Lenovo IdeaPad S9e Battery | http://www.labatterie.fr

If you discover weak areas, first try repositioning your router’s antennas. If that doesn’t do the trick, it may be worth considering Powerline adapters or wireless repeaters to bolster your network.The 2.4Ghz band is infamously known as the ‘junk band’. Everything from Bluetooth and cordless phones to CCTV and microwaves have been lumped into the band for decades, causing massive amounts of interference. Thankfully, the 5Ghz band has come to the rescue, which not only is much less congested, but also occupies a wider frequency range. This means that there are anywhere from eight to 23 non-overlapping channels. A dual-band router offers both the 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz bands.However, there are a couple of things to consider before running out and buying a shiny new dual-band router. Generally speaking, lower frequencies travel further, meaning that the 5Ghz band won’t have the same range as the 2.4Ghz band. This problem is mitigated with new antenna technologies, but if your router is a fair distance from your streaming device, you may find you get better performance from the 2.4Ghz band.

Also, not all 802.11n devices support dual band. For example, the Apple TV 2 and 3, the Roku 3 and Amazon’s Fire TV all connect to the 5GHz band but Google’s Chromecast does not. Be sure to check the specifications of your streaming device.The new 802.11ac standard promises to be a game changer for high-def wireless streaming. 802.11ac can achieve theoretical speeds of 1.3 Gbps compared to a maximum of 450 Mbps on 802.11n. While there are a few 802.11ac media bridges, most of the current media streaming devices do not support the standard and so this article won’t focus on it.Many midrange and high-end routers let you to manage your bandwidth through a method called Quality of Service (QoS). QoS essentially allows you to prioritise certain types of traffic over other activity on the network. How to implement QoS varies from router to router, but if you’re lucky, it can be as straightforward as logging into the admin panel, and prioritising traffic streams based on the IP address, application, port, or Media Access Control (MAC) address. MAC addresses are generally a good way to go because they won’t change.

If after adjusting your channels and prioritising your web traffic, you’re still struggling to stream your content, don’t despair; there are plenty of other things you can try. Depending on the device you are using to stream your content, have a look through the settings to see if there is anything that can be tweaked. Below are the support pages for some of the top streaming devices and services. Happy streaming!Last week the Superfish debacle became news and PC manufacturer Lenovo was slammed for pre-installing adware on new laptops.Since then I’ve had people ask me about how dangerous this stuff actually is and whether or not security software that works in similar ways poses similar threats.I think that the main issue here is that there is a balance to be found between providing security and exposing the system to extra threats. Core to this is the question:Are programmers of security tools any more able to write secure code than programmers who work on software that is unrelated to security tasks?

A local shop used to have a security guard who stood by the door. He monitored who entered the shop and who left — and with what. So hopefully he could hinder armed robbers from entering the store and prevent shoplifters laden with stolen goods from leaving it.This seems like a no-brainer. Even if he’s not a very perceptive guard, and catches only a fraction of the threats to the business, surely he’s better than nothing?Well, in this case he wasn’t better than nothing because he was stealing from the shop! He himself presented a threat to the business. Not only that but he had greater access to the shop’s goods than an ordinary customer.Even if the security guard was not intentionally malicious he could be completely incompetent. Criminals who know this could target the store assured that they would be able to commit crimes without sanction. His very presence poses a threat because the bad guys know that they can distract him easily while they shoplift.

Let’s apply that idea to security software. Maybe we have an anti-virus program that monitors SSL connections and detects a percentage of incoming threats that were downloaded from an HTTPS website. This seems sensible — at least it will catch some of the threats, if not all.But what if the way that software works is a bit broken? What if it exposes an extra jugular for an attacker to aim for? This is the incompetent security guard. Criminals who know about the business’ vulnerability (the broken security measures — software or human) can target it.In the cases of Superfish and Privdog it seems that the way these products work provides an opportunity for bad guys to pretty much undermine the assurances provided by websites using SSL. On one hand these tools may provide useful functionality (although that’s a matter of opinion) but on the other they have introduced a new and serious vulnerability into the system.I don’t think anyone is currently accusing security firms of having malicious intent in the way that they have developed anti-malware software. The issue is more about competence.

All software contains bugs, including vulnerabilities that have an impact on security. Security holes in software that works closest to the operating system, at a low level, are potentially far more serious than problems with applications that run at a high level with limited privileges.As Joxean Koret notes in his research [PDF], “the general aim of an Antivirus is to offer a better level of protection than what the underlying operating system offers alone. And they often fail miserably… Any software that you install makes you a bit more vulnerable. AV engines are not exceptions. Just the opposite… If your application runs with the highest privileges, installs kernel drivers, a packet filter and tries to handle anything your computer can do… Your attack surface dramatically increases.”If security software is not created with extra care they actually pose a threat to their users due to the nature of what they do and how they integrate with the operating system. Joxean’s work suggests that some who write security software are not actually any more skilled in writing secure code than those who write software unrelated to security.

The Asus Transformer Book T100 was the device that led the low-cost Windows charge, but time – and technology – have marched on. Since its launch, several generations of low-cost Windows cloudbooks, and Google’s Chromebooks, have transformed the laptop marketplace completely – a £300 ultraportable is no longer something to get excited about. If you’re looking for the best alternatives to buy, then click here to peruse our guide to the best laptops and hybrids that you can buy right now.Alternatively, feel free to scroll down and read our review of the original Transformer Book T100, the affordable hybrid which started it all. If you can pick it up dirt cheap on Ebay, or second-hand, it may still be worth snapping up.We were sad to see the netbook sink into obscurity, so it was with some pleasure that we unpacked Asus’ latest low-cost Windows device, the Transformer Book T100. Just like its Android-powered namesakes, the Transformer Book T100 partners a 10.1in tablet with a matching keyboard dock – the difference is that it has a quad-core Intel Atom processor and runs Windows 8.1. The big news, though, is that it costs only £349. See also: The best laptops of 2015

If your memories of netbooks are of chubby, miniaturised laptops with glacial performance, then be assured – this Asus is nothing of the sort. In the flesh, the Transformer Book T100 isn’t only surprisingly petite; it’s even moderately attractive. The dark-grey plastics of the base are imprinted with a fake brushed-metal finish, and the tablet’s glossy plastic lid mimics Asus’ top-flight Zenbooks with circular patterns spinning around the Asus logo. On its own, the 10.1in tablet weighs a mere 550g, and measures 11mm thick, and while there isn’t the premium-feeling build quality of the best Android tablets, or Apple’s iPad Air, it isn’t unforgiveably low-rent. There is some give in the plastic rear when you press on it, but it feels solid enough in normal use. Slot it back into the keyboard base and the two latches hold it firmly, only letting go once the release catch on the hinge is pressed all the way in. Together, the pair weighs 1.07kg.

The Asus’ design is nothing revolutionary, but the hardware inside certainly is: it marks the debut of Intel’s latest Atom platform, Bay Trail. This is big news, and perhaps the biggest development for the Atom platform since its inception – Intel has promised dramatic performance improvements.At the heart of Bay Trail lies the new 22nm Silvermont microarchitecture. This introduces a quad-core design and out-of-order execution, as well as support for USB 3, DDR3 RAM and 64-bit operating systems. Graphics performance promises to take a leap forwards, too, thanks to the presence of a cut-down Ivy Bridge-class GPU. The Transformer Book T100 is powered by a mid-range Bay Trail CPU, the quad-core, 1.33GHz Atom Z3740, which is capable of running at burst frequencies of up to 1.86GHz. Although the Atom Z3740 supports up to 4GB of RAM, Asus has focused on keeping the Transformer Book T100 affordable – there’s a basic 2GB of DDR3 RAM and 32GB of eMMC flash storage. Nothing fancy, in other words.

In everyday use, however, the new face of Intel’s Atom brings as dramatic a transformation as you could hope for. Compared to our experiences of Windows 8 on the previous generation of devices (Atom Clover Trail), the Asus is a veritable speed demon. Applications load far more energetically; web browsing is slick and smooth; and the overall experience remains impressively responsive, right up to the point where the limitations of the 2GB of RAM start to show.In benchmark testing, the Asus left Clover Trail-powered rivals far behind. Where the 1.8Ghz Atom Z2760 of the Dell Latitude 10 scored 0.22 in our Real World Benchmarks, the Asus racked up a result of 0.32, which is more than 45% faster. The biggest improvement was in the Media element of our benchmarks, which tests a device’s ability to encode MP3 files, render HD video and edit image files in Photoshop. Where the dual-core, Hyper-Threaded CPU in the Dell scored 0.18, the Asus’ quad-core CPU sped ahead with 0.35 – an improvement of 94%.http://www.dearbattery.co.uk

Oldal ajánlása emailben

Kommentek