When OS X Leopard was released, my Mac was fortunately new enough to qualify for a special £5 upgrade, but the vast majority of users had to pay about $129. Snow Leopard was different; for an upgrade, Apple only charged about $30 (£25).

£25 for a piece of software, even one as important as an operating system, is much more realistic than a £100 pricetag. I think it is unreasonable to ask personal users for anything more than £60 or£70

High price tags force people to piracy, yet for many years companies like Apple and Microsoft continued using them. I suspect Adobe loses a small fortune over its £600 charge for Photoshop, because I imagine that most of their end-users actually acquired the software illegally. Adobe kindly charge students a discounted rate of only £150: how they expect a student to afford that amazes me.

High price tags force people to piracy.

I have no problems pay $10 or $20 for a decent piece of shareware, and I often buy bundles of discounted shareware, but I dislike being expected to pay a fortune for a commercially-developed program which has hundreds of features which I’ll never even need to use.

Microsoft try to offer users packages containing only software they’ll need, but this confuses many.

Only one package should be sold. That package should only include essential programs, with additional programs being sold individually if needed. Not only would this be beneficial to the average company, but would allow companies like Microsoft to accurately judge the popularity of software like OneNote based on the demand for it

Mac users have the benefit of being easily able to back-up their files with Time Machine, but it can even prove a chore for us to connect our Mac to an external hard disk. Time Capsule provides an alternative, as users can back their files up by WiFi, but this is an expensive product.

Online back-up services hold a number of advantages over backing up files locally. For example, data is safer with them, as an external hard disk could easily be destroyed. It also allows portability; laptop users can effectively back up their data anywhere as they don’t have to carry around a spare hard disk!

Several online back-up services exist, but the two largest are Carbonite and Mozy. I recently bought a year’s subscription to Carbonite and in this article I shall review it.

Carbonite is an incremental remote back-up solution, available for Windows and OS X. Basically, after an initial back-up, any new or modified data is uploaded to their servers and backed up. This means only data that must be uploaded is, instead of all data being uploaded again.

Carbonite allow you to back-up any files, except Applications. Free trial users can’t back up their music or movie library, but paid customers can back photos, films, documents and music up. At the moment, I have backed up everything except my music library, because that will take some time to upload.

Users can upload an unlimited amount of data to their servers, where it is encrypted.

It takes quite some time to upload your files. I had to leave my computer on over a few nights to upload 5GiB of data, but I expect this is due to my Internet connection rather than Carbonite. I did experience a few problems though: it doesn’t automatically configure my firewall or ports. The lack of documentation resulted in my having to speak to their customer service, who readily provided me with a solution. They were slightly abrupt but got to the root of the problem.

I will share a few of these solutions for Mac users:

1. Allow ‘/Library/Application Support/Carbonite/CarboniteDaemon.app’ to receive incoming connections (the log is in the same folder)
2. Forward ports 25, 53, 80 and 443 to your machine
3. Ensure no folders which are constantly being written to, like cache folders, are included in the back-up

Users control Carbonite through a prefpane in OS X. This preference pane allows users to see how much data is left to be backed up, allows them to exclude data from the back up and allows them to restore files. I would like there to be a few more options in this pane, such as the ability to see the file currently being uploaded and access the log. The icons of the Mac folders are also outdated.

An interesting features of Carbonite is that users can access their uploaded files anywhere, such as their office or at family’s. This effectively allows Carbonite to act as Remote Access.

Restoring files is as simple as simply selecting the file and the location to which you would like it restored.

So, down to the details. Carbonite is $55 a year, however Subscription.com (who provided the software for me to review) offer a Carbonite offer code for a 20% discount. This is remarkably simple to apply: one simply has to go to Carbonite through their website, it is simply one extra click to save $11! I have gone through this process and it is remarkably simple. Subscription.com also offer codes or similar click-throughs to offer discounts on everything from antivirus software to newspapers to magazines!

When using Mac or Linux, I often find myself stumbling upon features which I just find ‘nice’.

I love the built-in support for VNC. On Mac, it is as simple as waiting for the remote computer, providing it’s on a local Bonjour one, to appear in Finder. And enabling it is a checking a box in the Sharing preference pane. (connecting to a non-local machine is done through going to Connect to Server in Finder and prefixing the computer’s location with vnc://). Support varies by distro for Linux, but generally the service is pre-installed.

I love how I can mount SFTP and FTP shares in Nautilus under Ubuntu and in Finder on OS X. Unfortunately, support on OS X is read only. Whilst Windows has limited support for FTP and WebDAV etc, I personally find it very cumbersome and not nice to play with at all. I’d happily use Nautilus to put files onto my website; but on Windows I’d have to use Filezilla!

Faces in iLife 09 is great. Whilst there are better commercial (and probably free) options, it is just nice that is there. But it doesn’t intrude, whilst in Windows it no doubt would somehow majestically stand out to make it obvious that such a nice gimmick is included!

Desktop search is nice. I don’t think Windows Search can compare with Spotlight or Beagle. On Windows, I’d probably download Google Desktop Search. But no need on Mac or Ubuntu, as they’re already there.

I also love the simplicity of Linux commands like dd. On Windows, you’d need something like Acronis to do the same job, just much worse!

So, bringing on the flame war. What do you like in your operating system which isn’t in others?

MyNevermind is a nice freeware game for OS X I have been using to kill time lately.

The game is very similar to the 1970 boardgame Mastermind but it is slightly harder because instead of having 6 colours, you have 10 numbers and the game is single player. Basically, the aim of the game is to find a 4 digit number in less then 10 turns!

To help you find these digits, you would be told whether a digit is correct, but in the wrong place, or whether it is in the right place. You will not, however, be told which digit is correct and you have to deduce this yourself.

The game is timed, for purposes of score calculation, but there is no time limit. I generally spend about 5 minutes to play the game, but depending on your skills of deduction, this may be much longer or much quicker!

The game is not the most attractive application, but it is fit for purpose and still exercises your brain!

If you have a Mac, you might as well download it and at least give it a try. It’s only 308Kb big!

I’m somewhat of a browser nerd. I’ve never realised how many web browsers I have installed, and the recent release of Google Chrome only adds to my collection.

Why do I, and quite possibly all computer fans in general, have so many browsers?

On my Mac alone, I have Camino, Firefox, Safari and Shiira. In a virtual machine, I have IE6, Firefox, Safari and Google Chrome. But why? I only use one.

Many people use the excuse of checking for compatiblity of their websites as justification for their browser collection, but you don’t really need two Gecko-based browsers, two WebKit engines but you probably do need half a million versions of IE.

I think the reason we have so many browsers is that we want to see how our primary browser will evolve.

Browsers generally steal ideas off one another (Firefox ’stole’ tabbed browsing off Opera, but IE ’stole’ it off Firefox) and through installing the largest range of browsers, we can see which innovative features will be integrated into ours. Shiira, for example, has many aesthetic features which I expect will one be adopted by other browsers whilst Chrome’s way of handling web apps will also probably soon be adopted.

The more browsers we see, the more features we can see and we know what our web experience will be like, even if we don’t switch browsers.