The 1990s was a decade that saw major shifts in technological power. While the 90s was dedicated to finding one’s place in the tech hierarchy through powerful hardware, software advances and proprietary protocols, the current era is more dedicated to complying to universally accepted standards and fixing what was broken in the previous decade. Speaking of broken, the 90s was actually a time when CRT-monitors and power-hungry systems, now condemned by modern standards, were all the craze. Now the phase to LED-based monitors and recyclable components is imminent.

With a greener tech world almost absolutely needed, organizations such as the EPA and RoHS are continuously making stricter the requirements for an environmentally friendly system. Some companies are rushing to the top as Green Manufacturer, others are emphasizing on a specific field, while others would rather wait until an environmental lawsuit is filed against them. It is this sad reality that only a handful of companies are actually trying to push for the green future, while others continue to market toxic products in the hopes that the public will not care.

However, if we do look into the efforts of the caring companies, we can expect a greener future in the years ahead. Nokia, for example, is leading the efforts on recycling e-waste. Apple is also emerging from the shadows of environmental condemnation, phasing out toxic chemicals and lowering power-consumption even before strict standards are made effective. If only all companies did the same, toxic chemicals would be history sooner than you think.

I do think that we still have a long way to go. It may take us a while to get rid of that habit we had in the 90s, in that we have so much to clean up after. Companies are doing something about it and the numbers they present justify such. Organizations do, however, have to push other companies to do the same, since the state of the environment is really no joke. In the meantime, we might as well do our part. Continue to switch off lights and save on water and we might see some dramatic improvements in the near future.

The moment you hit enter on your address bar, you are greeted with a small window with a small search bar and a high-resolution, appealing photo. These pictures change on a daily basis and can often entice users to check the URL daily to see the new picture. In other words, Bing.com’s homescreen is pretty, and is also quite inviting. The only unfortunate thing about the homescreen is that nobody has a real need for visiting this site. Ever since Firefox came out, visiting the search engine homescreen was made obsolete by the search bar being integrated into the browser. With that, there will only be two kinds of people who have to go to this main screen: those who use Internet Explorer 6 or older <gasp>, and those who use Safari and would rather use Bing over the hotwired Google Search Bar. Of course, these are somewhat extreme conditions and only represent a very small minority of the browser population.

Now, let’s go to the real job: searching! Like every other search engine, either from the main screen or through a search bar, all that is needed is to type the words and hit enter. To demonstrate, I will give a scenario: I have been tracking Doom Classic for the iPhone and iPod Touch ever since it’s announcement, and now I am looking for some updates. With that, I will type in “Doom Classic for iPhone” and see what I get.

The results are in. Bing presents the results in a nice, organized manner. In addition, these results are ad-free at the moment, so it won’t overwhelm you with junk links. Another cool feature is that when you hover your cursor over a result, a line with an orange dot will appear on the right side. Hovering over the orange dot will reveal some nice extras that include text from the link relevant to the search topic, and sometimes, external links to other potentially relevant articles. This feature could potentially save time, especially when it comes to checking if the site is relevant before actually entering it. While the links given were pretty much accurate to the search topic, Bing often gets confused with link priority. In the case of the demonstration, second-hand articles of Doom Classic came first before the first-hand source, which is the fifth link listed. In rare cases, even obvious sites (such as the main site of a given company) is not even listed on the first page. Of course, these are rare cases and shouldn’t happen often.

What probably makes Bing very unique from Google is the image search. I would be lying if I said I didn’t like Bing’s image search. While I never really complained about Google’s Image Search, Bing’s take on it surprised me by giving me an interface that I didn’t think would be convenient. The biggest thing you’ll notice with Image Search is that all image results are presented on only one page. Bing also provides some interesting image results one doesn’t easily find on Google, yet these images are still relevant to a certain extent. Filtering tools are also provided at the side, always there when needed. One of the better features is that when you click on one of the images, not only does it show the thumbnail on top with a preview of the page at the bottom, on the side, other image thumbnails are provided so that one can easily jump to another page preview without having to return to the main image search page. Clicking on these thumbnails also opens a new tap, so you don’t have to always click the back button. This can potentially save a lot of time, and makes opening multiple pages a snap.

In total, I think that Bing is quite a sophisticated search engine. It’s specialty lies in its ability to preview pages and automatically open pages in new tabs to save just a little more time. While search results can be inconsistent, this happens seldom, and Bing is becoming more and more accurate in bringing in relevant results. While it is by far the prettiest search engine I have seen, it can surely do better than entice people with attractive pictures. While Bing is very robust at this point in development, I doubt it actually needed Microsoft to spend hundreds of millions on advertisement.

If you ask me if I do use Bing, I will say Yes, but not as my default engine. The pretty pictures can be quite distracting, since it gets in the way of the main purpose of finding results. Also, I usually use Bing only when I feel Google isn’t bringing out the articles or images I need. Another thing that keeps me in Google is that it’s the engine stuck with Safari, and I don’t want to mod Safari just so that it can use the search bar for an engine I don’t use regularly. However, this is only personal reference and I way for me to reduce surfing time on Safari, so I am totally not stopping you to switch to Bing. I think it’s great and that it will hopefully only get better in the future.

The biggest news to everyone is, of course, the return of Steve Jobs! That’s right. Apple’s CEO is back showing himself to us once again. After a few minutes of assuring the audience that he was healthy and well, Jobs went on to bring in the updates. The first of these updates is iPhone OS 3.1, which is composed of updates and some tidbit features that will be to the liking of some. I will not dive into these updates, though they are the updates are fairly substantial. These updates will be free for all devices running OS 3.0, while iPod Touch users using older firmware can update at a now lower point of $4.95.

The next big news was iTunes 9, which brought in new refinements to the music player application. The first of these is a revamped Genius, which now extends itself into music genres in the form of Genius Mixes. Another way to discover complementary music, but nothing very astounding. The next update is a redesigned iTunes Store, which gives a cleaner interface and allows one to listen to previews and make one-click transactions, without even leaving most pages. Another update is improved device syncing, which gives even more parameters for syncing specific content to your iPod or iPhone. This also includes an app organization feature, which allows one to add, remove and/or organize apps on your iPhone or iPod Touch, all within your Mac or PC. The last of the additions to iTunes 9 is iTunes LP, which gives some of the albums on iTunes a rather vintage feel, accomplishing this by providing digital album sleeves that bring music lovers back to the pre-CD era of music. It’s a nice feature that will hopefully go beyond the simple interface in the future. iTunes 9 is available today for free, so head on to Apples site to download.

The second of these announcements is the iPod Line-up, which usually get their usual annual changes. The iPod Classic was very brief, only announcing an increased storage of 160 GB from 120 GB at the same $249 price point. The iPod Touch has some changes as well. For those looking to get an iPod, you’re in luck! The 8 GB model is now only $199, reaching out to a broader audience who want a taste of the iPod Touch and the App Store. The 16 GB model is now at 32 GB capacity at $299, while the 32 GB is now at the incredible 64 GB capacity at $399. Note that the 32 GB and 64 GB models also received a 50% bump in CPU speed, as well as support for OpenGL ES 2.0, which in layman’s terms mean snappier performance and better looking 3D games, as well as more frames per second. Surprisingly, there’s no camera as many rumors suggested, though Apple claims it had to be omitted to drive prices down.

There was also the iPod Shuffle, which now supports extra voice commands as well as additional colors: pink, green and blue to be exact. It also has a new entry level price point, with a 2 GB model at $59, and the 4 GB model remaining at $79. There will also be a special edition, made from polished stainless steel, at a premium price of $99. Now there’s the iPod Nano, which received the most radical changes of the four. The first of these is that the Nano has a built-in video camera, microphone and speakers, apparently being advertised as an “ultra-thin, ultra-tiny Flip Mino”. It now has a built-in FM Radio, just like the Zunes that have been around since 2006. The screen has also been widened, giving the Nano an even wider widescreen aspect ratio. Another tidbit is that the Nano’s shell is now made of polished stainless steel, at the same time retaining its chromatic colors. The most important news for the Nano, however, is it’s price point. While the 8 GB model is still $149, the 16 GB version had its price slashed to an even lower $179, effectively leaving the $200 range for good and becoming even more affordable.

So that’s the round-up. While I am happy for Job’s return to Apple, as well as the slick updates to iPod Nano, I think the event was still somewhat a disappointment. In all honesty, I was really, really looking forward to the iPod Touch getting more than just a speed bump and increased capacity. It was ironic in that the iPod Touch was even more likely to get the camera over the Nano, especially since there are many apps that use a camera. Another thing to notice is that the Classic line-up is getting stale, receiving almost no noticeable updates since 2007. Oh well, at least we get price cuts in anticipation of the holidays, and we can still look forward to the next event where can hope we will really be wowed by Apple. Anyway, you can always look up more information at Apple’s site and look deeper into its features. I will also try to cover the Zune HD and make a comparison with the revamped iPod line, making recommendations from there. To close this entry, hope you enjoy the new iPods and keep rocking!

During its peak as a next-gen console, it introduced an interface and hardware far more advanced than the original Playstation, the Nintendo 64, or even Dreamcast’s predecessor Saturn. Back in 1999, Dreamcast’s graphics were literally ahead of its time. Top notched games included the original Soul Calibur, Crazy Taxi, as well the console ports of the the multiplayer FPS’s Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 Arena. While all these titles would eventually head to other platforms, critics and gamers were almost unanimous in opinion that the Dreamcast versions were superior. What was also critical to Dreamcast’s success was its role as the first console to truly support online gaming, more than three years before the conception of Xbox Live. Unfortunately for most gamers during that time, Dreamcast’s glory days were numbered.

The following year after the release of the Dreamcast, the next, and most powerful, entry arrived; the Sony Playstation 2. Due to the one year gap between consoles, the PS2 happily built itself upon newer technologies that the Dreamcast lacked. Of all the advantages the PS2 boasted against the Dreamcast, it’s ultimate weapon was the then latest and highly anticipated DVD format. Boasting several times the capacity of the CD, and maintaining quick reading speeds, the DVD became the ultimate demise of the Dreamcast. Sega just couldn’t compete with the better graphics, faster hardware, bigger storage media, and vast catalog that Sony held in its position. To make things worst, the Xbox and Gamecube arrived the year after that, also boasting supersior hardware specs and a killer catalogue that rivaled Sony’s  in every way. With Dreamcast quickly falling behind technology, by the turn of the millenium, the once killer console was finally removed from store shelves, forever. Only three consoles would make it to the next generation, and Sega would be forced to make games for its former rivals.

Years went by and the three consoles would later gain prominence. Xbox Live was unleashed in 2002, becoming an immediate hit, even claiming the title of online console gaming pioneer for itself. The PS2 would later on go on to sell an astonishing 138 million copies, mostly thanks to a catalog of top-notched games. The Gamecube continued to perform well, mostly thanks to it’s selection of franchises that have remained rock solid for the past two decades. By the time the seventh generation was among us, cross-platform gaming finally became mainstream. The console wars would continue amongst the three, with none of them showing any sign of surrender anytime soon.

With that story finished, let us not keep in our minds how the Dreamcast died, rather, let us remember how the Dreamcast lived for the gamer. Let us look back at just how far gaming went since the Dreamcast’s induction ten years ago. Let us remember how titles for multiple consoles once looked at the Dreamcast version as the golden standard. Let us remember how a home entertainment system once connected with another one from across the world for the first time. These, my friends, are the Dreamcast’s legacy. Today, gamers around the world celebrate that legacy, the tenth-anniversary of a truly revolutionizing console. This is to Dreamcast: Congratulations on your tenth birthday, and may the gamers of tomorrow remember everything you’ve done for us. Cheers to Sega for having given us a gamer’s blessing!

Now some of you might be enraged about Quake Live suddenly asking money from the pockets of it’s users, but I’ll explain some details about the news, and you’ll soon find that it’s actually not bad. The subscription will merely add the ability for users to host private servers, where a small fee has been perfectly normal for the past years. Calling this service a premium subscription is kinda stingy to most people, so I will just call it “server rentals” since that is basically all that it really offers anyway. One should only rent a private server if:
1. You are a company or group wanting to host tournaments/events
2. You want to apply controlled conditions, those that are not possible without an administrator
3. You want to play with only a select group of people (i.e. friends)
4. You want a closer server location with less latency

Other than that, renting servers are not a necessity. Also, you will NOT lose any of the current Quake priviliges you currently enjoy by not paying. With that, things such as leaderboards, profiles, awards, etc., will remain available at no extra charge. So basically, the free Quake you know now will still be free, just with the ability to rent servers. Not so bad now, is it? Anyway, now that Quake Live is also Mac and Linux compatible, what are you waiting for? Start Fragging!

If you look at most of the Apple products around, you will immediately notice the first of these philosophies: The fewer, the better. This is most evident in Apple’s hardware and OS X, where there is virtually one product per category to rule them all. For example, in contrast to the six versions of Windows Vista (four for Windows 7), there is only one version of Mac OS X. Their belief behind this is that there will always be something one may eventually need. Rather than making someone upgrade to another version of an OS or buy additional software, there is one OS that has everything, so you can immediately take advantage of its features the moment the need arises. While this philosophy works rather well for OS X, it becomes more controversial amongst the Macs, where computer customization has been crucial for selection for the past decade or so. The consequence is that people would have to buy a $2,000 Macbook Pro just to get a notebook with a discrete GPU, when a customization option for, say, a 13-inch model could potentially save several hundreds of dollars. Diversity has been the focal point of Microsoft’s Laptop Hunter Ads, and an idea that Apple should accept in the near future.

The second philosophy of Apple is that of quality, and in turn, price. Apple believes that there should not be any room for failure or any other compromise, which is why their products, while far less problematic than most other computers, carry a hefty price tag. Most people criticize the Mac for its high price on a computer with much lower hardware specs than an equivalently priced PC. While this criticism is relatively true, people tend to forget other factors of pricing, namely built-in software, and build quality. This is also why Apple refuses to compete in the netbook market, believing that Apple should never taint its image as a quality manufacturer by producing netbooks that have weak hardware and inferior build quality. While the prices of Apple’s products are frequently under-fire, many others believe that a sophisticated OS and software and quality that produces high customer satisfaction are worth the price tag. While Apple’s Macs and other products are expensive, it’s because they were meant to be premium items to begin with. It’s like criticizing Porsche for not making a car that is priced like a Chevy. Apple just doesn’t compete in that kind of market.

The last philosophy is also the most criticized, which is that of content. Those that fall in this category are the iPhone and, to an extent, the iPod+iTunes line. While these products are known for certain features, people on scrutinize these products for lacking something they essentially want out of a device. The fact that the iPod lacks a built-in FM Radio, substantial updates (software-wise), and a music subscription service have become focal points for criticism and a marketing factor for competitors. This is also highly evident in the App Store, where apps are usually filtered  because either it is useless in the eyes of Apple, it directly competes with a current Apple offering, or the app uses a cellular connection. This kind of “censorship” is frequently under-fire and, once again, these issues will be resolved by yet more incoming competitors. In fact, most competitors sell to people the fact that their products have what Apple’s lack. Once again, this is where Apple falls prey for the inevitable diversity of the tech community. While Apple might deem a feature or service useless, it might be highly coveted by another group of people. It is this mere lack of a certain feature that pulls people away from Apple; a sad truth.

This is only a mere summary of what I think is the way Apple thinks. It is sad to know that Apple can do nothing but expect people to buy their way of thinking, but of course, it just doesn’t work (no pun intended). This is also why competitors can easily make an anti-Apple, where all they have to do is add what Apple lacks and they already have an audience to appeal to. It’s as though Apple is always the one shoveling the snow, experiencing much hardship, while rivals only have to walk the clear path. Though the Apple Philosophy could work back in the old days, in a time where perspective has spliced into many forms, Apple needs to adjust to the times. While Apple doesn’t have to slap itself in the face by compromising its philosophy, it can at least reach out to the audience that currently criticizes them. In other words, Apple can potentially look into that untapped market and see what they can out of it. Though Apple continues to roll out new things that may woo the crowd, the point remains that Apple should be ready to face change, fundamental change. I think it’s about time that Apple make a comeback after years of having their weakness exploited by rivals. If Apple can fill those gaps, even these competitors will have much to live up to.

Whenever you see something done the Google Way, as I want to call it, it becomes something you really want to look into. While there were only a few details given, Chrome OS will follow the same design philosophy of its browser counterpart. Basically, Google is going to use the Linux kernel (just like Android) and build an entirely new operating from scratch. The OS design will primarily focus on speed, security and clutter-free experience, just like the Chrome browser. Google has also stated that since the focus of the OS will be for people who are “often on the web”, so I am expecting Webkit technology to be integrated into the OS one way or another. Just like the browser and almost every recent platform released by Google, Chrome OS will be open-sourced.

If you ask me about this new OS idea, while I am very speculative about what it can offer, I do trust Google that they will give us an OS of fine quality. The future release of Chrome OS could change the game plan of operating systems. On the narrower scale, this will basically be Linux done the Google Way. Not only will Chrome OS compete with other versions of Linux, especially Ubuntu, it will also attempt to rival its own desktop environment against KDE and GNOME. On the broader scale, this will be yet another thorn on Microsoft’s side by going up against Windows (seriously, Google has been pricking Microsoft on many fronts now). Of course, it will also compete against Apple and OS X, so it’s going to be really interesting how these two speed-freak companies are going to contend. Think about it: Imagine an OS that has the potential quality of OS X, and is made free and open-source to the public. Now we see something interesting.

My only hope is that people will at least give this project some widespread attention when more details are revealed. In my opinion, there’s nothing worse than hearing a person say he knows no other operating system out there than Windows. Why people don’t know of these things is probably the biggest reason why Microsoft is hardly afraid of the open-source revolution. A lot of people are looking to Google to bring open-source to mainstream computing, and Chrome OS might be open-source’s trump card. I think Chrome OS definitely has the potential to be more than just a Linux variant, and I can’t wait to see what Google will reveal in the near future.

What do you think of Chrome OS? Leave a comment below!

Fortunately, the latest version of Firefox (v3.5) was also worth looking at. And because of the open-ended nature of Firefox, it supported multiple search bars, including Bing. Now I get to simultaneously review Firefox 3.5 and Microsoft Bing. I’ll be separating myself from Safari for one or two weeks to get a feel on the stuff I want to review, so expect an entry on that by that time. Lastly, I will mostly be reviewing the Mac version of Firefox, but it should resemble the Windows and Linux version quite closely. If I can, I will also look at the Windows version within the week. Anyway, just a heads-up for upcoming articles!

The reason why I am so excited about the next-gen HTML is that the web is going to once again overhaul itself for what I consider to be the universal language of the web. Also, because of its universal nature, it should (in theory) allow web developers to create intricate websites without the need of external plug-ins or applets. While  Flash, Java and Silverlight are already showing us some flare, the usual problem with these add-ons is that they are also quite unstable. The majority of browser crashes occur from external plug-ins. HTML 5 plans to fix that by allowing developers and consumers to embed video and other rich applications into websites through native, browser-friendly code.

The last thing I am excited about is that a lot of web applications are going run great under HTML 5. Take the upcoming Google Wave for example. This rich set of tools are, to a certain extent, running on pure web-code, proven by Wave’s cross-platform nature. Things like real-time text feedback, drag-and-drop, and collaborative work will all become more native and easier to achieve. If HTML 5 can truly shine, we might even see a time when 3D applications can truly run natively on a browser.

Those are just a few examples of what the next-gen HTML 5 can potentially do. I personally am excited about it, especially since HTML is much easier to code with rather than having to embed complex Web APIs. HTML 5 could be the key to Web 2.0. I’m not so sure what will happen to Flash or Java, but I still want to look forward to a more simpler, stabler, more powerful internet. Are you? Leave a comment!

That’s right. Sony is making another iPhone rival. While I don’t really have any details on what it will do. You can imagine playing your games like a PSP on a device that can do just as much as your cellphone. To be honest, I am quite curious at how well they blend. I use a Sony-Ericsson phone myself, and I’d like to say that I am happy with it. In my opinion, it feels more comfortable than any Nokia phone I have ever used.

But, if you ask me about Sony’s new idea, I’ll say my opinion that this device is good “in theory”. The first reason why I think this is not a good investment because this is exactly what Sony has been doing for quite a while: making the wrong investments. Think about it. Why did Sony invent Sixaxis? The Nintendo Wii. Why did they offer PSN Free? Xbox Live. Why did they show their own motion control at E3? Project Natal. You sort of get the psychology behind Sony’s investments.

The second reason is that Sony is simply doing this model because they are so paranoid. Although for this, I can’t completely blame Sony. Almost everybody is afraid of Apple’s success, so it’s just natural for people to bring out some heavy contender. Usually, these companies observe the trends that occur with these Apple success stories and try to use that as a springboard for a competitor. What Sony did, however, was jump the gun and head straight for development. I don’t think one year of iPhone gaming trends is enough for Sony to draw conclusions on how their business model should be done right.

The last reason is quite possibly Sony’s ultimate weakness: Pricing. A PSP game is normally priced at the $25-$35 range, while iPhone games average at $10. Also, if the PSP Go’s price is truly jacked that high, imagine when that is fused with cellular capabilities. In other words, it won’t be cheap. I find it really hard to believe if Sony can actually bring these high-profile games to a dangerously low $10. With all these Sony royalties pissing the minds of developers and publishers, it’s almost impossible.

Although, most of these would be the case if Sony tried to place itself head-to-head with the iPhone market. Maybe it would do a lot better as being just a PSP-Phone hybrid, something like the N-Gage, only better. But to put itself in a market which they hardly even grasped, it’s almost suicide. I truly feel sorry for Sony as they are currently on a sinking boat. Already losing over a billion dollars on the PS3 and making whole developments (like Sixaxis) go completely to waste. If Sony keeps up this kind of investment, it’s only a matter of time before they finally throw in the towel. You don’t put out a fire by adding more fuel into it. But who knows, I might be wrong. It is still a bit too early to make such judgement, but I’m simply drawing mine from what Sony has been doing so far. If you guys have your own opinion, feel free to leave a comment!