grassroots ways for boosting the number of women in technology and business.

I have a confession to make: I’ve been living under a rock.

I’ve actually been busy under here — running a bioengineering lab at MIT, starting companies, teaching, consulting, being a mom. But I’ve been so focused on keeping all the balls in the air that, until recently, I hadn’t noticed that women typically aren’t the ones starting technology companies.

To be fair, I had recognized that:

• Girls choose engineering less often and drop out of engineering disproportionately (the so-called “leaky pipeline”).

• The percentage of women computer science majors peaked 30 years ago.

• The higher I climb, the fewer other women there are at the table with me.

I’ve also seen progress in gender equity in higher education. I just didn’t realize until recently that the technology industry is light years behind.

In case you’ve also been under a rock, here are some numbers that I found truly astonishing. Women lead only 3 percent of tech startups, account for only 4 percent of the senior venture partners funding such startups and represent only 5 percent of the founders, advisors and directors at MIT technology spinoffs.

Are you as shocked as I was? What if I tell you that more than 50 percent of students in some MIT undergraduate science majors are women — and that’s been the case for almost 20 years? Where do these talented women go, and what are the implications of that drain?

If we believe that entrepreneurship is a fundamental engine of progress, that it is a path to getting ideas into the world, then what does it mean for our society if the ideas that germinate in the minds of all those young women rarely turn into companies with products? (By the way, women-led private tech companies have 12 percent higher revenue and 35 percent higher return on investment than those led by men, according to the Kauffman Foundation. This shouldn’t have to be true to make us care, but it actually is.)

The Lemelson-MIT Prize is an award for invention, for making discoveries useful through commercialization, and for inspiring the next generation. As the 2014 recipient, I am truly honored and grateful to the many people who have contributed to our collective track record using miniaturization tools to impact human health.

Here are three things that made a difference for me:

Great expectations: My biggest fan and mentor has always been my dad, himself a serial entrepreneur. When I became a professor, he had mixed feelings about me climbing the ivory tower. To encourage me, he asked one simple question: “When will you start your first company?”  (As it turned out, I started my first company within five years. Since then, my students and have founded 10 companies between us.)

Microclimate: Many have noted the chilly climate for women in engineering. I’ve been extraordinarily lucky. Of my college tribe of girlfriends, four of us are now successful entrepreneurs. My best friend is among that 4 percent of women venture capitalists; in fact, she was named one of Fortune’s Most Powerful Women. I’m fortunate to work alongside female founder colleagues, MIT’s Technology Licensing Office, and the ever-inspirational Professor Robert Langer. Indeed, my microclimate is actually pretty warm.

Men who believed in me: Much has been written about visible role models for women. I try to be one, even when it’s hard to put myself “out there.” Along the same lines, I appreciate having had a working mom who was a trailblazer, having been one of the first women in India to receive an MBA. However, it’s worth noting that the people in my life who have seen more for me than I saw for myself, who believed in me and promoted me, were mostly men, including my graduate advisor, my first investor, and my husband. The truth is that changing the face of technology requires the involvement of men who care about it.

I will donate some of the prize money to the MIT Society of Women Engineers. This organization runs fabulous outreach programs designed to keep young girls interested in the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and math). I also look forward to supporting a program for women’s entrepreneurship in MIT’s upcoming Innovation Initiative.

I hope other institutions will follow suit and such initiatives spread as quickly and far as the ideas set forth in the gender equity report championed by MIT’s beloved former president Charles Vest. I encourage you to also do your part: If you believe strongly in a talented woman you know, why not ask her when she will be starting her first company? It could be just the kind of great expectation that makes a real difference.

The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review on Neuroscientists Object to Europe’s Human Brain Project

More than 180 neuroscientists have signed an open letter to the European Commission calling on it to reconsider the technical goals and oversight of one of the world’s largest brain-mapping projects, predicting it is likely to fail.

The European Union agreed last year to invest more than one billion euros in the Human Brain Project (HBP), a 10-year effort involving dozens of research institutions to create a simulation of how the human brain works, using supercomputers.

But according to a letter released by dissenting scientists, the project is doomed by opaque management and the pursuit of goals not widely shared by neuroscientists. “We believe the HBP is not a well-conceived or implemented project and that it is ill suited to be the centerpiece of European neuroscience,” the letter says.

Governments, including those of the United States and China, have all launched large neuroscience projects to study the brain (see “Brain Mapping”). But the brain is so massively complex—it has roughly 86 billion neurons and trillions of connections—that there’s little consensus on how to study it.

Europe’s HBP has been particularly controversial because it emphasizes large-scale mapping of the brain and computer simulations over traditional, small-scale bench research. The project’s core goal, according to its website, is “to build a completely new information computing technology infrastructure for neuroscience.”

Signers of the letter, including neuroscientists from the University of Oxford and the Institut Pasteur, intend to boycott 50 million euros per year of neuroscience research grants that have been linked to the EU project.

“Why should an information technology project determine neuroscience funding?” says Zachary Mainen, a researcher at the Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown in Portugal, which gathered the signatures after a component of the project it was involved with was cancelled. “It’s not a project that was planned by the neuroscience community. They say they are going to simulate the brain, but I don’t think anyone believes that.”

According to a report in the Guardian, the neuroscientists hope to influence a review of the project by European officials that is expected to be complete by the end of the summer.

The HBP is led by Henry Markram, a neuroscientist at the the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland, who says critics are upset because there’s a scientific “paradigm shift” under way that threatens their way of working.

“It’s a natural reaction when you move from an old paradigm to a new one. It happened with the Human Genome Project,” says Markram. “That was also about large-scale, systematic teams working together, and you also had the individual labs saying ‘Oh my, I am going to be out of business.’ It’s very similar to that.”

Within two years, Markram says, the HBP will release the first phase of its technology platform, which will let any scientist contribute data and run simulations. He says this will bring neuroscience up to speed with disciplines like astrophysics or climate research, where scientists use simulations all the time. “You can’t measure everything in the Universe, but you can simulate it,” he says. “You can’t measure all of the brain, either, so we are going to have to predict a lot of it.”

That focus on computer simulations is what’s generating the most withering criticism. Konrad Kording, a neuroscientist at Northwestern University, calls the European project “useless and misleading” and says there is “genuine concern that the neuroscience community in Europe will be damaged by a very high-profile project that is deeply misguided.” Continue reading…

The Corliss Group Latest Tech Review:New Algorithm Finds the Most Beautiful

The way we navigate in cities has been revolutionized in the last few years by the advent of GPS mapping programs. Enter your start and end location and these will give you the shortest route from A to B.

That’s usually the best bet when driving, but walking is a different matter. Often, pedestrians want the quietest route or the most beautiful but if they turn to a mapping application, they’ll get little help.

That could change now thanks to the work of Daniele Quercia at Yahoo Labs in Barcelona, Spain, and a couple of pals. These guys have worked out how to measure the “beauty” of specific locations within cities and then designed an algorithm that automatically chooses a route between two locations in a way that maximizes the beauty along it. “The goal of this work is to automatically suggest routes that are not only short but also emotionally pleasant,” they say.

Quercia and co begin by creating a database of images of various parts of the center of London taken from Google Street View and Geograph, both of which have reasonably consistent standards of images. They then crowdsourced opinions about the beauty of each location using a website called UrbanGems.org.

Each visitor to UrbanGems sees two photographs and chooses the one which shows the more beautiful location. That gives the team a crowdsourced opinion about the beauty of each location. They then plot each of these locations and their beauty score on a map which they use to provide directions.

The idea here is that the user enters a start and end location and an algorithm then finds the most beautiful route, rather than the shortest one. It does this by searching through every possible route, adding the beauty scores for each and choosing the one that ranks highest.

Quercia and co say that on average these routes turn out to be just 12 percent longer than the shortest routes, which makes them reasonable alternatives for a pedestrian.

To work out whether the routes chosen by the algorithm are really more beautiful, Quercia and co recruited 30 people who live in London and are familiar with the area, to assess the recommended paths. And indeed, they agreed that the routes chosen by the algorithm were more beautiful than the shortest routes.

But that’s just the start. Crowdsourcing opinion for every possible location in a city is clearly a time-consuming and potentially expensive business. So Quercia and co have automated this process using photos from Flickr and the data and tags attached to them.

They chose some five million pictures taken in the same places as their original photos and then mined the data associated with them to see what parameters correlated with beauty.

Factors that turn out to be a good indicator of beauty are things like the number of pictures taken of a particular scene and comments associated with positive emotions. So looking for locations on Flickr that fulfill this requirement ought to produce a list of beautiful places in any city.

Quercia and co tested this idea in Boston to find beautiful locations on Flickr and then used their algorithm to find the most beautiful path between two locations. They then asked 54 people to evaluate these paths. Sure enough, the participants generally felt that the routes chosen by the algorithm were more beautiful than the shortest parts.

If you know Boston or London yourself, you can evaluate the routes chosen by the algorithms yourself by examining the maps in the paper.

Of course, there are potential problems. Some locations are less attractive at certain times of the day, for example during rush hour when traffic is heavier or at night when the character of some parts the city can change dramatically. The algorithm cannot account for these differences

Nevertheless, this is an interesting approach that has the potential to change the experience people have in interacting with the city. It’s not hard to imagine that tourist authorities might use an application like this to help visitors experience the best parts of a city on foot.

Quercia and co have a plan like that. Their next goal is to build a mobile app and test it in the wild across different cities in Europe and the U.S. Keep an eye out for it.