Jump to content

More IT in the Hood


Recommended Posts

raymac46

My neighbor came over to see me today. Seems he got a new HP i5 laptop and he could not get his printer to work with it. I went over and discovered that while the laptop had discovered the printer it was saying "driver not available." I checked online and discovered that Canon was not releasing Windows 10 drivers for this printer (he got it in 2008.)

So I advised him a new printer was in his future. After he picked up a new HP Envy inkjet we were into a bit of IT. First get the printer connecting to the network, then remove the old printer and add the new one. Everything went OK so I then repeated the process with a Windows 8.1 desktop.

Then his wife had a couple of Apple tablets she wanted to print from. I don't know anything about Apple, but the tablets are smarter than I am and they connected seamlessly to HPs mobile printing interface. No network needed.

All in all it took about half an hour to rewire his printing capability - and no wire needed!

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat

I have a sound card which was released last century - M-Audio Audiophile 2496 for which there are no Win 10 drivers. Works fine in Win 10 with the Win 8.1 drivers though! ūüėČ

Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46
Posted (edited)

I tried to download the latest Win 7  printer driver but it simply would not install on the new laptop. The install just hung and wouldn't complete. Sometimes you just have to know when to fold up. Win 8.1 still works with the old printer but not the latest Win 10.

Edited by raymac46
Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat

I get ya. With my sound card the Win 8 driver would not install on Win 10 but the Win 8.1 driver did! ūü•ī

Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46
Posted (edited)

In early Windows days it was old hardware that wouldn't work with the latest release; now it's old software that won't do the job. Go figure. You are still stuck buying new hardware.

No point in going with Linux here. It's a brand new laptop and I don't think the old printer was Linux compatible. I could have taken the printer but declined the offer.

BTW my neighbor is getting his old laptop upgraded to Windows 10. That'll be another can of worms for him I bet.

Edited by raymac46
Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

My neighbor came by yesterday and said now his new computer was not working with his new laptop. I checked it out and discovered that he had not restarted the laptop. That fixed his problem. Why folks just let Windows machines run for days without a restart is beyond me.

  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton
1 hour ago, raymac46 said:

Why folks just let Windows machines run for days without a restart is beyond me.

 

Why folks let Windows machines run at all is a mystery to me. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

Well one of my work machines runs Windows 10 21H1 Enterprise and while I get reboots queued up, I only reboot if I have to. But then again, I can fix any issue that I run across. I tell the users to reboot every day or two though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
16 hours ago, V.T. Eric Layton said:

 

Why folks let Windows machines run at all is a mystery to me. ;)

IMG_4069.jpg?resize=1024,683&ssl=1

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

Going back to my Norton Security headaches with Lillian I have always restarted Windows as my first  action whenever an unexpected glitch shows up. In fact, with any of these wireless printer/wifi issues I recommend a reboot of the printer and maybe even the router before reinstalling anything.

That said, a reboot was never going to fix the Canon printer that just did not have a suitable driver for Windows 10.

Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

Norton??? Don't you know that Norton should be removed immediately as it's bloated, crappy and will slow down the system. Have them use Eset or another antivirus that actually works. Heck, Defender is better than Norton and it's free.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46
Posted (edited)

You didn't have to deal with Lillian who wouldn't use anything but Norton Security. Or Windows for that matter. I could have saved her and me much aggravation if I had been allowed to install Linux on her old machine.

Edited by raymac46
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

Lillian also insisted on Getting Norton 360 so she could further screw up her PC with Tune-Up apps. I miss her. Honestly.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46
Posted (edited)

Finally, Lillian's husband wouldn't let her buy anything online, so she had to go to Staples and buy a boxed copy of Norton. So that meant I had to reinstall it every year instead of a simple online purchase and upgrade as needed.

Edited by raymac46
Link to post
Share on other sites
Digerati
On 6/22/2021 at 7:21 AM, raymac46 said:

Why folks just let Windows machines run for days without a restart is beyond me.

I let all my systems run all the time - or rather I never shut them down when I am done for the day, I just let them go to sleep. The only time I reboot is when some Windows or program update requires it. 

 

W10 is not XP where a daily reboot (or shutdown at night) was almost a requirement. 

 

So to address your hypothetical, folks let Windows machines run for days without a restart because W10 works fine that way and does not need to be restarted every day. In fact, as long as users don't dink with the defaults, it works great that way - to include automatically rebooting, as needed. And this is by design! That is, the default settings allows Windows to do its own required housekeeping chores and updates when we users are not using the computer. Can't happen if we shutdown at the end of each day. 

 

Sure, occasionally a manual reboot is required. And very often a simple reboot clears many problems and very often should be the first step in troubleshooting. But again, W10 is not XP, it is time folks stop treating it like it is. There really is nothing to suggest failing to shutdown or reboot every day would have prevented those problems in the first place. 

 

Contrary to what many think, the folks at MS are not dummies. Nor have they been sitting on their thumbs for the last 20 years.

 

It is our experience here that our clients (and friends & neighbors, colleagues, and family - as their de facto go to computer guy) who leave W10 default settings alone have fewer problems! And those who do the most dinking with the default settings because "they always did it that way" or because they feel they know more in terms of security or memory management or whatever than all those PhDs, professional developers and compsci specialists (with their decades and exabytes of empirical data) at MS. :(

 

Just as an apropos example, my neighbor just last week complained that her relatively new W10 AiO computer was slow. I could not find anything wrong with it. While it only has 4GB of RAM (more is on order thanks to Amazon Prime day), it does have a decent i5 processor, an SSD with lots of free disk space, and a decent cable connection. So I felt it should be a little snappier too. But I noticed she used a power strip and it was turned off when I got there. When I asked about her computing routine, she said she uses the computer for an hour or so every couple days, then shutdowns the computer and the power strip every time she is done using it. 

 

So I checked Windows Update and it was WAY WAY behind. Now Windows 10 by design will try to download and install updates way in the background as low priority tasks so it does not impact performance while the user is busy using it. But if it gets too far behind, especially with critical updates, it will start to move those tasks more into the foreground at a higher priority where performance can be impacted. 

 

So not only was the system behind in updates, Windows Updates were starting to impact performance (probably compounded by the small amount of RAM). I removed the power strip, talked her into ordering a good UPS with AVR too (we live in  Tornado Alley) and told her to just let the computer go to sleep when she was done using it. Other than a panicky phone call late one night when she thought someone had hacked into her system when she saw the drive activity light going crazy, all is good and she is already happy with the performance (and the new RAM is not installed yet). 

 

Yes, that is just 1 anecdotal example and really does not prove anything. But we have found here that it is a common event with similar good results when we tell our clients to just let their computers go to sleep at night. 

 

***

 

15 minutes ago, securitybreach said:

Norton??? Don't you know that Norton should be removed immediately as it's bloated and crappy.

 

Norton is a good security program - that is, it does provide excellent security - but I agree it is a resource hog. It is better than it was years ago but like several of the major suites (McAfee comes to mind) they put so much into the program to make it stand out, to include several features most users never need or use, it just ends up doing more than we need while adding no value - at best. 

 

Plus, it is expensive to buy and expensive to continually renew. We don't need to drive around in an Abrams Tank to be safe. We just need a decent, current model car, keep it properly maintained, and drive defensively!  Same with our computers. We just need a basic anti-malware solution, keep Windows and that anti-malware solution current, and don't be "click-happy" on unsolicited links, popups, downloads, and attachments. 

 

Having said all that, there is a brilliant and effective marketing strategy Norton (and McAfee) have very effectively employed. Include a free 90 or 180 trial license with new computers, get the users hooked on the product, then use scare tactics to convince them all h3ll will break loose if they let it expire and don't pay for a new subscription. :( Then folks like Lillian and others make Norton rich. 

 

Admittedly, I have mixed feelings on that. I sure would rather users pay through the nose for Norton or McAfee and keep their systems secure than go with no security at all. So in Lillian's defense, she knows she needs an effective security solution. But I just wish more folks would give Microsoft Defender a fair chance to learn it most likely will more than meet their needs. Sadly, there are too many Microsoft haters out there trying to convince everyone that anything with the Microsoft brand on it must be evil and/or incompetent. 

 

FTR, I use Microsoft Defender as the primary anti-malware solution on all our systems here. It is effective, simple to use and free. And it is already in there! However, regardless the primary security solution one uses, I always recommend users have a secondary scanner on hand just to make sure the primary solution, or the user (ALWAYS the weakest link in security) didn't let something slip by. I generally recommend Malwarebytes for that. And FTR, Malwarebytes has never found anything Defender (or me) let slip by, other than a couple "wanted" potentially "unwanted" programs (PUPS). 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

Hiya, @Digerati...

 

Just to clarify a couple things... I am often seen to be bad-mouthing all things MS. A large percentage of that is just in a joking fashion. I don't personally care for MS; however, I admit freely that they have done many good things in the history of personal computing. Without MS, I think things would have evolved very differently in the computering world. We may have ended up with some hybrid of Apple OS and Commodore's Basic. ;)

 

I'm not a Norton fan, either. Which is just a matter of personal opinion, of course.

 

Bottom line, as always, is use what works best for you. There's nothing at all wrong with that. :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
45 minutes ago, raymac46 said:

Lillian also insisted on Getting Norton 360 so she could further screw up her PC with Tune-Up apps. I miss her. Honestly.

 

Wow! I couldn't imagine how slow that machine must of been. Should of told her that, "if you want your computer to run faster, just remove norton instead of tuning up your computer"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Digerati
11 minutes ago, V.T. Eric Layton said:

I am often seen to be bad-mouthing all things MS. A large percentage of that is just in a joking fashion.

I often bad mouth MS too. In fact, I have been very vocal with my criticisms at times - to the point I was "counselled" once by my MS handler when I was still a MS MVP after I was very critical of some of their ill-conceived, misguided, and mismanaged marketing schemes and executive decisions. If anyone remembers the Microsoft "Outreach" teams, they will understand what I mean. 

 

But the developers at MS a separate group, are top notch and some of the best in the world. And most importantly, they have the true desire to provide the best, most secure software products out there.  And they do an excellent job in doing just that - as long as the marketing weenies keep their mitts out of the works. But sadly, many who despise Microsoft because of their past marketing and executive policies are incapable or simply refuse to separate the development side from the marketing and executives sides. They simply can't or won't accept that a hated company can still make great products. But worse, they try to impose those same feelings on every one else. :(

 

So while I may, with great vigor, criticize Microsoft when due, I will with equal vigor defend Microsoft when such criticism is not due especially when based on falsehoods. 

 

As far as criticizing "in a joking fashion", that's cool IF understood by all to be a joke. But of course the problem with forum posts is readers cannot read minds, see the body language or facial expressions, or hear the tone-of-voice of the "joker". So unless the writer takes the necessary steps to ensure the comment is expressed as a joke, it can easily be taken seriously as fact - especially when the writer is seen as a person of authority, a professional, and/or a member of the staff! 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

I work in the enterprise sector and we just switched to Defender from Symantec Endpoint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

I know its not the same but I still remember Microsoft with Ballmer running around yelling "developers' while they were spreading FUD calling Linux a virus.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Digerati
4 minutes ago, securitybreach said:

I work in the enterprise sector and we just switched to Defender from Symantec Endpoint.

I've seen this happening a lot in the last couple years. Folks are finally starting to realize Microsoft really does want to help keep our systems and networks secure. 

 

We certainly have the right to distrust Microsoft. They have done a lot in the past to earn that distrust - from me too. But in recent years they really have spent a lot of resources developing Windows, especially Windows 10 and Microsoft security solutions and even policies to earn that trust back. They really are tired of being blamed for the security mess we are in when it clearly was the fault of the bad guys who put us here, and the failure of Norton, McAfee, CA, TrendMicro and the other security providers who failed to stop them.

 

It is important to remember the reason Microsoft did not include anti-virus code in XP was because Norton, McAfee, and the others whined and cried to Congress and the EU claiming Microsoft was trying to rule and monopolize the world. They were! But that's not the the point.

 

The anti-malware industry claimed it was their job to thwart malware. So Congress and the EU threatened to breakup Microsoft Ma Bell style if they included anti-malware code in XP. So MS left it out.

 

But Norton, McAfee and the others failed miserably! Remember, they had (and have) no financial incentive to defeat the bad guys. If they succeeded, they would go out of business.

 

But who got blamed for their failure? Microsoft - even though it was the bad guys who perpetrated the offenses and the anti-malware industry who failed to stop, or even hinder their proliferation.

 

Notice how now Congress, the EU and Norton have kept their mouths shut about Microsoft integrating anti-malware in W8 and W10? It is because they know they were wrong. Had MS been allowed to include anti-virus code in XP, it would have at least hindered the untethered advances of the bad guys.

 

Even most of the biased IT media and MS bashers have, for the most part, kept quiet about MS including anti-malware code in W8/W10. I say, "for the most part" because they sure are vocal when it comes to declaring Windows Defender in W10 is not an absolute 100% perfect anti-malware solution, or the absolute best solution out there.  Oh well, haters will hate and the competition will try to compete, often by exploiting that hate. 

 

So ONLY Microsoft has the financial incentive to rid the world of cyber-bad guys and malware! Norton, Avast, McAfee, BitDefender, Kaspersky, and all the others need malware and the bad guys to succeed, or they all go out of business! That's another reason why I am a fan of Windows own Microsoft Defender (besides the fact it works). I am NOT saying all those companies have ulterior motives (though some might - see below). I believe most are sincere in their efforts. But the fact remains, if they succeed in ridding the world of malware, they will all be out of jobs.

 

As far as trusting Microsoft, can we really trust 3rd party security and privacy apps to have our best interests at heart? I mean look at Kaspersky! Or Lenovo which I realize is primarily a hardware manufacturer, or Huawei a hardware and telecommunications company. Can the Free World trust companies backed by Russia and China? Can we really trust a security program developed in country where corruption is so widespread? BitDefender is from Romania.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46
Posted (edited)

My main Windows 10 PC is on 14 hours a day and that gives plenty of time for updates to be downloaded and installed. When I'm finished using it I shut down and turn off the power strip so the printer and external drive are off as well. I don't see any problem with doing this. The PC is a desktop.

I know that the default Win 10 setup has Fast Boot so you don't really restart unless you tell the PC to do so. Even with the latest hardware and software a hard restart is needed if you get an update or run into some problems. Linux needs restarts too after kernel updates.

I use Windows 10 all the time and I do not feel any need to criticize it. I was unhappy when my old Sandy Bridge desktop was no longer supported in Windows but I replaced it and installed Linux on the old machine.

It has been my experience that many users don't know the difference betwen a soft and hard restart and that can cause them issues. The problems Lillian had were with Windows 7 although she also had troubles with IOS on a tablet. She passed away a few years ago so she is now well past caring about such matters.

Edited by raymac46
Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
On 6/23/2021 at 5:49 PM, Digerati said:

So ONLY Microsoft has the financial incentive to rid the world of cyber-bad guys and malware!

 

What a load of tosh. The world would be a safer place if every one used GNU/Linux or BSD or some such open operating system. You only have to look at the companies or organisations that have switched from Microsoft to such operating systems and their reason for doing so to see that. ūüėé

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Digerati
5 hours ago, abarbarian said:

What a load of tosh. The world would be a safer place if every one used GNU/Linux or BSD or some such open operating system.

LOL I always have to laugh when I see stuff like this - where fans of some totally off-topic product join a thread to tout their preferred product. :(

 

It reminds me of the Firefox fans years ago when it first came out who insisted everyone who still used IE6 were dumb and "will" get infected if they kept using IE. I quickly stopped them in their tracks too by asking one simple question; "Did you stop getting infected when, or just by switching to Firefox?"

 

"Bambi in the headlights!" Or, as they say today; "Crickets!" They either were not getting infected before, or in addition to switching to FF, they also installed ZoneAlarm Firewall, a decent anti-malware solution, and they stopped being "click-happy" on every link they saw - the same things people needed to do regardless their browser of choice. 

 

So come on, abarbarian! Talk about tosh! You clearly and literally took one of my sentences totally out of context, then decided it was "tosh". :rolleyes: :(

 

Obviously, I was talking about security software developers - folks like Norton, McAfee, TrendMicro, BitDefender Kaspersky, etc. Not OS developers. Those "security software developers" have no real financial incentive to rid the world of cyber bad guys and malware! That would put them out of business. 

 

Would the world be a safer place if "no one" used Windows? Maybe - for a while. But surely the bad guys would then concentrate their efforts on whichever OS dominates the home market. Which is exactly why hackers are spending a lot more time hacking corporations - because more and more use Linux or those alternatives!!!! 

 

So don't sit there so smug suggesting, falsely - that users and companies that switched have been immune. See Linux Malware on the Rise and note

Quote

According to¬†AV-Test, MacOS computers saw the largest increase in malware targeting in 2016 with a 370 percent increase, but Linux was close behind with a 300 percent rise from the previous year ‚ÄĒ triple the number in 2015.¬†WatchGuard‚Äôs Internet Security Report, which instead focuses on Q1 2017, claims that¬†Linux malware made up more than 36 percent of the top threats.

 

And this is not a new trend either. From 2004 ZDNet: Linux hacked more often than Windows. 

 

Why real hackers prefer Linux over Windows and Mac. 

 

Don't believe these four myths about Linux security

 

The bottom line is this: Linux, for now, is safer but only because it is a smaller target.  And the real bottom line is this - the solution is education, a bit of common sense, and for those responsible to do their jobs! 

 

1. Users need to be taught and users need to learn how to spot and avoid socially engineered methods of malware distribution - which affects ALL operating systems.

2. Users need to use a little bit of common sense and avoid clicking on unsolicited links, downloads, attachments, and popups.

3. System administrators, managers, and security/IS/IT executives need to do their jobs and apply patches in a timely manner and train their employees in common sense security precautions. 

 

 

  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
34 minutes ago, Digerati said:

Would the world be a safer place if "no one" used Windows? Maybe - for a while. But surely the bad guys would then concentrate their efforts on whichever OS dominates the home market. Which is exactly why hackers are spending a lot more time hacking corporations - because more and more use Linux or those alternatives!!!! 

 

Well if IT staff ran really tight ships with only essential software then you would see a massive drop in security leaks.

 

As to hacking, why on earth did all theses folks swap from WIndows to Linux ?

 

International Space Station adopts Debian Linux, drops Windows & Red Hat into airlock

 

Quote

Manager of the Space Operations Computing (SpOC) for NASA Keith Chuvala is on the record saying, ‚ÄúWe migrated key functions from Windows to Linux because we needed an operating system that was stable and reliable ‚ÄĒ one that would give us in-house control. So if we needed to patch, adjust, or adapt, we could.‚ÄĚ

 

SpaceX’s Dragon 2 and Starlink

 

Quote

‚ÄúLike supercomputers, Internet of Things devices, and many mission-critical devices, the Falcon 9 flies with Linux.‚ÄĚ

 

Many Security-Critical Military Systems Are Now Using Linux

 

Quote

The United States Department of Defense recognizes the key benefits associated with open-source development and trusts Linux as its operating system. In fact, the U.S. Army is the single largest installed base for Red Hat Linux and the U.S. Navy nuclear submarine fleet runs on Linux, including their sonar systems. Moreover, the Department of Defense just recently enlisted Red Hat, Inc., the world's largest provider of open-source solutions, to help improve squadron operations and flight training.

 

Russian military moves closer to replacing Windows with Astra Linux

 

Quote

In January 2018, the Russian Ministry of Defence announced plans to transfer military systems from the Windows OS to Astra Linux, citing fears that Microsoft's closed-source approach might hide Windows backdoors that can be abused by US intelligence to spy on Russian government operations.

 

Quote

The news comes after earlier this week it was reported that the Chinese military was taking similar steps to replace the Windows OS on military systems amid fears of US hacking. The Chinese military didn't go for a Linux distro but instead alluded to plans of developing a custom OS instead.

 

 

Did I mention Google or Facebook ?

 

The only reason most folk are using Windows is because they came out of the gate running and had super slick marketing and a ruthless attitude along with greed for loot.

 

ūüėú

Link to post
Share on other sites
Digerati

Well, it seems you are just here to argue and be a fanboy for Linux because nothing you just said has anything to do with financial incentives to rid the world of malware, or with the OP's topic. 

 

I'm done here. Have a good day. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bookmem
On 6/28/2021 at 12:07 PM, Digerati said:

Well, it seems I'm just here to argue and be a fanboy for MS because nothing you just said has anything to do with financial incentives to rid the world of malware, or with the OP's topic. 

 

I'm done here. Have a good day. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Bookmem
Link to post
Share on other sites
Digerati

Ah, but you joining a thread for the sole purpose of criticizing another is what? Righteous behavior? Helpful to the OP? Yeah right. 

 

I joined to reply to Raymac46's (the OP) rhetorical question - which was about "Windows". Not Linux. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bookmem
15 minutes ago, Digerati said:

Ah, but you joining a thread for the sole purpose of criticizing another is what? Righteous behavior? Helpful to the OP? Yeah right. 

 

I joined to reply to Raymac46's (the OP) rhetorical question - which was about "Windows". Not Linux. 

I thought you were "done here".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...