Well, I’ve learned my lesson with computer batteries. Unlike cell phone batteries, they’re not meant to be used willy-nilly. A computer battery wears down with use, not just that particular load of juice, but the ability to absorb and hold juice at all, itself wears down. A sort of wearing down of the charging up, if you will. I just got a new battery which I am now charging up for the first time.
Therefore, I will always use the power cord when I’m home. I will not use the battery just because I decide I want to work on the balcony for awhile and I’m feeling too lazy to to move the power cord to the outlet by the terrace door. Nay more: when I head to the local coffee shop or library, I will, with due diligence, seek out a seat near an unused electrical outlet, only using the battery if I have to.
However, I understand it’s best to discharge the battery fully a few times to calibrate the meter. Would that be like, just a couple of times now, and then once a month or so in the future? That would be simple and straightforward. But another somewhat contradictory thing I’ve heard is that you should partially discharge the battery, recharge it to not quite full, then discharge partially down to another point, then back up to a different point, as it were, along the scale of a single battery charge lifetime. I think that may have played a role in how I ruined my last battery. Naturally, I was trying to follow that advice by constantly charging up the battery and then using the charge up to a different point each time. By the way, this information, possibly misunderstood on my part, comes from Battery University. I seem to have misunderstood it to mean I should use the battery fairly frequently–because how could I heed the advice about charging up and charging down to different points on the lifecycle spectrum, if I’m not using the battery fairly frequently?. So, is it best just to ignore that latter piece of advice? Basically, I’m confused when it comes to batteries, but have decided just to use the damn thing as little as possible.
As for viruses, when I described my computer problems in this thread, there seemed to be a preponderance of opinion that I should dump Norton and use, instead, Spybot and Avast! which are free. Free is good. And since I’ve restored my computer, I’ve been provisionally using Spybot and Avast! and refusing the incessant invitations to activate Norton. And this, even though I’ve got a subscription with a couple of months left on it. Theoretically, Norton should be better. I paid for it, and I get support with the software, although the value of that support is, at this stage, rather dubious. I should really dump Norton? I’m happy with Spybot and Avast!, but what’s the catch? How come those apps are free when they seem to be so much better; conversely, how does Norton stay in business?