<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>InfiniTech</title>
	<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:33:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>The MacBook Air</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/16/the-macbook-air/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/16/the-macbook-air/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/16/the-macbook-air/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img src="http://i16.tinypic.com/6jegnte.jpg" align="right" height="188" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="300" />The rumors were true. The <a href="http://www.apple.com/macbookair/">MacBook Air</a>, announced by Steve Jobs yesterday, is the thinnest computer ever. Something tells me it's is going to be a big seller this year.

Starting at $1799, the Air is so thin it can fit inside one of those yellow envelopes (pictured to the right). It's tiny, and it's a full-featured Mac. Well, almost full-featured.

To fit a computer into that tiny package, some compromises were made (as usual with ultraportables).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://i16.tinypic.com/6jegnte.jpg" align="right" height="188" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="300" />The rumors were true. The <a href="http://www.apple.com/macbookair/">MacBook Air</a>, announced by Steve Jobs yesterday, is the thinnest computer ever. Something tells me it&#8217;s is going to be a big seller this year.</p>
<p>Starting at $1799, the Air is so thin it can fit inside one of those yellow envelopes (pictured to the right). It&#8217;s tiny, and it&#8217;s a full-featured Mac. Well, almost full-featured.</p>
<p>To fit a computer into that tiny package, some compromises were made (as usual with ultraportables).</p>
<ul>
<li>Few upgrades available</li>
<li>Internal Lithium-Polymer battery cannot be swapped-out at will</li>
<li>No optical drive. You can (and will want to) purchase a $99 external DVD burner. There&#8217;s a feature that allows you to &#8220;borrow&#8221; the drive of another PC/Mac via Wi-Fi, but you really should pay the extra $99.</li>
<li>Lack of ports. There is only one USB 2.0 port, a micro-DVI port, and a headphone jack</li>
<li>Internal speakers are mono</li>
</ul>
<p>Other than that, this is a real cool computer.</p>
<ul>
<li>The Touchpad responds to several iPhone-like gestures (pinch to zoom, etc).</li>
<li>It weighs 3.0 pounds, and is only 0.76 inches thick.</li>
<li>It has a 13.3 inch display and full-size keyboard (no dedicated numerical keypad, though)</li>
<li>802.11n</li>
<li>1.6GHz Core 2 Duo (or optional 1.8GHz)</li>
<li>2GB of RAM (only option available)</li>
<li>80GB Hard Drive or 64GB SSD (no higher capacities for either)</li>
<li>Onboard Intel GMA X3100 graphics</li>
<li>5 hours of battery life</li>
</ul>
<p>If you need a thin and light laptop, and can deal with the limitations, this is the computer for you.</p>
<p><strong>Further Reading</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/131604/2008/01/macbookair_reax.html">MacBook Air: Holding my breath</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/131624/2008/01/macbook_air_tradeoffs.html?t=204">MacBook Air&#8217;s tradeoffs</a></li>
<li><a href="http://culturegarage.com/2008/01/15/macbook-air-thinning-my-expectations/">MacBook Air: Thinning My Expectations</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/16/the-macbook-air/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>iTunes Isn&#8217;t Dead</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/10/itunes-isnt-dead/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/10/itunes-isnt-dead/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:28:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Amazon]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[itunes]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/10/itunes-isnt-dead/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apple&#8217;s iTunes now has some serious competition from Amazon.com&#8217;s online music store. The e-commerce giant&#8217;s music store is totally DRM-free, with all four of the major labels onboard. I think it&#8217;s safe to say DRM is on the way out.
However, iTunes hasn&#8217;t gone totally DRM-free yet. Plenty of their music still carries DRM, and the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apple&#8217;s iTunes now has some serious competition from Amazon.com&#8217;s online music store. The e-commerce giant&#8217;s music store is totally DRM-free, with all four of the major labels onboard. I think it&#8217;s safe to say DRM is on the way out.</p>
<p>However, iTunes hasn&#8217;t gone totally DRM-free yet. Plenty of their music still carries DRM, and the albums that are available without it cost more.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to say <strong>iTunes isn&#8217;t dead yet</strong>.</p>
<p>The iPod is by far the most-owned portable music player, and the average iPod-owner is too tech-illiterate to know that Amazon sells music, know that it works with their iPod, and know how to get the music they bought <em>on</em> to the iPod. iTunes is so easy that my cat could by music and load it onto an iPod.</p>
<p>Also, Amazon may be the first to be totally DRM-less, but I&#8217;m sure iTunes will follow suit. Heck, there won&#8217;t even <em>be</em> record labels in a few years. Instead, artists will simply distribute their music through iTunes, Amazon, etc. There&#8217;s no need for the big record labels anymore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2008/01/10/itunes-isnt-dead/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Ultimate MP3 Player</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/11/21/the-ultimate-mp3-player/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/11/21/the-ultimate-mp3-player/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:07:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/11/21/the-ultimate-mp3-player/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Ultimate MP3 Player doesn&#8217;t exist yet. It&#8217;s the second-generation iPod Touch.
Apple needs to fix the current bugs, and add some new features. Namely,

A volume switch on the device. Using the touchscreen to control volume can&#8217;t work too well.
The ability to download and subscribe to podcasts over Wi-Fi.
Flash support for Safari.

Here&#8217;s how I want the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://i17.tinypic.com/6yoi4k5.jpg" align="right" height="250" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="78" />The Ultimate MP3 Player doesn&#8217;t exist yet. <strong>It&#8217;s the second-generation iPod Touch.</strong></p>
<p>Apple needs to fix the current bugs, and add some new features. Namely,</p>
<ul>
<li>A volume switch on the device. Using the touchscreen to control volume can&#8217;t work too well.</li>
<li>The ability to download and subscribe to podcasts over Wi-Fi.</li>
<li>Flash support for Safari.</li>
</ul>
<p>Here&#8217;s how I want the &#8220;Ultimate MP3 Player&#8221; to work:</p>
<ul>
<li>You plug the device into an AC outlet, so It&#8217;s charged when you need it.</li>
<li>While it&#8217;s plugged-in, it connects to your Wi-Fi network. It would repeatedly check to see if any of your subscribed podcasts are updated, and download them. So you have all your podcasts on the player, as well as it being fully charged.</li>
</ul>
<p>I don&#8217;t load new music onto my current MP3 player anywhere near as often as I put new podcasts onto it. Forget Wi-Fi sync, I want a device that can download podcasts itself.</p>
<p>Get going, Apple!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/11/21/the-ultimate-mp3-player/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>You Don&#8217;t Need to Use Leopard&#8217;s 3D Dock!</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/25/you-dont-need-to-use-leopards-3d-dock/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/25/you-dont-need-to-use-leopards-3d-dock/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/25/you-dont-need-to-use-leopards-3d-dock/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Scores of people have been complaining (Digg users mainly, no surprise there) about the 3D dock in Mac OSX 10.5 Leopard. Well, you whiners are lucky.  According to MonkeyBites, there&#8217;s an option to use a &#8220;classic dock.&#8221; It&#8217;s not an exact replica of the Tiger dock, but close enough. It has a cool transparent-black [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scores of people have been complaining (Digg users mainly, no surprise there) about the 3D dock in Mac OSX 10.5 Leopard. Well, you whiners are lucky. <img src='http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> <a href="http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2007/10/leopards-3-d-do.html">According to MonkeyBites</a>, there&#8217;s an option to use a &#8220;classic dock.&#8221; It&#8217;s not an exact replica of the Tiger dock, but close enough. It has a cool transparent-black background instead of the blue from Tiger.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a <a href="http://lime.quickshareit.com/share/picture1d2a37.png">screenshot</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/25/you-dont-need-to-use-leopards-3d-dock/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In 2009, Your TV is an Expensive Paperweight</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/13/in-2009-your-tv-is-an-expensive-paperweight/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/13/in-2009-your-tv-is-an-expensive-paperweight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2007 11:57:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/13/in-2009-your-tv-is-an-expensive-paperweight/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img src="http://i22.tinypic.com/317e90g.jpg" align="right" height="128" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="128" />In 2009, the FCC will require that all TV stations cease transmitting in the VHF band they previously occupied. They will move to digital broadcasting, which takes-up much less bandwidth, vacating the "TV Spectrum" for other uses.

What's the catch? Your TV will become a rather expensive paperweight, as traditional televisions cannot process the digital signals. If you have an HDTV, or a modern digital-ready TV, than you'll be fine. If not, then you're options are to either buy a new TV or purchase a converter box that processes the digital signals and feeds them to your antiquated television.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://i22.tinypic.com/317e90g.jpg" align="right" height="128" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="128" />In 2009, the FCC will require that all TV stations cease transmitting in the VHF band they previously occupied. They will move to digital broadcasting, which takes-up much less bandwidth, vacating the &#8220;TV Spectrum&#8221; for other uses.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s the catch? Your TV will become a rather expensive paperweight, as traditional televisions cannot process the digital signals. If you have an HDTV, or a modern digital-ready TV, than you&#8217;ll be fine. If not, then you&#8217;re options are to either buy a new TV or purchase a converter box that processes the digital signals and feeds them to your antiquated television.</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t news, the FCC has been planning it for a few years now. Why are they vacating the TV Spectrum? It can be used for other purposes, such as cell phones and wireless broadband, as the UHF spectrum will soon be. Unfortunately, there&#8217;s a depressingly high chance that the spectrum will simply be sold to a large corporation, where it will benefit no one except whichever telecom company has deep enough pockets to buy it.</p>
<p>Personally, I don&#8217;t mind the spectrum being vacated (as long as a corporation doesn&#8217;t gain exclusive control over it), though I <em>am</em> opposed to digital TV. I think it&#8217;s unnecessary, and that TV could be better broadcast over the internet.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s insane for the FCC to expect us to go out and buy new TV sets on such short notice, and don&#8217;t forget that their forcing the high-definition rubbish on us too. Sometime around the death of VHF TV, the stations will stop broadcasting in the standard definition as well. Does someone in the FCC have stock in the TV set industry? You have to wonder&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/13/in-2009-your-tv-is-an-expensive-paperweight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Annoying Del.icio.us Prompt</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/11/annoying-delicious-prompt/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/11/annoying-delicious-prompt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2007 17:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Web Sites]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/11/annoying-delicious-prompt/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been migrating my Firefox bookmarks to del.icio.us as of late, but I&#8217;ve run into something I don&#8217;t like.
Whenever I clear my cache (Ctrl-Shift-Del), which I do often when I work with CSS and JavaScript, I&#8217;m logged out of Del.icio.us (which is no big deal, and expected since I&#8217;m flushing the cookies). As soon as [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been migrating my Firefox bookmarks to del.icio.us as of late, but I&#8217;ve run into something I don&#8217;t like.</p>
<p>Whenever I clear my cache (Ctrl-Shift-Del), which I do often when I work with CSS and JavaScript, I&#8217;m logged out of Del.icio.us (which is no big deal, and expected since I&#8217;m flushing the cookies). As soon as I clear out Firefox&#8217;s cache and cookies, logging me out of Del.icio.us, I get this stupid prompt from the Firefox extension. It looks like this:</p>
<p><img src="http://i22.tinypic.com/30lcu50.jpg" /></p>
<p>How do I get rid of this stupid prompt? I want to leave the few copies of my del.icio.us bookmarks in Firefox, and I don&#8217;t want to be bugged about it whenever I log out of del.icio.us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/11/annoying-delicious-prompt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>We Need a &#8220;G4 Cube 2.0&#8243;</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/07/we-need-a-g4-cube-20/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/07/we-need-a-g4-cube-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 17:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/07/we-need-a-g4-cube-20/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apple&#8217;s desktop lineup currently includes

The wimpy $500 Mac Mini
The &#8220;all-in-one&#8221; iMac
The $2500 Mac Pro

So you have you&#8217;re choice of a cheap, and tiny, computer that won&#8217;t meet the needs of most power users (let&#8217;s see you edit video on a Mini); an &#8220;all-in-one&#8221; computer with enough for most power users, but little choice in the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apple&#8217;s desktop lineup currently includes</p>
<ul>
<li>The wimpy $500 Mac Mini</li>
<li>The &#8220;all-in-one&#8221; iMac</li>
<li>The $2500 Mac Pro</li>
</ul>
<p>So you have you&#8217;re choice of a cheap, and tiny, computer that won&#8217;t meet the needs of most power users (let&#8217;s see you edit video on a Mini); an &#8220;all-in-one&#8221; computer with enough for most power users, but little choice in the monitor area since everything is built-in to the LCD; and the expensive &#8220;ultimate computer&#8221; with 8 processing cores.</p>
<p>There needs to be a midrange model that allows for the use of your own monitor, like the ill-fated G4 Cube. It&#8217;s stats should be something like these:</p>
<ul>
<li>2.4GHZ+ Core 2 Duo</li>
<li>2GB of RAM</li>
<li>250GB-500GB of Hard Drive space</li>
<li>8x Dual-Layer SuperDrive</li>
<li>ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory</li>
</ul>
<p>It&#8217;s pricing should be comparable to the iMacs, seeing as the specs would be similar (though the cost of the LCD is cut-out).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/10/07/we-need-a-g4-cube-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s With GMail&#8217;s Sign-Up Button?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/21/whats-with-gmails-sign-up-button/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/21/whats-with-gmails-sign-up-button/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 17:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/21/whats-with-gmails-sign-up-button/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since July, the Sign-Up button on the GMail login page has been changing. The frequency of the changes hasn&#8217;t been constant, and there have been a large variety of different styles.
Since July 28, 2007, I have been taking screenshots of the different buttons, and I&#8217;m publishing the screen grabs here. It&#8217;s kind of fun, seeing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since July, the Sign-Up button on the <a href="http://gmail.com">GMail</a> login page has been changing. The frequency of the changes hasn&#8217;t been constant, and there have been a large variety of different styles.</p>
<p>Since July 28, 2007, I have been taking screenshots of the different buttons, and I&#8217;m publishing the screen grabs here. It&#8217;s kind of fun, seeing a different button every day, but the question is &#8220;why?&#8221; Why is this happening? Are there some bored employees at Google?</p>
<p>Here are the buttons:</p>
<p><img src="http://i14.tinypic.com/4kp92y0.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i14.tinypic.com/53p8ifs.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i10.tinypic.com/4mcadly.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i13.tinypic.com/5xp9onn.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i1.tinypic.com/6ezv14k.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i9.tinypic.com/4qelifs.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i7.tinypic.com/4tz8rj6.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i8.tinypic.com/4uc8s5w.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i8.tinypic.com/642y9w6.jpg" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i12.tinypic.com/5z2iw5h.jpg" /></p>
<p>This odd occurrence is still happening, and I&#8217;m still taking screenshots of the new ones.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/21/whats-with-gmails-sign-up-button/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stupid Lawsuits and Patents For 9/15/07</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/15/stupid-lawsuits-and-patents-for-91507/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/15/stupid-lawsuits-and-patents-for-91507/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2007 12:07:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/15/stupid-lawsuits-and-patents-for-91507/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Verizon is suing the FCC over the 700MHz open-access requirements. Verizon says &#8220;Imposing any such requirements in the competitive wireless market would reduce the revenue the government will receive from the spectrum auction and limit the introduction of new and innovative wireless services.&#8221; Yeah, and I&#8217;m Bill Gates. Who cares if the government is receiving [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://weblogtoolscollection.com/archives/2007/09/15/wordpress-plugin-releases-for-915/">Verizon is suing the FCC</a> over the 700MHz open-access requirements. Verizon says <em>&#8220;Imposing any such requirements in the competitive wireless market would reduce the revenue the government will receive from the spectrum auction and limit the introduction of new and innovative wireless services.&#8221;</em> Yeah, and I&#8217;m Bill Gates. Who cares if the government is receiving more revenue from the 700MHz spectrum? And how do the requirements &#8220;limit the introduction of new and innovative wireless services?&#8221; The open-access requirements <em>increase</em> the introduction of new services by keeping telecom companies like Verizon from controlling the band.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, <em>Microsoft, Apple, Verizon, AT&amp;T, Sprint, Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba, Viacom, Real, Napster, Samsung, LG, Motorola, Nokia, Sandisk</em>, and other companies are being sued by some lunatic &#8220;company&#8221; that <a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070914-company-patents-playlists-sues-everyone.html">patented the concept of playlists</a>. Oh, and &#8220;Premier International Associates&#8221; has no company history prior to the lawsuits. How the heck did they get the patent in the first place?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/15/stupid-lawsuits-and-patents-for-91507/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should Your Next Computer Be a Mac?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/14/should-your-next-computer-be-a-mac/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/14/should-your-next-computer-be-a-mac/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:55:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/14/should-your-next-computer-be-a-mac/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img src="http://i16.tinypic.com/53hcr2x.jpg" align="right" height="200" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="234" />Most computers tend to last only 2-3 years. It's an annoying fact, but that doesn't make it any less true. My previous computer was a Compaq Presario, which lasted about three years. My current machine, a Gateway 835GM, has been kicking since a few days after the release of the sixth Harry Potter book (July 16th 2005 for the uninformed). How much longer will it last? No idea. At random times (read: the worst possible moment) everything locks-up, and then goes blank. It's been happening for a few months now, and my attempts to pin-down the problem have been unsuccessful. Who knows how much time is left until it quits.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://i16.tinypic.com/53hcr2x.jpg" align="right" height="200" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="234" />Most computers tend to last only 2-3 years. It&#8217;s an annoying fact, but that doesn&#8217;t make it any less true. My previous computer was a Compaq Presario, which lasted about three years. My current machine, a Gateway 835GM, has been kicking since a few days after the release of the sixth Harry Potter book (July 16th 2005 for the uninformed). How much longer will it last? No idea. At random times (read: the worst possible moment) everything locks-up, and then goes blank. It&#8217;s been happening for a few months now, and my attempts to pin-down the problem have been unsuccessful. Who knows how much time is left until it quits.</p>
<p>If you spend a week reading my articles, you&#8217;ll likely come to the assumption that I&#8217;m a big Apple fan. You&#8217;d be right, though I haven&#8217;t used any of their products for more than ten minutes at a time. I get Macworld from the library, I read Apple news online, and I&#8217;ve read several books about Apple and their products. I don&#8217;t have a Mac yet, but I definitely want one. Why, besides being totally obsessed with Apple products (a.k.a. &#8220;The Pinnacle of Innovation and Design&#8221;)?</p>
<p>First of all, Windows sucks. I&#8217;ve been using Windows since before XP was around, and it wasn&#8217;t very good. XP came out, and it was more stable and a little easier to use. Nowadays, Microsoft is marketing the heck out of Vista, and I&#8217;m thinking &#8220;How stupid does Microsoft think we are?&#8221; Vista is at <em>least</em> a step backwards. Vista is basically Windows XP with some security patches, a new interface, and more versions. The new &#8220;cool&#8221; interface may look cool, but from what I&#8217;ve seen it definitely hinders usability&#8230;and performance. Buy an OS with higher (like double) minimum spec requirements so I can have translucent window borders? No thanks.</p>
<p>In the hardware area, things aren&#8217;t much better. New PCs generally have Vista preinstalled, and you run into the problem of your computer self-destructing in two years. Throw-in bad tech support, device conflicts, malware, and the headaches start.</p>
<p>Some people will tell you that Macs have &#8220;compatibility issues.&#8221; Well, Vista definitely has &#8220;compatibility issues.&#8221; Only a third of software that runs on XP will run on Vista. You&#8217;ll need a new secuity suite for sure, and countless other apps won&#8217;t work. Meanwhile, Macs are becoming more and more adept at running Windows apps. Parallels Desktop and VMWare Fusion allow you to run Windows applications <em>in the Mac OS</em>. That&#8217;s right, they even appear in the dock. How is that possible? Now that Macs have Intel chips, it&#8217;s a lot simpler to run apps in a &#8220;virtual Windows playpen.&#8221; Before, virtualization systems had to emulate the chip as well. Of course, some programs won&#8217;t run in a virtual state (3D games for example). That&#8217;s where Apple&#8217;s Boot Camp software comes in. With Boot Camp, you can have an actual copy of Windows installed on your Mac. You can turn off your Mac, and restart it in Windows so you can play Need For Speed or whatever processor-intensive program you need to run. And get this: Vista runs faster on Macs than on any other PC on the market. The Vista Upgrade Adviser even scores iMacs higher than any other non-Apple machine. So&#8230;wait&#8230;how high would a Mac Pro score?</p>
<p>I think all of the above is enough reason to go Mac.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.ntugo.com/computers/2007/09/14/should-your-next-computer-be-a-mac/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
