FROM: Beau Smith "silly_willy_walnut_head"
TO: Mom
SUBJECT: I'm not typing a subject in this thing
--
Hey, Mom,
Earlier this week you asked if there was any kind of virus out there that could be the next Conficker. I'm glad you asked because I found something pretty serious. It's not on the level of Conficker, but Microsoft thinks it's enough to give it a high alert level.
Every Tuesday, Microsoft sends out patches to update the system, and one of them had been causing systems to crash. They researched it, and they found out that it's actually a virus called Alureon that's causing the problem. Alureon is a type of virus that controls a person's system; it's very hard to detect, and many people don't know they have it. It's able to monitor a user's Internet traffic and look for passwords, credit card numbers, and other personal information. What's even more alarming is that it doesn't show itself on a system until it causes it to crash.
We're both probably wondering the same thing: why didn't Microsoft detect this before it sent out the patch? From what I've seen, the patch shouldn't cause problems unless the system has the virus. The patch is just a way of discovering the problem. Plus, a virus like Alureon is written to keep itself hidden. When it's installed on a system, it deletes its own installation files, which goes a long way toward covering its tracks.
It's pretty overwhelming to think about all this, but preventing it is pretty straightforward. I definitely recommend buying Norton AntiVirus or Symantec AntiVirus. You can set them to scan all the files on your computer; this makes sure if there's anything in the system. They're good at isolating and removing viruses (including ones like this). One thing is to take extra caution when on the Internet; go to sites and accept emails from people you trust, and install a pop-up blocker on Firefox. Norton has a feature which I love: when you surf the Internet, it detects whether or not sites can be trusted. If a site doesn't look safe, the program gives you a warning screen.
Also, be sure to turn on your firewall and have the system check for updates every day. These keep your computer current and more secure. Plus, since Alureon looks for password data, be sure to change your computer's password and your online passwords. You can make them longer, add in a '$' or '&' character, and scramble letters so that they don't form words or phrases.
Hope that helps! I added the sites I found; they'll show you a lot about what's going on.
Love,
Beau
--
1. "Win32/Alureon"
2. "MS10-015 Restart Issues"
3. "Backdoor.Tidserv|Symantec"
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Jim Gibbons and technology
As shown in the polls and overall public opinion, Jim Gibbons has become substantially disliked as governor of Nevada. Yet much of his voting record shows a substantial bent toward technology and progress. But does it do any good?
Before and after assuming the office of governor in 2007, technology has been at the center of some of his votes. In his first State of the State address, he announced that he would allocate $170 million to improve the traffic flow and safety of several of Nevada's highways. He supported the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005, which determined the guidelines for posting illicit content and the penalties therein. A year earlier, he voted in favor of investigating commercial space travel.
As a member of the Congressional Internet Caucus, some of Gibbons's recent work promoting awareness of and solving problems related to the Web. In early 2001, he supported the enforcement of criminal laws aimed at reducing the number of spam messages. In 2002, he voted in favor of a bill that allowed telephone giants to add high-speed Internet to their marketing. The next year, he voted to ban credit card payments to online gambling companies.1
Recently, Gibbons called for technology to be updated in the fight against illegal immigration. On April 26 of this year, he called on Barack Obama to take a stand against the problems at the border; part of his solution included updated technologies such as facial recognition software2. His stance is that since we have greater capabilities with which we can protect ourselves, it makes sense to use them.3
In his most recent State of the State address, he elaborated on the substantial problems facing the state. With the economy and housing market high on the list, technology isn't the highest place. In fact, his main mention of technology discussed a project to recycle waste and make landfills a thing of the past.4
Progress in Nevada is the same as in any state: it needs technology, but that's not all there is to it. Technology depends on money and ingenuity of the public, and his measures show a bent toward using it for the public's benefit.
--
Works cited:
1. http://www.issues2000.org/governor/Jim_Gibbons_Technology.htm
2. http://gov.state.nv.us/PressReleases/2010/2010-04-26_Immigration.htm
3. http://www.gibbonsforcongress.com/category/news/
4. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/feb/08/full-text-gov-jim-gibbons-state-state-address/
Before and after assuming the office of governor in 2007, technology has been at the center of some of his votes. In his first State of the State address, he announced that he would allocate $170 million to improve the traffic flow and safety of several of Nevada's highways. He supported the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005, which determined the guidelines for posting illicit content and the penalties therein. A year earlier, he voted in favor of investigating commercial space travel.
As a member of the Congressional Internet Caucus, some of Gibbons's recent work promoting awareness of and solving problems related to the Web. In early 2001, he supported the enforcement of criminal laws aimed at reducing the number of spam messages. In 2002, he voted in favor of a bill that allowed telephone giants to add high-speed Internet to their marketing. The next year, he voted to ban credit card payments to online gambling companies.1
Recently, Gibbons called for technology to be updated in the fight against illegal immigration. On April 26 of this year, he called on Barack Obama to take a stand against the problems at the border; part of his solution included updated technologies such as facial recognition software2. His stance is that since we have greater capabilities with which we can protect ourselves, it makes sense to use them.3
In his most recent State of the State address, he elaborated on the substantial problems facing the state. With the economy and housing market high on the list, technology isn't the highest place. In fact, his main mention of technology discussed a project to recycle waste and make landfills a thing of the past.4
Progress in Nevada is the same as in any state: it needs technology, but that's not all there is to it. Technology depends on money and ingenuity of the public, and his measures show a bent toward using it for the public's benefit.
--
Works cited:
1. http://www.issues2000.org/governor/Jim_Gibbons_Technology.htm
2. http://gov.state.nv.us/PressReleases/2010/2010-04-26_Immigration.htm
3. http://www.gibbonsforcongress.com/category/news/
4. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/feb/08/full-text-gov-jim-gibbons-state-state-address/
Friday, April 23, 2010
I'm David, but you can call me Google
David knocked down Goliath. Can Google knock down Windows?
Last year, the Internet search giant announced that it would be releasing Chrome OS, a platform that hopes to challenge Windows. At first glance, the comparison is like a marshmallow trying to survive a charging elephant; the logistics of it enhance the image. Windows runs most of the world's computers, and Google's field is in its search engine. Expecting it to best one of the OS giants can seem impossible.
But is it?
Google's marketing plan ties into its business practices. It earns most of its money through advertisement, and with the Chrome OS gaining interest, Google will have more opportunities to place ads. An operating system designed by the world's largest search engine will generate publicity, which will increase revenue. Even if people never buy netbooks that run on Chrome, the advertisement and attention to Google are enough.
But Google's challenger has more than twenty-five years of experience behind it. After more than two decades of development and debugging, Windows runs most of the world's computers and handles most applications. Users need an incentive to seriously consider Chrome OS. So far, it touts a more streamlined operating system; it doesn't necessarily mean that it's faster or more versatile than Windows. Even Windows at its worst allows users to do more. Chrome OS has to fill a need that Windows can't.
On the other hand, if Chrome OS is simply built upon everything that's been written (as opposed to starting from scratch), then Google can focus on meeting the needs of consumers by streamlining and making the OS more versatile.
With the OS coming soon to netbooks, the first true test will come; if Chrome performs better than Windows in this small arena, it could pose a challenge to Windows in the long run. Still, with Windows boasting twenty-five years of experience and success, David will have a formidable Goliath to knock down.
Last year, the Internet search giant announced that it would be releasing Chrome OS, a platform that hopes to challenge Windows. At first glance, the comparison is like a marshmallow trying to survive a charging elephant; the logistics of it enhance the image. Windows runs most of the world's computers, and Google's field is in its search engine. Expecting it to best one of the OS giants can seem impossible.
But is it?
Google's marketing plan ties into its business practices. It earns most of its money through advertisement, and with the Chrome OS gaining interest, Google will have more opportunities to place ads. An operating system designed by the world's largest search engine will generate publicity, which will increase revenue. Even if people never buy netbooks that run on Chrome, the advertisement and attention to Google are enough.
But Google's challenger has more than twenty-five years of experience behind it. After more than two decades of development and debugging, Windows runs most of the world's computers and handles most applications. Users need an incentive to seriously consider Chrome OS. So far, it touts a more streamlined operating system; it doesn't necessarily mean that it's faster or more versatile than Windows. Even Windows at its worst allows users to do more. Chrome OS has to fill a need that Windows can't.
On the other hand, if Chrome OS is simply built upon everything that's been written (as opposed to starting from scratch), then Google can focus on meeting the needs of consumers by streamlining and making the OS more versatile.
With the OS coming soon to netbooks, the first true test will come; if Chrome performs better than Windows in this small arena, it could pose a challenge to Windows in the long run. Still, with Windows boasting twenty-five years of experience and success, David will have a formidable Goliath to knock down.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Why use Linux?
Apple promoted the revolution of desktop computers. Windows built upon the mass-production of PCs. UNIX revolutionized the graphical user interface. But one particular operating system has gained attention of its own, and all thanks to the work of a student who spearheaded its development.
Linux is the name of a kernel and operating system created by Linus Torvalds. Linux was the kernel that completed Richard Stallman's GNU Project, thereby completing a free-software operating system. Linux is free and Open Source; it costs no money to download and use, and it allows users--namely those unaffiliated with Microsoft, Apple, and other major computer corporations--to contribute their own code to the project.1
Linux is a stable platform, offering greater protection from viruses and reducing the risk of system crashes. In theory, this makes it an ideal operating system for anyone (although, in practice, there isn't much major software such as Adobe's products that can use Linux). But the fact that Linux is Open Source has allowed programmers and major corporations to use the OS's stability. Google, Amazon.com, DreamWorks, and Industrial Light and Magic have used (and continue to use) Linux, and government agencies are adopting the OS into its servers and computers.2
Ever since I got a Mac, I've learned about Linux, UNIX, and X11 to the point where I want to use the OS. Anything that provides greater stability would be great, but for me to use it, it would have to fill a need or a want. Right now, it's curiosity only, but that'll change once I use it. Part of me wants to learn how to program in C and write code for it, too, but until I know how to do it, I don't think I'd be using Linux as much as I'd like.
But based on what I've heard, I'd love to explore Linux and see what it does. Computers have always fascinated me, and seeing something different from Mac and Windows fascinates me. And if I can learn how to program code in C, Linux will be an adventure that I'd have the will and the skill to explore. For me, it's an opportunity just waiting to be taken.
--
Works cited:
1. "The GNU Manifesto"
2. "Who Uses Linux?"
Linux is the name of a kernel and operating system created by Linus Torvalds. Linux was the kernel that completed Richard Stallman's GNU Project, thereby completing a free-software operating system. Linux is free and Open Source; it costs no money to download and use, and it allows users--namely those unaffiliated with Microsoft, Apple, and other major computer corporations--to contribute their own code to the project.1
Linux is a stable platform, offering greater protection from viruses and reducing the risk of system crashes. In theory, this makes it an ideal operating system for anyone (although, in practice, there isn't much major software such as Adobe's products that can use Linux). But the fact that Linux is Open Source has allowed programmers and major corporations to use the OS's stability. Google, Amazon.com, DreamWorks, and Industrial Light and Magic have used (and continue to use) Linux, and government agencies are adopting the OS into its servers and computers.2
Ever since I got a Mac, I've learned about Linux, UNIX, and X11 to the point where I want to use the OS. Anything that provides greater stability would be great, but for me to use it, it would have to fill a need or a want. Right now, it's curiosity only, but that'll change once I use it. Part of me wants to learn how to program in C and write code for it, too, but until I know how to do it, I don't think I'd be using Linux as much as I'd like.
But based on what I've heard, I'd love to explore Linux and see what it does. Computers have always fascinated me, and seeing something different from Mac and Windows fascinates me. And if I can learn how to program code in C, Linux will be an adventure that I'd have the will and the skill to explore. For me, it's an opportunity just waiting to be taken.
--
Works cited:
1. "The GNU Manifesto"
2. "Who Uses Linux?"
Sunday, April 11, 2010
When computers attack--the threat and the response
Every technology is designed to accomplish results, but those that are designed for good can be used as a form of crime. The Internet is no exception. In January 2010, a Chinese cyberattack hacked into several Gmail accounts; the sophistication of the attack revealed that cybercrime has a more profound effect on the digital world than once believed. Mobs of programmers and hackers have successfully hacked into websites created by companies, banks, and even the U.S. government, and the same type of code used in the Google attack is only one means of creating and launching attacks.
Long before the days of WarGames (1983), the Internet has proven to be surprisingly vulnerable and open—a gateway to the hacking of computers and possibly to the destruction of the Internet itself. Today, extortion and fraud target personal consumers and political targets alike. As a result, computer programmers have taken a stand, and the battle against cybercrime on all fronts has come to light.
Cybercrime fighter Barrett Lyon explains that today's security measures aren't enough to fend off hundreds of thousands of computers programmed to accomplish the same thing all at once. Most of today's computers have common weaknesses, which make them susceptible to software that identifies them. If enough computers attack a site at the same time, then they can successfully tank a website. This is the basis behind an attack in which hackers crash websites via massive traffic overload. All of the bots—the computers which are simultaneously under the hackers' control—overwhelm the website by logging in or visiting it at the same time. This helps denial-of-service attacks, extortion, and theft succeed.
But Lyon's work has helped companies and law enforcement combat cyberattacks. His experience as a professional cybercrime fighter comes from his self-taught computer experience and his own history of hacking; as a teenager, he hacked into AOL and deleted the domain name, which took the site offline for three days and got the attention of the news and the FBI. As he understood more of the weaknesses of computers, he used his skills to divert and fight attacks.
At the start of his career, he saw signatures in a series of intense attacks; this helped him find the source of the attacks, and he even went undercover into the cybermafia as a Russian hacker to learn more. He gained the confidence of a Russian hacker, who went by the nickname "exe" (which stood for "extremist" instead of the file format "executable file"); Lyon posted the nickname on large public chat rooms, which revealed the false domain name the hacker was hiding behind. In the end, the domain name revealed the hacker's curriculum vitae in the registration records.
Joseph Menn, author of Fatal System Error, listed "exe" as one of his more memorable cybercriminals. "exe" was like Lyon—self-taught computer wiz at a young age. "exe," whose real name was Ivan, began writing code that acted like a virus—spreading from one bot to many others. Menn has shown the increase of serious cyberattacks across the world. Denial-of-service attacks have long existed, but in recent days these attacks have targeted government and media organizations. In Estonia and the former Soviet republic of Georgia, these attacks have been used to shut down government and media websites. In the United States, stolen military secrets are among the greatest scares. Attacks like these still happen because one out of every seven computers could be bots, and most people don't realize it or know how to prevent it.
Menn adds that the technology behind the threat isn't the only thing that keeps cybercriminals from being prosecuted. The struggle is not in the streets or in the drug market, but in the world theater. In Russia and China, hackers are an asset that the governments and their Mafias can use, especially if they know how to coordinate thousands of computers to launch major attacks in the United States. The Google attacks in January 2010 are directly correlated to the Chinese government, but this isn't all. Hackers have managed to retrieve our military secrets and have the potential to hack into our power grids, and all through a technology that was designed to accomplish good.
With terrorists gaining interest in computer hackers and nations trading military secrets and draining our economy, is there hope? Menn and Lyon don't see much of it. Menn reminds us that the hacking leads to a trillion-dollar drain on the economy, especially in online commerce. Lyon sees an increasing paranoia in the security industry; it's an erosion of trust, one which decreases the effectiveness of fighting any kind of crime. Unlike weapons with specific purposes, people can do anything they want with software. Until greater and more effective security measures are created, the technology reminds us that the greatest of technology can lead to the greatest of crime.
Long before the days of WarGames (1983), the Internet has proven to be surprisingly vulnerable and open—a gateway to the hacking of computers and possibly to the destruction of the Internet itself. Today, extortion and fraud target personal consumers and political targets alike. As a result, computer programmers have taken a stand, and the battle against cybercrime on all fronts has come to light.
Cybercrime fighter Barrett Lyon explains that today's security measures aren't enough to fend off hundreds of thousands of computers programmed to accomplish the same thing all at once. Most of today's computers have common weaknesses, which make them susceptible to software that identifies them. If enough computers attack a site at the same time, then they can successfully tank a website. This is the basis behind an attack in which hackers crash websites via massive traffic overload. All of the bots—the computers which are simultaneously under the hackers' control—overwhelm the website by logging in or visiting it at the same time. This helps denial-of-service attacks, extortion, and theft succeed.
But Lyon's work has helped companies and law enforcement combat cyberattacks. His experience as a professional cybercrime fighter comes from his self-taught computer experience and his own history of hacking; as a teenager, he hacked into AOL and deleted the domain name, which took the site offline for three days and got the attention of the news and the FBI. As he understood more of the weaknesses of computers, he used his skills to divert and fight attacks.
At the start of his career, he saw signatures in a series of intense attacks; this helped him find the source of the attacks, and he even went undercover into the cybermafia as a Russian hacker to learn more. He gained the confidence of a Russian hacker, who went by the nickname "exe" (which stood for "extremist" instead of the file format "executable file"); Lyon posted the nickname on large public chat rooms, which revealed the false domain name the hacker was hiding behind. In the end, the domain name revealed the hacker's curriculum vitae in the registration records.
Joseph Menn, author of Fatal System Error, listed "exe" as one of his more memorable cybercriminals. "exe" was like Lyon—self-taught computer wiz at a young age. "exe," whose real name was Ivan, began writing code that acted like a virus—spreading from one bot to many others. Menn has shown the increase of serious cyberattacks across the world. Denial-of-service attacks have long existed, but in recent days these attacks have targeted government and media organizations. In Estonia and the former Soviet republic of Georgia, these attacks have been used to shut down government and media websites. In the United States, stolen military secrets are among the greatest scares. Attacks like these still happen because one out of every seven computers could be bots, and most people don't realize it or know how to prevent it.
Menn adds that the technology behind the threat isn't the only thing that keeps cybercriminals from being prosecuted. The struggle is not in the streets or in the drug market, but in the world theater. In Russia and China, hackers are an asset that the governments and their Mafias can use, especially if they know how to coordinate thousands of computers to launch major attacks in the United States. The Google attacks in January 2010 are directly correlated to the Chinese government, but this isn't all. Hackers have managed to retrieve our military secrets and have the potential to hack into our power grids, and all through a technology that was designed to accomplish good.
With terrorists gaining interest in computer hackers and nations trading military secrets and draining our economy, is there hope? Menn and Lyon don't see much of it. Menn reminds us that the hacking leads to a trillion-dollar drain on the economy, especially in online commerce. Lyon sees an increasing paranoia in the security industry; it's an erosion of trust, one which decreases the effectiveness of fighting any kind of crime. Unlike weapons with specific purposes, people can do anything they want with software. Until greater and more effective security measures are created, the technology reminds us that the greatest of technology can lead to the greatest of crime.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Blu-ray disks--an overhaul in progress
High-capacity data storage took a leap forward in 2004, when the first Blu-ray disc devices entered the Japanese market. Due to their high storage capacity and cost-effective manufacture, Blu-rays are predicted to make DVDs obsolete. But how do they work, and do they make good on their promise?
Blu-ray disks exceed the capabilities of CDs and DVDs in several ways. They store more data, making them the current standard for high-definition media storage. High-definition signals have a greater bandwidth and require more storage to preserve quality; high-definition video takes up far more space than a single CD or DVD can allow. A single-layered Blu-ray disk, on the other hand, can store more than four hours of HD video, and a double-layered disk can store twice as much without compromising quality.
In optical media, the recording layer is manufactured to have bumps and lands. When the laser shines on the bumps, the light bounces back earlier than if it hits a land, and it hits the reader. In Blu-ray disks, the bumps are smaller and closer together, and the tracks are spaced at a smaller distance. The smaller the distances and sizes, the more data that can be stored. In comparison, DVDs have a track pitch (or track separation distance) of 740 nm and a bump size of 400 nm, while Blu-rays have a track pitch of 320 nm and a bump size of 150 nm. To read this data, a blue (actually violet) laser shines at a wavelength of 405 nm. Red lasers, in comparison, shine at either 780 nm for CDs or 650 nm for DVDs. The smaller aperture (opening that lets the light through) and wavelength of Blu-ray optical readers focus precisely enough to read the data on the disk.
The construction of Blu-rays solves reading problems that CDs and DVDs still face. Blu-ray disks are placed closer to the optical reader, which reduces the chance of disk tilt and consequently the chance that light won't be reflected back at a 90˚ angle. They're also constructed so that the laser doesn't have to shine through two layers of plastic to get to the recording layer. DVDs store the data beneath the plastic, which can lead to birefringence, or the splitting of laser light into two differently-refracted beams which can't read the disk. Blu-rays store the data on top of the layer instead, preventing this phenomenon.
In addition, Blu-ray disks transfer data faster than DVDs, allowing large files to be written in less time. The disks also offer greater copyright protection; they're encoded with encryption that keeps them from being duplicated illegally. Also, the disks are built with practicality in mind; they are designed with a layer that reduces the likelihood and effects of scratches and fingerprints.
Do Blu-ray disks hold good on their promise to revolutionize video and data storage? Their specifications and design agree completely. Today, Blu-ray hasn't overhauled our current standards of optical media, but with movie titles being sold in the format and software such as Final Cut Studio offering (limited) Blu-ray usability, the technology's getting closer. With our country now using HD television as its standard, the overhaul is in sight. With companies like Pioneer announcing an optical storage medium that uses a UV laser to read a 500-GB disk, that overhaul is just a matter of time.
To learn more about Blu-ray, HD television and video, and the standards that continue to vie for attention, check out the links and learn more about the history that establishes where the technology stands today.
Blu-ray disks exceed the capabilities of CDs and DVDs in several ways. They store more data, making them the current standard for high-definition media storage. High-definition signals have a greater bandwidth and require more storage to preserve quality; high-definition video takes up far more space than a single CD or DVD can allow. A single-layered Blu-ray disk, on the other hand, can store more than four hours of HD video, and a double-layered disk can store twice as much without compromising quality.
In optical media, the recording layer is manufactured to have bumps and lands. When the laser shines on the bumps, the light bounces back earlier than if it hits a land, and it hits the reader. In Blu-ray disks, the bumps are smaller and closer together, and the tracks are spaced at a smaller distance. The smaller the distances and sizes, the more data that can be stored. In comparison, DVDs have a track pitch (or track separation distance) of 740 nm and a bump size of 400 nm, while Blu-rays have a track pitch of 320 nm and a bump size of 150 nm. To read this data, a blue (actually violet) laser shines at a wavelength of 405 nm. Red lasers, in comparison, shine at either 780 nm for CDs or 650 nm for DVDs. The smaller aperture (opening that lets the light through) and wavelength of Blu-ray optical readers focus precisely enough to read the data on the disk.
The construction of Blu-rays solves reading problems that CDs and DVDs still face. Blu-ray disks are placed closer to the optical reader, which reduces the chance of disk tilt and consequently the chance that light won't be reflected back at a 90˚ angle. They're also constructed so that the laser doesn't have to shine through two layers of plastic to get to the recording layer. DVDs store the data beneath the plastic, which can lead to birefringence, or the splitting of laser light into two differently-refracted beams which can't read the disk. Blu-rays store the data on top of the layer instead, preventing this phenomenon.
In addition, Blu-ray disks transfer data faster than DVDs, allowing large files to be written in less time. The disks also offer greater copyright protection; they're encoded with encryption that keeps them from being duplicated illegally. Also, the disks are built with practicality in mind; they are designed with a layer that reduces the likelihood and effects of scratches and fingerprints.
Do Blu-ray disks hold good on their promise to revolutionize video and data storage? Their specifications and design agree completely. Today, Blu-ray hasn't overhauled our current standards of optical media, but with movie titles being sold in the format and software such as Final Cut Studio offering (limited) Blu-ray usability, the technology's getting closer. With our country now using HD television as its standard, the overhaul is in sight. With companies like Pioneer announcing an optical storage medium that uses a UV laser to read a 500-GB disk, that overhaul is just a matter of time.
To learn more about Blu-ray, HD television and video, and the standards that continue to vie for attention, check out the links and learn more about the history that establishes where the technology stands today.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
BIOS setup and drive devices
I don't have a PC anymore (I've been a Mac user since 2006), but last year, a neighbor gave us a really old laptop, so I pulled the settings from it.
BIOS (version A04) settings:
HDD size: 20 GB (20005 MB)
Boot order: CD drive, then HDD, then 3.5" floppy drive.
System primary password for the HDD: Disabled
—
DMA:
DMA, or direct memory access, is a transfer mode for data that bypasses the CPU. Data is sent directly from the drive to the memory, freeing up processor power and capacity.
Low-level formatting:
Low-level formatting is a process which assigns tracks and sectors to disks. As opposed to high-level formatting, which creates partitions based on the information that's already there, low-level formatting provides that information. This is the type of formatting that takes place before drives are put onto the market.
SATA:
Serial ATA is today's standard for computer drives. SATA devices transmit data bit-by-bit across the cable in real time. Because of its speed (up to 1.5 GB/sec vs. PATA's 133 MB/sec) and method of transferring data, most drives use SATA.
ATA:
ATA, or Advanced Technology Attachment, is the foundation for today's data transfer between drives. It's a series of standards that determines how drives communicate with the rest of the system. ATA standards have changed over time; the earliest editions are now obsolete, but some early editions are still being used.
IDE:
IDE, or Integrated Drive Electronics, was the foundation of ATA. It allowed data transfer without connecting a device directly to the motherboard, but through a connector that transfers data. The first IDE devices entered the market in 1986, and Enhanced IDE (EIDE) devices became what we now know as PATA.
BIOS (version A04) settings:
HDD size: 20 GB (20005 MB)
Boot order: CD drive, then HDD, then 3.5" floppy drive.
System primary password for the HDD: Disabled
—
DMA:
DMA, or direct memory access, is a transfer mode for data that bypasses the CPU. Data is sent directly from the drive to the memory, freeing up processor power and capacity.
Low-level formatting:
Low-level formatting is a process which assigns tracks and sectors to disks. As opposed to high-level formatting, which creates partitions based on the information that's already there, low-level formatting provides that information. This is the type of formatting that takes place before drives are put onto the market.
SATA:
Serial ATA is today's standard for computer drives. SATA devices transmit data bit-by-bit across the cable in real time. Because of its speed (up to 1.5 GB/sec vs. PATA's 133 MB/sec) and method of transferring data, most drives use SATA.
ATA:
ATA, or Advanced Technology Attachment, is the foundation for today's data transfer between drives. It's a series of standards that determines how drives communicate with the rest of the system. ATA standards have changed over time; the earliest editions are now obsolete, but some early editions are still being used.
IDE:
IDE, or Integrated Drive Electronics, was the foundation of ATA. It allowed data transfer without connecting a device directly to the motherboard, but through a connector that transfers data. The first IDE devices entered the market in 1986, and Enhanced IDE (EIDE) devices became what we now know as PATA.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
