There are basically two things that you need to start easily backing up: an external hard drive and software that allows you to back up your entire computer with the click of a mouse.  The external hard drive connects to your computer via USB and on it a copy of your computer’s hard drive is created.  When purchasing this hard drive, be sure to get one that holds much more data than is on your current hard drive so that it will continue be able to back up your computer as you gather more files and applications on your computer.  You can either buy a ready to-go-external HD or you can buy a hard drive and its housing separately and assemble your own (be sure that the housing has a USB output and that it is compatible with the HD you bought).  

As for the software, many external hard drives come with software of their own that easily backs up your HD when the external HD is connected to your computer.  Otherwise, you can search download.com for some free downloadable software (http://www.download.com/Backup-Software/3150-2242_4-0.html).  On Mac OS 10.5 Leopard, the addition of Time Machine makes backing up incredibly easy.  After an initial configuration, every time you connect the external HD to your computer, a new backup is created.  Time Machine is incredibly useful because it allows you to “go back in time” to look at your computer as it was during previous backups.  Time Machine even reminds you when you have not backed up in a dangerously long time (like my computer is right now).  What’s more is that if your old HD corrupts or you want to install a new one, Time Machine makes it incredible simple to restore your old hard drive on your new one.  Simply insert the Leopard install disk and restore from the external HD!

The question beckons:  how often should you back up?  Ideally, once a week, but once a month would be ok too.  It’s a very good idea to backup after you receive or create a very important file that you cannot lose.

Cheers and good luck.

RAM is a  specific type of memory that is an acronym for “random access memory” which means that any data stored on the device can be accessed at any time, regardless of where it is stored or what data proceed it.  Computers use RAM to operate programs, as it is can be written on and read extremely fast.  The 1970 Apple ][+ had a mere 48 kb of RAM, compared to the 1GB or RAM that comes standard with a Macbook today.  

1GB of RAM should be sufficient for an average computer user (i.e. one who surfs the web, plays music, videos, photos, uses word processors, and  very occasionally edits video).  If for any reason, you should want to upgrade your RAM (the Macbook takes up to 2GB of 667 Mhz RAM) google a how to for the type of computer that you have.  On most computers, it is fairly easy to do.  Be sure to buy more RAM at a computer store beforehand and make sure it is the right type.  Reasons for adding more memory include slow performance or a desire to edit videos or use large programs such as Photoshop (and all of CS3).  

But take note: just because your computer is acting slow doesn’t necessarily mean that you need more RAM.  Often a full hard drive hinders performance because the HD is also responsible for operating programs to a lesser degree.  Either upgrade your hard drive or clear out some unneeded files.

Let’s start out with the PSP. The PSP is certainly the most technologically advanced of the three devices, yet it seems not to have caught on in the markets nearly as well. In terms of features, the better question is which doesn’t it have, not which does it have. It has full 3d graphics (as one might see in a PS2 game), headphone jack, bluetooth, Wifi, an internet browser, media viewer, memory stick slot, plays movies, it’s software can be updated via the internet, and oh yeah, it plays games. It has the potential to be a portable powerhouse, and constant software updates means that the possibilities are literally endless. The PSP looks amazing, but unfortunately is a little awkward to hold and use. That oblong shape makes it slightly uncomfortable in one’s hands. One final comment – the PSP has all the technology that one would need, but beyond gameplay, it certainly doesn’t have anything that many cell phones can’t do these days (such as browse the internet, play songs, videos, etc.). Overall, it’s great for gaming, and if it’s an abundance of features and superb graphics that you’re looking for, then the PSP is for you.

Onwards to the DS. The DS brings the touch screen to portable gaming, certainly a sign of Nintendo’s recently heightened innovation that brought us the Wii. The DS is simple (no browser, bluetooth, media player…) , yet it has the superb addition of device-to-device multiplayer gameplay. One can connect to a friends DS using a built in wifi connection. One cannot, however, access the internet through the DS.  Gamers can even chat or “pictochat” using the stylus, which is a great addition. The graphics are largely two dimensional with some rudimentary 3d elements. Games for the DS tend to be much simpler than those for the PSP, only a notch above Gameboy Advance games. The Nintendo DS is for a casual gamer who enjoys playing Mario spinoffs and sequels. The DS becomes much more exciting when your friends have them too because of multiplayer and chatting capabilites.

Now for the Gameboy Advance SP. The SP is simply a clamshell version of the Gameboy Advance with a well-lit screen and a rechargeable battery. These two features render it far superior to the Advance. Games are well – very simple (such as Pokemon etc.) The only reason that one should get this over the DS is if one wants to solely play original gameboy games. The DS does not support those games.

Bottom line:  The the best two devices are the PSP and the DS, but they are just so different that I cannot recommend one over the other.  Ideally, you’d have both, but if you have to have one over the other then determine which one is right for you.

• Two cameras separated by distance between one’s eyes are used to record two different images.
• The images are edited to enhance certain 3d effects.
• At the theatre, film from each camera is displayed through two different projectors.  The light from each passes through two differently polarized films, which only lets light waves of a certain direction pass through, thereby giving the light waves of each projected image a different orientation.
• The light bounces off the screen at nearly the same polarization (orientation) and light from each camera passes through a different lens of the 3d glasses.  This is because the each lens of the glasses has a unique polarization equal to that of the light that is to pass through it.
• The effect is a different image received by each eye, which the brain interprets as three dimensional. The brain is accustomed to receiving a different image from each eye in everyday life, which is why we have depth perception.

The next time you’re at a 3d movie, think of the science behind it.

First of all, let me comment on the phones’ similar layout.  Each has a black background on which application icons are displayed.  In the bottom of each touchscreen is a bar that contains various shortcuts such as the phone and email features.  Some of the Voyager’s icons are practically identical to those of iPhone, such as the music and calendar icons, which bear a striking resemblance to icons that Apple have used for years on their computers (iCal, iTunes).  To the people out there that would argue that LG’s phone was announced first (in the form of the Voyager’s cousin, the KE850) and therefore the iPhone is a copycat – I have these words: that’s debatable.  As I have said, LG chose to use icons that are virtually indistinguishable from well-established Apple icons.  Secondly, how could either of the companies have copied each other when both phones were secretly developed at the same time?  Moreover, why would they copy each other?  They both have far too much to lose.

Now for the features.  While it is true that the Voyager one-ups the iPhone in terms of certain features that are standard to most cell phones (capacity to send files via bluetooth, organize email, etc) the iPhone simply trumps the Voyager in ever other way.  It is just such a clean device, there is no clutter to it.  It has a certain indescribable passion and innovation to it comparable to that of an new Alpha Romeo convertible.   When you rotate the device you are impassioned by the screen, which magically rotates along with it.  As for the  keyboard, the iPhone wins the prize.  It’s auto-correct feature is stunning, allowing one to type at much faster speeds than with the Voyager’s manual keyboard.  Did I mention the web apps that one can install on the desktop of the iPhone?  Does the Voyager allow you to do anything from check your Halo 3 stats to display a virtual lighter flame with one tap of the screen?  I don’t think so.

The iPhone can be likened to the invention of the motion picture – it is awe-inspiring.  When you walk down the street, people turn their heads and stare at the device.  With the Voyager, I do not see that happening.  The iPhone is more than a phone – it is revolutionary.  In my opinion, the only thing that separates a the Voyager from any other standard smartphone is the touchscreen.  It has no new, exciting features.  It just doesn’t make a noticeable attempt to be different.  

Bottom line: The iPhone is innovative and passionate, while the Voyager is a standard smartphone with a touchscreen. 

Ok, so I wasn’t able to remain unbiased, but get your hands on an iPhone and won’t be able to either.

As a Mac user, my main browser continues to be Safari, for which I abandoned Explorer when it came out with the release of Panther.  Safari is a great browser – complete with tabbed browsing, a quick search, popup blocking, and just about everything else that one would need.  Moreover, it boots up extremely quickly.

I must admit that I do have Firefox on my Mac as well (it’s even on the dock) but I rarely use it anymore.  The reason I installed it is because some internet applications and forms did not function well with or support Safari.  Recently, however, I have had no problems doing the same tasks that didn’t work earlier using Safari ( I am running 3.0.4) now that it has become a much more well-known browser and therefore developers have begun to optimize sites for compatibility with Safari. The reason that I don’t use Firefox on my Mac is simple:  it takes much longer to start up than Safari.  I have 2 GB of memory and  a 160 GB hard drive so its slowness is not the fault of my computer.  Why would I wait 10 seconds to start to quickly Google something with Firefox when I could be done doing it with Safari in the same amount of time?

For PC or Linux users, however, Firefox is the best browser.  It is simply the fastest, most convenient, and most user-friendly.  Why should you waste your time with Internet Explorer?  Firefox is simply better, complete with tabbed browsing and quick search.

Bottom Line on Firefox:  If you have a Mac, stick with Safari.  PC users, flock to Firefox.

Update Feb 2, 2008 – Ironically, some aspects of wordpress don’t work well with Safari (specifically the formatting).  I’ve had to open up Firefox to edit my blog entries.  It still lags, though.  I admit, there are some downsides to Safari, but I will always prefer it to Firefox.  Meanwhile, Apple have just announced a new version of Safari (3.1), which has features including downloadable web fonts and increased developer accessibility

-Cheers,

Tim