Relocate Your Applications

Learn how you can safely relocate your installed programs from drive C to drive D or E.

You partitioned your hard drive initially and loaded the operating system, and now you realize that your C drive is running low on space while D drive is lying empty? You are now left with two options— uninstall space-hogging applications and reinstall them on the other drive, or resize your existing partitions using a partition management utility. The latter option is better as you can allocate the space permanently to drive C, but the threat of losing all your data in one go is high in case you accidentally reset your PC or witness a power failure. The first option is a faster one and would only affect the particular program it moves in case of any errors. Then again, this process is painstakingly slow. We will show you a simple utility which can relocate the programs from one drive to another in a few minutes. Download the utility ‘Application Mover’ from ‘http://www.funduc.com/app_mover.htm’ and install it. Run the program after installing.


Step 1: On the main screen, you must specify the two paths to the programs which need to be moved. Choose the current and new path accordingly. Leave all other check boxes untouched. Click ‘OK’.


Step 2: The next screen will confirm the files that will be moved. Confirm with ‘OK’, and the file operations will begin.


Step 3: A new window will open and you will be asked to finally confirm the replacement of the program location. Confirm with the ‘Replace’ button for every file or simply check the ‘Do not ask me again’ box.

Application Mover moves all files from the old path (and any subdirectories under that path) to the new path. The program then uses these strings to make changes to the Windows registry, Windows shortcuts, .ini and Install.log files in the program path. The application performs its operations in the following order - Files are copied to the new path > Registry Changes are made > Shortcuts are changed > Files are deleted from the old path > .ini and Install.log files are changed. The utility is shareware and can be purchased for around 13.5 $. Another alternative utility is Steammover, but the cons are—it runs under Windows Vista and 7 only, works on NTFS and not FAT32, leaves shortcuts on C drive, and if deleted, the relocated program won’t work. 

Do’s and Don’ts: Do not move important directories (for e.g. C:\Program Files to D:\Program Files). The utility must be run with Administrator privileges. Do not move ‘My Documents’. Do not move ‘C:\Program Files\Common Files’. Programs must be shut down before moving. Backups must be taken to avoid mishaps. Moving MS Office is unsafe—do it at your own risk. Do not move antivirus applications. Do not move programs from one PC to another. Do not move programs over the network unless the shared drives are mapped to the PC. Do not install a new hard drive or USB drive which tends to replace the drive letter of the drive where the applications are relocated.

Is Android the next Windows?

When using a Windows PC today, it’s easy to take for granted that the software will just work. If you need something new, just pop in a CD or download it from the Web—there’s usually no question of whether it will work or not. With the combined market shares of all available versions hovering around the 90 percent mark for well over a decade, Windows is effectively the standard that developers must adopt unless they have very good reasons for remaining available to only a small niche. It wasn’t always like this though, back in the early days of personal computers, multiple different platforms existed and it wasn’t always easy to share data between them, let alone entire programs. Software (including the operating system) became one of the main reasons you’d choose one platform over another, and when smaller players became unsustainable and the industry crystallized around the Windows and Macintosh, it was still software that differentiated them. There are various reasons for which the Mac platform didn’t gain as much popularity as Windows in the 1990s, but it’s always been a viable alternative. 

                      Today’s mobile devices are in a similar situation. We have a number of completely different platforms, mainly differentiated by their operating systems and all mutually incompatible. Differences aren’t limited only to the look and feel of the hardware and software, but extend to the kind of situations you’d want to use each of them in. Some have been developed with no-frills business applications in mind, some with games and multimedia, and some trying to bridge the two worlds. In many ways, Apple is playing the same game it played with desktop computers—tightly controlling the hardware and software to give users a premium and polished—if somewhat constrained—experience. This time though, it’s had a clear first-mover advantage, arguably defining the modern smartphone experience on its own. Recognizing that third-party software is key to the platform’s success, Apple also created the App Store, which we now know to be the center of the iOS ecosystem. Google, on the other hand, is playing things the way Microsoft did twenty years ago: building only the software, and letting anyone who wants it use it. To beat Apple’s early advantage, they decided to make it free of cost to manufacturers, and it’s paid off. That’s how we have dozens of models from various manufactuers, and also why there are so many differences in hardware, power, and usability. Android’s reach is now arguably greater than iOS’s, but it comes at the cost of stability, predictability, and now also security—the hallmark weaknesses of Windows. If Android continues to gain popularity, it will become the default choice for software developers, and thus become the standard that everyone else must become compatible with. In such a world, iOS, BlackBerry OS, WebOS and Windows Phone would live on as niche minority options, or some of them would die out entirely. Who knows, if Android truly is the Windows of the post-PC era, it might even overtake its desktop-bound ancestor as malware authors’ favorite target.

ALIENWARE X51 - A Hard Core Review

Battlefield 3’s metro station is being bombarded with RPG’s and the grenades as the assault squads begin flanking your team from all sides. You and your squadmates try desperately to hold the fort, but your team is losing tickets rapidly and you’re finding it increasingly hard to hold them back. It’s edge-of-the-seat stuff as the enemy decents upon you last control point, already having seized the rest of the map. You and your squad form the last line of the defence in the face of sure defeat. Yet you remain resolute, determined to turn the tide once again in your favor, The battle is racy, the compact gory, your nerves are twitching, your finger tight on the trigger, when suddenly the moment freezes. The battle is paused. To your horror, the game has crashed.

The hard core gamer’s conundrum

For too long you’ve had to bear the frustrations of the unreliable PC hardware and freezing consoles ruining your gaming experience at the most inopportune moments. If only you had a better, hassle-free PC designed for hard core gaming. If only consoles could live up to all the promises. If only someone could pack a full-scale gaming PC into small chassis.

       What may seem like a distant dream, is now a reality. Enter the Alienware X51, the new gaming desktop gaming PC packed into such a sleek and compact design that it would put other PCs and consoles into shame. It has a makings of a game changer. It will metamorphose the life of a hardcore gamer.

The Form Factor

Before the inevitable comparison Microsoft’s Xbox 360 pops its head, let’s dig into the basics. Let’s look at the form factor first. The X51’s slim-tower chassis measures a tidy 3.25 inches high, 3.75 inches wide, and 12.25 inches deep making it only a little bit larger than the Xbox 360. It can stand upright and lie down flat on its side. Its slot-loading DVD burner will fit in with aesthetics of any media rack. Peep inside the X52 and you’d find a pure PC: it employs a Mini-ITX motherboard, desktop-level Sandy Bridge Intel processors, and a full-sized slot graphics card (rotated 90 degrees and connected via a riser card to the PCle 2.1 × 16 slot). The news is that the X51 has a full-length 3D card sand witched on the top of the motherboard. Its ability to accept a full-length 3D card means the X51 is the slim- tower gaming machine out there.

Cutting Edge

The X51 is rugged and power packed. It is black, It’s lean, and it has a full-sized graphics card. It is upgradable. It packs full-sized gaming PC components into a chassis only marginally bigger than a Playstation 3. It as many ports as desktops PCs twice its size. It is the one of the first computers to use the desktop version of Nvida’s Optimus graphics switching technology. Look carefully. There’s an alien head emblem on the front and on either side, pair of translucent talons. No, they are not redundant embellishment. The individually light up in colours of your choice. That ain’t all, though. If you are a component junkie, peer under the hood. It is cleverly engineering! In the X51 matte case, full-size desktop fit together like a 3D jigsaw puzzle. Every single components are modular and can be replaced and upgradable with minimal effort and in an incredible short time. And there is not even hint of wasted space inside. If this is not cleverest engineering, what is?

         So much. But what’s the pedigree? Did you question the DNA? Do not. Look at the name. It is Alienware. It bears the Dell tag.

         So, what is so special about the Alienware X51? The console gaming space is already cluttered with big names like Xbox and Playstation. Why the X51? Okay, let’s admin the X51 neither the biggest nor the most powerful gaming PC the Dell owned company has ever unveiled, but it is certainly is the biggest challenge to traditional consoles to date.

Cool Connectivity

That’s all? Wait. You ain’t heard it all. Its connectivity options are unparalleled – the X 51 has many ports as desktop PC’s twice its size. On the front panel, alongside microphone and headphone jacks, you’ll find a pair of USB 2.0 ports. The back sports not only a dedicated HDMI 4.1 jack, four USB 2.0 ports, two USB 3.0 sockets, Gigabit Ethernet, and a full 3.5mm surround sound jack set, but also both digital optical and coaxial SPDIF audio outputs interface with any surround system. There’s more – 802.11n Wi-Fi, twin DVI video outputs and mini- HDMI on the rear of the graphics card.

Power Punch
The Alienware X51 is one of the first computers to use the desktop versions of Nvidia’s Optimus graphics switching technology. In simply words, The X51 attempts to save power by using the onboard Intel graphics when possible. You can get all the power of the dedicated Nvidia GPU through the full-size HDMI port without having use a special graphic card’s DVI and mini-HDMI outputs.

    Put, simply, Alienware is offering a gaming PC packaged for mass consumption, and that too at a price that does not burn in the gaming animal’s pocket. The X51 is a bang-for-the-buck machine. It is reasonable priced. It is solidity built. It is even portable. Moreover, Its upgradable , so you do not need to fret about the tomorrow’s games. It is a powerful home computer, and if you jingle a few extra coins, it can also transform into transform into a Blu-ray player.

         The Alienware X51 is a game changer, designed transform your experience unlike anything else before it. Surrender to the X51! Resistance is futile.

Toshiba Qosmio X500

"GOOD MULTIMEDAIA PERFORMER, BUT A TAD PRICEY."

For: Large screen, good speakers, good looks, Blu-ray writer.

Against: A bit expensive, flimsy build quality, GPU is a bit
dated, no USB 3.0.









Toshiba have gone with a bold and snazzy look for the X500. The bright red LED lighting gives it a very attractive look. The chassis is made up mostly of plastic, which isn’t very strong. There’s quite a bit of flex in the lid, which should not have been. Also, most areas have a glossy finish, so fingerprints and dirt are a nightmare. The hinge seems sturdy enough, allowing the screen to tilt back 160 degrees. At 4.75 kgs, you can’t even think of lugging this around as it’s too heavy. This is the first gaming notebook we’ve come across that sports a 18.4-inch full HD screen, which is simply gorgeous. 
                    There are four USB 2.0 ports in all (one ESATA combo) with sleep and charge function; no USB 3.0 ports though. Other features include HDMI, FireWire, Blu-ray writer, Express card slot, headphone and microphone jack and a VGA port. One thing we noticed was that the fit and finish of the chassis wasn’t very good. There were plenty of gaps around the optical drive and the ports didn’t fit well in the cut-outs of the frame. Overall, the build and finish wasn’t up to the mark; certainly not something you’d expect from a high-end gaming notebook. 

There are four USB 2.0 ports in all (one ESATA combo),

but no USB 3.0 ports.

SPECIFICATIONS

Dimensions (W x D x H): 44.2 x 29.4 x 4.6 cm; Weight:

4.75 kg; Processor: Intel Core i7-2630QM, 2.0 GHz;

RAM: 4 GB; Hard Disk: 750 GB; Optical Drive: Blu-Ray

writer; Display: 18.4 in, 1920x1080; GPU: GTX 460M;

Connectivity: 802.11b/g/n, Ethernet, HDMI, USB 2.0,

eSATA, FireWire; OS: Windows 7 Home Premium

                    The Harman Kardon speakers have large drivers, which can clearly be seen through the grill. A bunch of touch sensitive media keys are placed on the left, which is really annoying since you accidently hit them every time you start to type. The X500 is powered by the latest Intel Core i7-2630QM, which runs at a stock speed of 2.0 GHz, and can Turbo up to 2.9 GHz. Additionally, there’s 4 GB of RAM, a 750 GB hard drive and a Nvidia GTX 460M graphics card. The X500 is pretty well-equipped for a gaming notebook other than the fact that the graphics card is slightly old. While the CPU performance is solid in most benchmarks, the graphics card shows its age in the gaming tests.The X500 runs relatively cool and quiet even when stressed. The backlighting of the keyboard is even, but the keys themselves could have been designed better. The shortcut keys on the left could have been placed elsewhere as they always get in the way. They make an annoyingly loud beep every time you press them and there’s no way to disable that. 
                    The Harman Kardon speakers are one of the best in a notebook. The soundstage is wide and they are able to reproduce clear highs and mids. The low end is notvery pronounced, but then again we don’t really expect it to be. The X500 is fitted with a 12-cell Li-ion battery which lasted only 1 hour 20 mins on Battery Eater Pro, which is average.Toshiba has priced it at Rs 1,00,990, which is not bad considering the large screen and great speakers. There are some minor niggles, like the average build quality, annoying shortcut buttons, and the outdated graphics card, which makes this price tag seem rather high.

What’s New in 2012 Security Suites

More viruses, more protection? In the stress test we show how well the new security suites protect against the flood of malware.

You would have to look deep into the architecture of the security suites to understand the developments made in the 2012 version. Even though nothing much appears changed, it’s worthwhile to take a closer look. How will these antivirus programs with their improvements fare against the current malwares, we test just that in the AV test lab. We are very keen to see if the developers have ironed out the biggest weakness of the software that was seen in the 2011 version – poor system disinfection. 

           The biggest danger for computer users currently is the sheer number of newer variants of known malware that keep popping up. Symantec registered a total of 286 million different viruses, Trojans, backdoors and others in the last year. Most of these exist on the web for a very short while – 75 percent of the malware do not affect more than 50 computers worldwide.

Collected knowledge about viruses

There are two sets of solution to fight malware: Information about viruses should spread quickly over the cloud, unknown malware should be better recognized with real time protection. Kaspersky distributes updates for new viruses to users just after 90 seconds they are out. Even ESET, one of the few products till now without a cloud connection, has followed suit with Smart Security 5. The result is remarkable: the latter that was beaten last year, this year Smart Security 5 recognizes and blocks all unknown malware without any errors. ESET now effectively detects even the malware programmed in the laboratory (zoo malware) with which AV-test checks the recognition mechanism. Together with improved system performance, the program catapults itself from the last place directly into the top group. Even in real time protection, which recognizes threat with the help of behavioural detection technology, developers have beefed up security. According to Stefan Wesche, Technical Expert Norton Products, the latest version of Norton Internet Security, supervises over 120 new behaviours in the active processes in real time. G Data has integrated proactive protection against online banking Trojans like Zeus. Both programs are among the best in malware recognition last year. Microsoft’s free scanner Security Essentials cannot exactly keep up with them, however it’s more effective than other full suites and even pushes McAfee to the last rank. Its Internet Security 2012 recognized too few malware like its predecessor. Even when McAfee assured us that there will be technical innovations in the beginning of the year 2012, we do not recommend the program in its current state.

 Finally, better system disinfection? 

System DISINFECTION :
In comparison to last year, the cleaning of infected
systems has improved.

However, Kaspersky holds the top spot in the malware analysis with a very high recognition rate of unknown malware, rootkits and zoo malware. In addition, the Internet Security 2012 cleans infected systems very thoroughly. From 24 malware, it managed to remove at least 21. Here, only ESET was a bit better and removed only 23 of the 24 malware. Other vendors like F-Secure have also improved the system cleaning visibly, which was the biggest drawback in the previous version that was released last year. Some exceptions: McAfee Internet Security 2012 undercut the unsatisfactory results of the last year. The suite did not recognize five of the malware at all, and in all it removed less than half of the total number of malware (11 out of 24). Even Microsoft’s free protection software managed better than that. Although the scanner did not keep up with the best commercial programs, if you want something without having to pay a paisa, this still provides solid protection. Only thing is that you cannot create a recovery CD with it. This would have been useful in case the system cleaning fails in Windows. Such a live system (mostly Linux based) can be created in other programs at any time and you can subsequently disinfect the system with this.

Stopped instead of removed

A cleaner and more secure computer is one thing, but it should also be fast. At least the security suite should not overly slow down the system. AV-test analysed the system load on a desktop PC running Windows 7 Ultimate, powered by a quad-core Intel Xeon CPU (2.83 GHz) and 4 GB of RAM. Typical tasks such as system startup, file transfer, download, website loading, application installation and launching were timed. Contrary to the widely spreading prejudice, Norton was the frontrunner in the overall performance test. This is not surprising since Norton was already at the second place last year in this assessment. What is remarkable is just the minimal lag in Windows startup in the range of milliseconds. Moreover, Norton scanned downloaded files faster than the competition and allowed programs such as Adobe Acrobat Reader or LibreOffice to install smoothly – only Avira and McAfee were better here. The activity for which the computer is most often used by many is very dangerous: surfing the web. According to Symantec, the number of web-based malware attacks has increased in the past year by 93 percent. Here, the security programs had to take a closer look without slowing down the browser. With the help of the information stored in the cloud database, the virus scanner analyses the reputation of the website you have opened. This is based on the experiences of the clients connected to the cloud – if the website has been identified as a source for viruses and malicious content, then it is directly blocked. For unknown sites, the scan engine analyses the downloaded HTML or Java Script code on the computer. The 2012 Internet Security suite from G Data seems to look even closer since it required a little more time to load sites such as Amazon, YouTube or Wikipedia – and that with a 100 Mbps dedicated line in the test laboratory. Neither the testers from AV-Test nor those from G Data could explain this. However, one reason could be the time-consuming scan with a second engine which had brought G Data to the last place in the performance assessment last year. For users who feel that the system should be fast with an antivirus installed, G Data shouldn’t be the first preference. However, for protection-oriented users, it offers the second best recognition rate in the test. 

Less added value through new extras

System LOAD :

Some suites slow down the computer to a great extent

during tasks like system start or downloading

Panda offers an additional surfing protection. With the secure browsing feature which runs in a Sandbox, you can browse the web without worrying about being infected by malware. But this feature only works after you download and install the additional component called VirtualBox. Other manufacturers are also trying to make their products more attractive with additional features besides the virus weaponry. Symantec offers the option to manage all the computers on which Norton is installed via remote maintenance, something that is especially interesting for smaller networks. Kaspersky has once again integrated the File Advisor with which you can upload individual files for virus scan with a click. But as for most functions, there are many freeware tools that can do the same job just as well or even better. The free support that Avira offers for all users is however very helpful – including remote assistance. Through the automatically installed TeamViewer, Avira Support can solve many problems directly on the users’ computers. If you want to stay loyal to your current antivirus brand, you can upgrade to the 2012 version for free if you still have valid licenses. The improvements in the latest version provide better protection which no one should ignore.

Verdict

First Runner Up : Kaspersky Internet Security 2012 uses a cloud-based

reputation database for effective threat detection.

The security suites have improved overall, even if none of them offers you perfect protection. The package that offers by far the best protection and performance is F-Secure Internet Security 2012, and it wins just ahead of Kaspersky Internet Security 2012. Norton is the best at economically utilizing system resources, while ESET shines as the most improved product of the lot. McAfee remains disappointing, however, and still lags behind Microsoft's free security solution. 

Test winner

F-Secure offers the best protection and an easily understandable interface.

Test winner : The Online Safety module in F-Secure Internet Security 2012 allows limiting

 web access.

Solid State Drives and Standard hard drives : A Comparison

Everyone needs to store data; the only question is whether the new solid-state drives have overtaken standard hard drives. We puts spinning platters against compete against ROM and reveals the advantages and the disadvantages of both classes.

Most people agree you can never have enough storage space! But in the computer world, where CPUs are already no longer measured by Gigahertz numbers and the prices of notebooks count more than their performance, hard drives are not bought for their capacity alone. Good performance, energy effi ciency, and robustness also have to be considered. In this scenario, standard hard disks have the size and price advantages, while on the other hand modern solid state drives offer speed and reliability. Which one will win the battle overall? We invites you to watch our storage format war!

Round 1: Speed

At first, 2 Terabytes of disk space sounds impressive. But what is the use of such giant hard disks when you have to wait for hours to store your data? Today’s 3.5- inch HDDs, are all equipped with SATA 2 interfaces (though SATA 3 will become popular this year) which are found in every current PC and are known to provide solid performance. The current best-selling hard drives have average data transfer speeds of 111 MBps, both during data reading and writing. In practice, this means that copying the entire contents of a DVD onto another hard disk takes nearly 45 minutes. The transfer rate falls around 28 percent with smaller 2.5-inch drives, which are used in notebooks and super-compact desktops. The fastest notebook hard drives on the market today achieve around 80MBps while reading and around 75MBps while writing which is just about OK. Now Solid State Drives (SSDs) enter the ring—and all hard drives are simply wiped out. The Intel X25-E (and the internally identical Kingston SSDNow E Series) reach data speeds of 243 MBps when reading and more than 206 MBps when writing. The best SSD is nearly twice as fast as a top 3.5-inch hard disk and approximately three times speed of a top notebook hard drive! Even the SSDs in the lower ranges of the price-performance list off er data rates comparable to the fastest HDDs.And this is not all: the fastest SSDs already achieve the theoretical 3Gbps limit of SATA 2. SSDs will become even faster as soon as SATA 3.0 drives and controllers are available, since this standard doubles the rated speed to 6 Gbps. You won’t even have time for a sip of coffee. The difference is really striking when you consider access times, i.e. the standby time before which stored data can be accessed. The top-performing Western Digital VelociRaptor manages with very little standby time of just 7 milliseconds while reading. While writing  drives need 15 ms while reading and 10 ms while writing. Notebook HDDs work with access times of upto 15 milliseconds for the same tasks.The Intel X25-E lowers standby time to almost zero. Only 0.07 milliseconds while reading and 0.05 milliseconds while writing. This is 60 times faster than the VelociRaptor! Clearly the first round goes to solid state drives. But beware: all SSDs are not created equal. The worst Flash drives are extremely sluggish with more than 200 milliseconds of delay while writing. Even the most appalling notebook HDD does not require more than 17 milliseconds.

Round 2: Priceperformance analysis

Hard drives had no chance in the speed comparison, but this is not a reason to count them out. Magnetic drives have a very, very strong trump cards to use: the maximum capacity and the price per Gigabyte figures. Today, there are already 3.5-inch hard drives with 2 Terabyte capacities, and notebook drives are hitting 1 TB (though the biggest standard-height drives are still 500 GB) and the pace of development has not slowed down. And this is frankly enough to hold off the attack of the SSDs for now. The current standard of normal SSDs are available in sizes of up to only 256 GB. The few exceptions which go as high as 512 GB are stratospherically expensive. Though 256 GB is enough for most applications, it’s just not enough for today’s digital films, music and photos. The price per Gigabyte round just goes against SSDs. A 1 TB 3.5-inch drive should cost no more than Rs 4,500. This works out to 1 GB of space for Rs 4.5 per gigabyte. At present a notebook drive costs Rs 4,800 for 500 GB, which comes to Rs 9.6 per GB. On the other hand, the fastest Intel X25-E costs US$ 799 for only 64 GB! Even the cheapest 32 GB SSD comes for around US$ 100 . The painful thing for all SSD fans is that they must pay many times more for the comparatively modest 2x performance boost. Also you cannot have high space demands, or you will need to use the SSD solely for

applications and add another HDD for mass storage. Clearly the second round goes to HDDs.

Round 3: Electricity consumption

Most users and buyers rarely consider anything beyond the speed, capacity and cost. However SSDs are trying to attract attention to another area: a good modern SSD needs only 1 Watt while reading and 2 Watts while writing data. In comparison with 3.5-inch HDDs, this is a big advantage since the best case scenario for them is 4 Watts on average. However notebook HDDs keep up very well; even reasonably priced ones consume between 0.6 and 2.2 Watts on average while reading and 2.5 Watts while writing. Therefore this round is a draw.

Round 4: Stability

Better robustness is taken for granted with Flash memory. SSDs have no moving parts and can recover from vibrations and shocks better than hard drives which have delicate read heads and thin magnetic platters. For those who use their laptops outdoors, in moving vehicles or in harsh conditions, an SSD is a better choice. But what about their overalldurability? Here, there is still no longterm test to prove which is better. SSDs are still too new, and Flash modules have a limited lifespan. SLC chips can withstand around 100,000 writing circles, but MLC chips can take only around 10,000. That is why manufactures have come up with a variety of techniques to distribute write operations in cycles across the memory area so that no part gets worn out. And just like HDDs, SSDs also come with guarantees of three to fi ve years. Being tested and known, HDDs win out here.

Round 5: Operating Noise

Our final parameter is the amount of noise each type of drive makes. SSDs seem to win here since they have no moving parts making noise at all. However the notebook drive is also not bad: it’s rare to hear even a slight whisper while in operation. In contrast, 3.5-inch hard drives can be heard from quite far away, and the noisiest of them all is the the Western Digital VelociRaptor, which spins at an amazing speed to achieve its fast data rates. In this round the victory goes to SSDs.

The Result: Undecided!

Which type of drive is better? Even after extensive testing, CHIP reads this result as a draw, because the answer depends on the individual demands of the user. Those who wish for the ultimate in performance with no worries about price and no high memory requirements should go with an SSD. Even laptop owners who travel a lot and expose them to harsh conditions are served well with SSDs. If you are lucky enough to have a laptop with space for two drives, you can get an SSD to boot from and a HDD for bulk storage; a fi ne balance. For all other users, an SSD is just not worth it. At prevailing prices, one can get a standard hard drive with lots of memory space for very little money.

The Power of DLNA

A simple set of networking standards built into most of today’s entertainment devices will let you use them all together.

Nearly a decade ago, consumer electronics manufacturers began realizing that consumers’ demands were evolving, and the idea of a “digital lifestyle” began to take hold. People were already looking for ways to avoid duplicating files, burning CDs and being physically tied to their devices. So manufacturers began seeing the advantages of a more connected lifestyle—why should anyone be forced to play digital music tracks only on the computers they are saved on when they have a perfectly good stereo system? Why shouldn’t anyone be able to watch their movies and TV shows on any screen in the house, including phones and tablets? DLNA (the Digital Living Network Alliance) is a set of guidelines and standards that PC and electronics makers can use to ensure that their devices are able to share media and talk to each other without the need to deal with any of the technicalities. Certified products usually carry the DLNA logo, so buyers are assured of compatibility. In order to be compliant, devices have to be able to connect to a network. If the network is set to allow devices to join automatically, configuration can be automatic. Ideally, users should be able to plug in their devices and immediately start browsing, playing and controlling media. Different devices support DLNA functions differently, and can be summed up as follows:

• DLNA SERVERS: These are typically networked hard drives, libraries onyour PC, and media hubs that attachto your TV. They host the files thatwill be streamed across your networkDLNA 
• PLAYERS: These are TVs, mobile phones, speaker docks, digital receivers and even some PC software, which you can use to pull media from a server and play it.
• DLNA CONTROLLERS AND RENDERERS: In many cases, you can use a DLNA device to pull media from a server and play it on another device. In this case, one device is the Controller (such as a smartphone running a remote control app) and the target device is a Renderer (TVs, media receivers, speaker docks etc, which simply receive media that is pushed to them).

Additionally, some of these devices might support Digital Media Uploader and Downloader functions, which were conceptualized for copying media to and from portable devices such as MP3 players. You can usually use these functions to copy files from a Server to a Player or vice versa.

           Different devices will support different combinations of DLNA functions, for example a network media receiver such as the WD TV Live Hub lets you browse and play media on a server (acting as a Player), but will also stream to other devices from its internal hard drive (acting as a Server) and can receive commands from a cellphone (acting only as a Renderer). Most apps let you choose between rendering on the device itself or on other devices detected on the network. This might be confusing, but the good news is you really don’t have to keep track of what each device is doing—this information is just to help you use all the flexibility that your devices are capable of off ering.

            DLNA streaming also lets you avoid making additional copies of your files and wasting space on your phone or tablet. To use your iPhone, iPad or iPod touch as a DLNA Player or Controller, you’ll need a suitable app. Two examples are SmartStor Fusion Stream, which is packed with features, and Living Media Player, which is a much simpler option. After downloading and LMPlayer or Smartstor Fusion Stream, the first thing you’ll see is a list of servers detected on the network. You’ll need to be connected via Wi-Fi and the DLNA Server (your computersor storagedevices) will need to be on the same network, though they can be connected either with a fixed wire or wirelessly. Once you select your server, you’ll be able to navigate its contents. You can browse by metadata such as title, artist, etc, or by the files’ actual folder location. Note that both applications have a dropdown menu near the top. Clicking this scans the network for compatible DLNA Renderers, so you can select which device your files will start playing on. You can play most types of videos on your iPhone, iPod or iPad itself (with the notable exception of AVI files, due to a limitation in iOS). However you can still use these apps to control playback of the same files on other devices such as your TV or media receiver—in this case the apps act only as DLNA Controllers. SmartStor Fusion Stream adds Uploader and Downloader functions in addition to playlist creation. If the need arises, you can use it to carry copies of your files with you, or selectively copy them to other compatible devices. You can even upload photos taken with your iPhone/iPod camera to a server for storage, though you have to select one at a time.