Laptops are all the rage these days, but they're easily stolen, even from places you think are safe, like work. Even if you just lose a laptop, you probably don't want anyone to have easy access to all your data just by pressing the power button.

That's why the first step (definitely not the last, but the first step to protecting your laptop) is to put strong password protection on your user accounts. Most people think this is a pain, but it's easy to set up and a small price to pay in inconvenience to keep your data safe

Windows

Go to Control Panel and choose User Accounts.

Choose the Advanced tab.

Check the box that says Require users to press Ctrl-Alt-Delete.

Press OK.

If that's not how your Windows machine looks, try this from the User Accounts screen:

Click Change the way users log on or off.

Uncheck the welcome screen option.

This forces a user to enter a username and password when they log in.

Now go back to the Control Panel and open Display Options. Click the Screen Saver tab.

Check the option that makes the screen saver ask for a password.

Then press OK.

Finally go back to the Control Panel and this time choose Power Options.

Select the Advanced tab. And make sure you check the box by Prompt for password when the computer resumes from standby.

Press OK.

Mac

Go to System Preferences and choose Security.

Check Disable automatic log-in.

Check Require password to wake this computer from sleep or screen saver.

Now you need to take other action like logging out of accounts, encrypting data, and so on. But you're on the right track to a safer laptop setup. Just in case.

After recently writing about the 'joys' of upgrading from XP to Windows 7, I was mildly surprised to hear from Vista users who wanted to know if they should upgrade to Windows 7. The answer is: "Probably." Here are the issues you need to consider as I see them.

First, let's get this out of the way: while I'm not saying whether Vista is good or bad, Vista was a less good product for Microsoft. That's not my opinion, as someone who's known for preferring Linux; it's also the opinion of Charles Songhurst, Microsoft's general manager of corporate strategy. So I don't want to hear any whining from Microsoft fan boys about how misunderstand Vista was and how, by Vista SP2, it was actually a good operating system. It wasn't, it still isn't, and Microsoft knows that as well as I do.

That said, if Vista is working for you, good for you. You don't have a reason to move to Windows 7.

But if you're unhappy with your Vista's computer's performance, or you find Vista's worst five features ticking you off, then you should switch. Personally, I find Vista's UAC (User Account Control) as enjoyable and useful as those speed-bumps on some streets that make you slow down to five MPH or take a chance on leaving your exhaust system lying on the road behind you.

As Microsoft itself (again, not me!) observes, if you're a heavy-duty user with lots of programs and files, moving from Vista to Windows 7 may take you more than 20 hours. That's not a misprint. Microsoft said, and meant, 20 hours.

The best upgrade you can expect, according to Microsoft, is just under an hour and a half. You'll excuse me if I don't think it will go that quickly. I can upgrade systems that fast, but I install new operating systems and upgrade systems on a weekly basis. I think an ordinary Joe on an average PC can expect to spend most of the day on moving from Vista to Windows 7.

I've also had some people write to me with the misleading contention that if you do a clean install — that is delete everything on your Vista PC and then install Windows 7 — it will take far less time. They're right. Installing the operating system alone will take far less time. What they don't mention is that you'll then have to reinstall every application, replace all your files, and reset every one of your settings. This will save time? Yeah, sure it will.

In a business environment, you may want to a clean install anyway, rather then tie down technicians to a PC-by-PC chain gang. For this slow, semi-automated slog, I recommend using WAIK (Windows Automated Installation Kit) and System Center Configuration Manager, once the Windows 7 versions are out to ease your Windows 7 deployment.

But neither of these utilities is of much help for small businesses or individual users. Either way, you're still looking at a lot of time. This is no "do it over the weekend" migration for even the tiniest SOHO (small office/home office).

Is it worth it? Is there some single feature that makes it worth moving from Vista to 7? I couldn't find one for moving from XP to 7, and I can't really do it for shifting from Vista to Windows 7 either.

But — and this is important — even Windows 7 RTM is far faster, more stable and tends to have fewer glitches with older hardware and software than Vista SP2. So, a single 'feature?' No, there isn't one — but Windows 7 simply does everything Vista does, except better. Make the move. You'll be glad you did.

Palm dealt Microsoft Windows Mobile operating system a substantial blow Thursday, with Palm CEO Jon Rubinstein confirming that Palm would no longer develop devices running the OS.

According to Rubinstein, Palm plans to forge ahead with its own WebOS platform.

"Going forward, our roadmap will include only Palm WebOS-devices," Rubinstein said during a quarterly earnings conference call with analysts Thursday.

There are plenty of reasons why the move might be a mistake on Palm's part, but the decision will definitely mean a setback for Microsoft, as Palm will no longer need to pay licensing fees to Microsoft for use of Windows Mobile.

WebOS is Palm's new operating system and appears on both the three-month-old Palm Pre and Palm's upcoming Pixi smartphone, so it makes sense that Palm wants WebOs in full focus.

It's also reasonable to think Palm's looking for money-saving measures after reporting brutal first quarter losses Thursday -- losses in which the only bright spot was Pre catalyzing a 134 percent jump from the previous quarter on the number of smartphone units shipped. And even then, most analysts think Pre sales -- which Palm did not disclose in detail -- were lower than expected and bound to taper off.

The strength of Microsoft's Windows Mobile platform, however, is also up for debate. Windows Mobile has lost substantial market share in the past year, with researchers like Canalys putting the number of phones shipped with Windows Mobile at about 9 percent of the overall global smartphone market. That's a far cry from Nokia (45 percent), Research in Motion's BlackBerry (20.9 percent) and Apple's iPhone (13.7 percent).

Harsher critics, like J. Gold Associates' Jack Gold, have recommended Microsoft divest itself of mobile OSes altogether, and continue to make moves similar to Microsoft's recent alliance with Nokia to bring Microsoft Office and other Microsoft applications to some of Nokia's Symbian-based smartphones.

But at the same time, a number of smartphone makers have announced new devices based on Windows Mobile 6.5, including Sony Ericsson, HTC and most recently, LG Electronics. Those join other units fromHewlett Packa Samsung and Toshiba. At the same time, Microsoft has been hyping Windows Mobile 6.5 and gearing up for a host of Mobile 6.5-based phones arriving before the holiday shopping season.

 A staggering 95% of all "user-generated comments" for blogs, chat rooms and message boards online are spam or malicious, according to a new Websense report on security threat trends.

 "That's the first time we started monitoring that," says Patrick Runald, Websense senior manager for security research, about the level of spam and malware ploys carried out around blogs and chat rooms.

The Websense Security Labs "State of Internet Security Q1 – Q2 2009," which covers the period up to June of this year, also notes that the number of malicious Web sites for the period more than tripled. In addition, 77% of Web sites with malicious code are said to be legitimate sites that have been compromised.

"The bad guys are finding new ways for disseminating malware," Runald said. "It's getting worse."

According to the Websense Security Labs report, based on data collected in part from scanning 40 million Web sites every hour, 61% of the Top 100 sites are said to either be hosting malicious content or containing a masked redirect to lure unsuspecting victims from legitimate sites to malicious ones.

Facebook, YouTube become malware magnets

More than 47% of the Top 100 sites, particularly social-networking sites, such as Facebook or YouTube, support user-generated content, which the report notes is becoming a significant way to disseminate malware and conduct fraud.

"On Facebook and other social-networking sites, there's an explicit sense of trust," says Runald. "That's why the bad guys are attempting to exploit it, with malware like Koobface, which could hijack your machine and send messages."

In the area of cybercrime, one significant attack that took place involved criminals seizing control of the CheckFree Web site and attempting to re-direct users to a Web site hosted in Ukraine that tried to install malware on victims' computers. The report said CheckFree has more than 24 million customers and controls 70%-80% of the online bill-payment market.

 I'm holding Apple's fifth-generation iPod Nano, and it's feeling like deja vu. Here we are again with an 8GB and 16GB iPod Nano that bear the exact same shape and dimensions as last year's models, priced at $149 and a slightly more wallet-friendly $179, respectively. Sure, the aluminum is a little glossier, and the screen now stretches out to 2.2 inches (up from 2 inches), but most people would really need to have an Apple fanboy's eagle-eye to discern last year's model from today's.

 But don't let looks fool you. Under the hood, Apple really juiced the fifth-gen iPod Nano up with a ton of tricks that serve to make the Nano better. I'm not convinced all of the Nano's new features were executed perfectly, but at least nothing about the fifth-gen Nano is a step backwards for Apple (unlike the third-gen Nano's awkward shape, or the button-less iPod Shuffle). For the sake of mentioning it, just know that everything found in last year's model is here as well, located in exactly the same place, with the same font, same everything. Music, photos, videos, podcasts, battery life, sound quality...same, same, same. Well, technically, rated battery life is up a little for video playback, clocking in a 5 hours instead of 4.

So what's new? Well, for starters, the iPod Nano now has a video camera. On the back of the Nano there's an eensy-teensy fixed-lens camera that runs flush with the body, capable of capturing 640x480 standard definition video at 30 frames per second. Files are recorded as iTunes-friendly .MP4 videos with h.264 formatted video with AAC audio. Video quality looks, well...decent. We'll have a better sense after more testing, but I think it's safe to say that it won't be crushing the Flip Mino HD anytime soon.

Part of the problem isn't so much the camera technology as it is the placement of the camera--located right behind the clickwheel where you can't help but rub your nasty hands across the lens each time you pick it up. After just a few minutes out of the box, video recordings became increasingly cloudy with screen grime.

 Maybe I'm just filthy, but I have to think Apple would have done better to move the lens closer to the top and out of harm's ways.

 The same complaint hold's true for the Nano's pinhole microphone, which is placed right beside the camera lens. While recording video it's obvious if you're holding your finger over the lens: the view is blocked, you figure it out, and adjust your grip.

The same can't be said for voice recordings, where it feels natural to grip the Nano like a microphone, only to find voice memos riddled with the grating sound of your hand rubbing against the microphone. The problem isn't helped by the fact that you can't actively monitor your recordings while you make them. That said, the capability to create voice recordings now without having to plug in a special headset or microphone accessory is a nice plus.

 Another happy little plus included on the fifth-generation iPod Nano is an internal speaker. Granted, the sound quality of the speaker is like hearing your favorite music performed by a flea circus, but it gets the job done if you're just looking for a way to quickly share music or video with friends without passing around your earbuds.

 One thing the built-in speaker won't work on, however, is the Nano's new FM radio, since headphones need to be plugged in for the radio to work. That's fine by us, though, since we were sure hell would freeze over before Apple would ever place a radio inside an iPod. Since 2001, customers have pleaded with Apple to add an FM radio to the iPod, only to find themselves shaking their disillusioned fists in air, year after year. Well, the iPod has an FM radio now, so I suppose we can all just shut up about that.

In fact, the iPod Nano has a fairly spectacular radio, capable of displaying RDS station info, tagging songs, and even pausing and rewinding. You heard right, you can pause up to 15 minutes of radio, which the Nano will cache internally until you're ready to start up again. And as far as song tagging goes, provided you can find a station that broadcasts enough RDS data to make an accurate song tag, your tagged songs live in a separate radio submenu.

Once you sync back up to your computer, iTunes will ask you if you want to look up your tagged songs in the iTunes store. It's neat, but not exactly reliable, since RDS info is hit or miss in most towns.

Wrapping things up, Apple added a new pedometer feature into a "Fitness" submenu that lives in the Nano's "Extras" directory along with games, voice memos, alarms, notes, etc. It's cute, and works a little like a poor man's Nike+iPod kit. In fact, iTunes will even prompt you after it sees you've used the pedometer, to see if you'd like to track your progress on the Nike+ Web site.

Apple has also thrown in a Genius Mixes selection under the music menu, which brings over one of the new ballyhooed features from iTunes 9. Essentially, these Genius Mixes are instant groupings of music based around a common genre, such as rock, pop, or jazz. So far, the feature hasn't really won me over, but I'll give it some more time and see if it surprises me.