Understanding tech language: The difference between malware and a virus

While cleaning up an infected PC, Flingwing asked the Antivirus & Security Software forum to explain the difference between malware and viruses.

Depending on how technically correct you want to be, viruses are a subset of malware, or the two words mean the same thing.

The word malware (malicious software) describes any piece of code designed to infect your computer (or mobile device) and make it do things that you don't want it to do, such as mass-mail spam or steal your banking passwords. Trojans, worms, and rootkits are all types of malware.

And so is a virus, in its most technically-correct meaning. A virus is malicious code that spreads by infecting existing files, similar to the way a biological virus spreads by infecting living cells.

[Email your tech questions to answer@pcworld.com.]

Once common, true computer viruses have become quite rare. Criminals have found better ways to spread malicious code.

So if viruses are rare, why do people still talk about them? And why do we still run antivirus programs?

Viruses were the dominant form of malware in the 1980s and 90s, when personal computers were first becoming common. At that time, there was no commonly-used umbrella term such as malware, so people called any malicious program a virus.

And the word has stuck. Although that program you keep running in the background protects you (hopefully) from all forms of malware, it's called antivirus because that type of program has always been called antivirus.

By the way, if you've got a malware problem that isn't merely linguistic, see When malware strikes: How to clean an infected PC.

Read the original forum discussion.

When he isn't bicycling, prowling used bookstores, or watching movies, PC World Contributing Editor Lincoln Spector writes about technology and cinema.
More by Lincoln Spector

View the original article here

Feedly walks fine line between free and paid RSS services

Computerworld - Feedly on Monday launched its paid RSS service, following up on a promise made three weeks ago when it announced a subscription option.

Previously, Feedly had offered $99.99 lifetime subscriptions to the first 5,000 customers who plunked down a credit card. Later that same day, the Palo Alto, Calif. company said it had sold out of the lifetime accounts within eight hours, raising nearly $500,000 from the offer.

Today, Feedly began taking orders for the Pro version of its news reader service: Customers pay $5 per month or $45 annually.

Feedly Pro includes all the features found in the free version, and adds article search, one-click integration with Evernote and Pocket -- the latter was formerly known as Read It Later -- and priority support.

An HTTPS connection option, which was originally a Pro-only feature, was added to the free version of the service after customers complained.

"New Pro features will be added regularly. The goal is to offer our most passionate users more productivity and make Feedly sustainable in the long run," said Cyril Moutran, co-founder of Feedly and its head of products and strategy, in a Monday blog.

"Sustainable" is a word that Feedly has used before to characterize its push into a paid service.

When Google announced earlier this year that it would pull the plug on its free Reader, several pundits pointed out that because free services are more easily abandoned, it made sense to trust companies with for-fee services because they were more likely to survive long-term, and more responsive to paying customers.

That hasn't necessarily struck a nerve with all Feedly customers, some of whom again today bemoaned the move to a paid service or the exclusion of features such as search from the free version.

"Disappointing to need to pay for search as that's a major feature missing from the Google Reader transition," commented someone identified only as "Seth" today. "Evernote, Pocket, and support strike me as just a minor feature bundle to help people get over the fact that they'd have to pay for searching their content. If another company does it free, I will likely switch despite the great start you've had."

"I don't understand why you would want people to pay for the article search," added one of several commenters labeled "Anonymous" today. "I really appreciate that you created Feedly but just because you can and you want some money you should not make us pay for features we had in Google Reader."

The free version of Feedly will remain in place, and new features will be added to it, the company has promised.

Like any service that offers both free and paid versions -- the so-called "freemium" business model -- Feedly must walk a fine line between satisfying the bulk of its users, who rely on the free version, and proving to its paying subscribers that their money has been well spent.

"We don't see a conflict between paid and not paid services, but perhaps a tension between the two," said Moutran in an email reply to questions, including whether there was an inherent conflict between free and paid under a freemium model.

"We'll continue to negotiate that area by listening to our users and doing our best to make the appropriate services available at the appropriate level," Moutran continued. "Maintaining a free version of Feedly is key in our model to keep marketing cost low. It also forces us to create enough value to convince users the Pro version is worth it. Free users also help us make the product better."

But the fact is, Moutran said, a paid level of service was necessary. "We have to execute on our business plan. A premium account has always been part of that plan," he asserted.

Moutran also echoed the thoughts expressed by bloggers in March after Google's decision to kill Reader. "We have also heard people express concerns about using Feedly because it was free, and therefore had no sustainable business model," Moutran said.

Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news for Computerworld. Follow Gregg on Twitter at  @gkeizer, on Google+ or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed . His email address is gkeizer@computerworld.com.

See more by Gregg Keizer on Computerworld.com.

Read more about Internet in Computerworld's Internet Topic Center.

Small and midsize businesses are moving to the cloud to host their communications capabilities. Learn how enterprise-quality phone benefits, online management, conferencing, auto attendant, and ease of use are built into a system that is half the cost of a PBX.

Read now.

View the original article here

Feedly walks fine line between free and paid RSS services

Feedly on Monday launched its paid RSS service, following up on a promise made three weeks ago when it announced a subscription option.

Previously, Feedly had offered $100 lifetime subscriptions to the first 5000 customers who plunked down a credit card. Later that same day, the Palo Alto, Calif., company said it had sold out of the lifetime accounts within eight hours, raising nearly $500,000 from the offer.

Monday, Feedly began taking orders for the Pro version of its news reader service: Customers pay $5 per month or $45 annually.

Feedly Pro includes all the features found in the free version, and adds article search, one-click integration with Evernote and Pocket—the latter was formerly known as Read It Later—and priority support.

An HTTPS connection option, which was originally a Pro-only feature, was added to the free version of the service after customers complained.

“New Pro features will be added regularly. The goal is to offer our most passionate users more productivity and make Feedly sustainable in the long run,” said Cyril Moutran, co-founder of Feedly and its head of products and strategy, in a Monday blog.

“Sustainable” is a word that Feedly has used before to characterize its push into a paid service.

When Google announced earlier this year that it would pull the plug on its free Reader, several pundits pointed out that because free services are more easily abandoned, it made sense to trust companies with for-fee services because they were more likely to survive long-term, and more responsive to paying customers.

That hasn’t necessarily struck a nerve with all Feedly customers, some of whom on Monday again bemoaned the move to a paid service or the exclusion of features such as search from the free version.

“Disappointing to need to pay for search as that’s a major feature missing from the Google Reader transition,” commented someone identified only as “Seth” today. “Evernote, Pocket, and support strike me as just a minor feature bundle to help people get over the fact that they’d have to pay for searching their content. If another company does it free, I will likely switch despite the great start you’ve had.”

“I don’t understand why you would want people to pay for the article search,” added one of several commenters labeled “Anonymous” today. “I really appreciate that you created Feedly but just because you can and you want some money you should not make us pay for features we had in Google Reader.”

The free version of Feedly will remain in place, and new features will be added to it, the company has promised.

Like any service that offers both free and paid versions—the so-called “freemium” business model—Feedly must walk a fine line between satisfying the bulk of its users, who rely on the free version, and proving to its paying subscribers that their money has been well spent.

“We don’t see a conflict between paid and not paid services, but perhaps a tension between the two,” said Moutran in an email reply to questions, including whether there was an inherent conflict between free and paid under a freemium model.

“We’ll continue to negotiate that area by listening to our users and doing our best to make the appropriate services available at the appropriate level,” Moutran continued. “Maintaining a free version of Feedly is key in our model to keep marketing cost low. It also forces us to create enough value to convince users the Pro version is worth it. Free users also help us make the product better.”

But the fact is, Moutran said, a paid level of service was necessary. “We have to execute on our business plan. A premium account has always been part of that plan,” he asserted.

Moutran also echoed the thoughts expressed by bloggers in March after Google’s decision to kill Reader. “We have also heard people express concerns about using Feedly because it was free, and therefore had no sustainable business model,” Moutran said.

Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news.
More by Gregg Keizer, Computerworld

View the original article here

Google Drive blurs the line between Windows and the web with new desktop shortcuts

Google's unrelenting march into Microsoft's turf continues.

A mere two weeks after the release of the Chrome App Launcher for Windows—Google's backdoor into the offline world, basically—the company has announced that when Windows users install the desktop version of Google Drive, it will automatically dump shortcuts for Google Docs, Google Sheets, and Google Drive on your desktop, along with one for your Drive-based online storage.

Double-clicking on one of those icons opens up the associated web app. After signing in to your Google account you're free to powerhouse through your productivity tasks, and all your work will automatically save to the cloud, the Google Drive team explained in a Google+ post. These simple desktop links could prove handy indeed for non-techies or people who chose to live their lives in Google's free, cloud-connected ecosystem, especially if you configure the Drive family of apps to work offline.

Google

While default shortcut dumps are evil incarnate and should be cast back into the depths from which they spawned, Google's move is actually pretty savvy. Not only do the shortcuts reinforce the fact that Drive is a full productivity suite rather than a simple cloud storage box, but like the Chrome app launcher, they also keep Google's service in your face. Plus, the shortcuts further muddle the increasingly blurry line between the desktop and the open web.

“For quite some time, we’ve had a dichotomy between web apps and native apps, and one of the things that sets them apart is the ability [for native apps] to be launched from the desktop and have a degree of persistence and independence from the browser,” Ross Rubin, principal analyst at Reticle Research, told PCWorld when the Chrome App Launcher was released. "…People want to interact with their web apps as easily as they do with their desktop apps."

The Chrome App Launcher helps to break down those walls, and now, so will these Drive-related shortcuts.

And Google? Well, Google makes its money by tossing ads at your eyeballs when you're on the web. Check out PCWorld's Chrome App Launcher analysis for the full scoop on what Google stands to gain by dumping web apps on your desktop, and look for the Google Drive installation tweak to roll out sometime in the next week.

Brad Chacos spends the days jamming to Spotify, digging through desktop PCs and covering everything from BYOD tablets to DIY tesla coils.
More by Brad Chacos

View the original article here