Although it may not at first seem
relevant, your choice of browser on your laptop may differ markedly
from your choice of browser on a desktop machine. Desktops, after
all, generally have sufficient memory and power to run without
restarting regularly; desktops are also usually shared among many in
a family, and they have different users over time. For this reason, the
browser you choose for a desktop machine need not run light nor
require less processing power.

However, on a laptop, it's much more
important to use a browser that can be closed regularly without
losing important data, and it's much less important for it to allow
easy usage by multiple people. That's why, among all current
browsers, the best overall for laptop use is Google's Chrome browser.

Of course, this doesn't mean Chrome
will be best for you. Many people confuse “best overall” as being
“best for everyone.” Yet, especially in the case of browsers, one's individual preferences are a strong determinant of which
browser would be best for him. Chrome may be the fastest and
lightest browser on the market today, but Firefox is still superior
in terms of specialized add-on applications.

Other specialized browsers include
Flock, which fully integrates social media like twitter and facebook
directly into the browser experience; or WebbIE, which is best
utilized by the visually impaired for use with screen readers. If you
use a very low-bandwidth internet connection, Lynx is an extremely
fast way to surf the web. Safari is a good choice if you're using a
Mac laptop; because it's coded specifically to the hardware, it tends
to perform better than the competition on Apple devices. Opera is
also a widely used browser, although it has most of its success in
mobile web browsing as opposed to laptops.

As you can see, which browser you
should use depends on what situation you are in. If all you care
about is speed or crash reliability, Chrome is your best option. If
you care about specialized applications built by third parties,
Firefox wins hands down. Other concerns may direct you toward many
other of the browsers currently available on the market.

It should be noted that in no case is
Microsoft's Internet Explorer (IE) a good choice for browsing. The
latest version of Internet Explorer 8 completely fails the Acid3 test
for browser compliance of web standards, but there is a rumor
that the still unreleased Internet Explorer 9 may finally attempt to
perform well on the Acid3 test. If you currently use Internet
Explorer 6 or earlier, it is strongly recommended that you switch to
a more recent browser, as version earlier than IE7 are extremely bad
at rendering any of the current web standards. If you use Internet
Explorer 7 or 8, your browsing experience could be improved if you
switched to a non-IE browser, although it is not nearly as urgent as
if you used an earlier version of IE.

This article was written by Robin Raven. She also has worked for online dating in addition to Laptop Computers.org.

What was Apple's reasoning behind the creation of the iPad? Well, many have assumed that it was Apple's way of creating a device to fill the gap between the Macbook and the iPhone. But I got news for those people: they are wrong. I don't believe this was Apple's intention at all. I think there is something else to this — something big.

I am convinced that the iPad is a preview of the future that Apple envisions — a future where Apple has total control of the distribution of hardware, software, and everything in between on a full-blown computer platform.

In other words: I believe that Apple intends on moving all of their devices and hardware to an iPhone-like operating system that would unify all of Apple's products and empower the iTunes platform more than ever before, while also significantly reducing the control that any particular user has over his or her computer.

With the iPad, we are lead to think of as a tablet computer — when, in reality, it is an iPod Touch on steroids — but Apple seems to believe that this device could, with time, replace laptop computers for in-home usage. The iPad, like the iPhone and iPod Touch, is locked into the iTunes ecosystem. So we essentially have a locked-down computer that Apple has total control over. Well, the future has come early!

Think about it — what happens if Apple, in time, creates an operating system that is similar to the iPhone OS that runs on computers? Perhaps Apple could create a netbook-like device in the future that runs a custom version of the iPhone OS. This device would also be locked into the iTunes ecosystem as well, having users install traditional computer applications directly from iTunes.

Is it really that far fetched of an idea?

It makes sense (and it makes even more business sense). When you think about it, iTunes has really driven Apple to success. It is the platform that has started it all. There is also so much power and content within this platform that it can't be stopped. So, again, is it really difficult to imagine that Apple would envision having all of its hardware wired into this rich ecosystem of software and content? To have total control?

For yours truly, it would not be that difficult to imagine.

That said, it would be an incredible deviation from conventional operating systems. It would mean that Apple would have the total package with total control. Users would be buying into that ecosystem while being locked into it as well.

This would be the perfect scenario for a company like Apple.

The only question left is whether or not users would be willing to buy into this type of computing platform? (Actually, in retrospect, that is an absurd question.)

Now that the iPad has come out, many people have wondered where the future of clam-shell design laptops
will go. Thankfully, designers still have many ideas that will work
particularly well for laptops in coming years. Not everything is
possible in reality yet, but make no mistake: what designers come up
with today is what engineers will make reality in the future.

One idea is to make the clam-shell laptop design hold dual touch-screens, rather than a keyboard side
and a screen side. One of the touch screens could also have a tactile
feedback system; when used as a keyboard, it feels like a
real keyboard. Another idea is to use a display that isn't on a
screen, but relayed to a wall in the house. You could even use
flexible screens to allow your laptop to be rolled up when not used.
(Such screens are available with today's technology, though they are
not touch-sensitive.) A common feature of new designs is to reduce
the size of pretty much everything involved. With a heads-up
projected display, the hardware can get smaller in each iteration
while maintaining the same size display. All of these ideas are of
course just futuristic design ideas, and do not even have working
prototypes available.

The Canova design uses an innovative
way of combining the classic clamshell design with new dual-screen
abilities. Created by Milan design firm V12 Design in 2008, the dual
touch-screen displays can also be held as a book, or even laid flat
to have a single maximal touchscreen. Although many other futuristic
designs are possible (as seen in the previous paragraph), what makes
V12's Canova design special is that Estari, a laptop manufacturer in
the United States, was so impressed with their design that they decided to see
what they could make out of materials available today. Their result
is the second generation Canova, a dual screen laptop that hinges at
a different place than traditional clamshell designs.

The second generation Canova improves
on the first design by allowing the system to be maneuverable in was
the first design couldn't. Each of the 15.4-inch screens can be
locked into positions relative to the other. This makes the dual screen
laptop capable of acting as an easel, propping up as though it were a
backward clamshell design, or even as a dual laptop, allowing two
users to work simultaneously.

Estari claims that they will be able to
release the laptop at a $400 price point. Many experts doubt this claim, especially since it sports dual touch screens of
significant size. However, if they can afford to get it out at that price,
then it will likely be very successful with consumers from all budgets and walks of life.

The Notebook Estari Canova dual-head is
currently still under development, but it should be available
commercially sometime in the next year or two.

The iPad is not
a laptop. Unlike other tablets, Apple's new iPad just isn't even
trying to do all the things another computer might. Yes, you can use
the iPad to write up documents, play music or podcasts, and enjoy
games of all kinds. However, you may do these things only through the applications that are
purchasable in the app store. While a great many different apps are
certainly available (with more to come each day), you should not
expect the software you are used to using to be available on the
iPad.

This
is not to say that the iPad isn't a great device on its own merits. Yet, you should not purchase it thinking that it will do the same job
as another tablet might. Most specialized needs new laptop purchasers
have--whether it be for real estate, tax preparation, or even
business presentations--cannot readily be had with the iPad. This is
because specialized needs are usually run by specialized programs,
which generally are available only on specific platforms. In the
future, the app store may start offering programs suited to high-end
professional needs, but until then, the iPad just isn't capable of
doing everything your laptop can.

Unlike
a laptop computer, which allows you to do whatever computing need you
require on the go, the iPad is geared more toward light computing of
a different kind. The iPad will go places your laptop never would,
and will allow you to do many things in many places that you never
could do with your old laptop. But this is no substitute for a good
laptop computer. Typing for extended periods on a non-tactile screen
just isn't the same as having a full-size keyboard, and even if you
use the keyboard attachment, it still doesn't quite live up to what
you need when doing serious work. The iPad is geared more toward
casual usage, and any true business use will be optimized only in
places where you need an absolute minimum of computing power and a
maximum of portability.

With
all that said, most computer experts and enthusiasts have fallen for the iPad
fever. If you're familiar with the iPhone/iPod Touch interface, then
you'll already be well aware of how the iPad handles, and of how it
differs from a typical tablet computer. The iPad is an ingenious
device that creates its own market space, rather than competing
against other laptops for the same share of the market. If you're not
already familiar with using an iPhone or iPod Touch, I highly
recommend you try out the iPad before rushing out and purchasing one. If you are unable to imagine life before your iPhone,
then the iPad is probably for you. It will then only take a few test runs of book-reading and game-playing
before you also partake of the Apple iPad Kool-Aid. Just remember
that it isn't a laptop, and is definitely not a substitute for doing
real work on the go.

It wasn't until the early 1970s that
“portable” computers finally shrunk in size enough to be truly
considered a laptop computer. The Dynabook, though never built beyond
a semi-operational test model, had the form factor more akin to a
tablet computer than the flip-screen laptop architecture we are so
used to today. Resembling an iPad more than anything else, the
Dynabook had a miniature keyboard built in beneath a rudimentary
screen, and was intended as a personal computer that would be aimed
at mainly children's use. The designer, Alan Kay, more recently
developed the One Laptop Per Child project, somewhat fulfilling his
dream over 35 years later.

Despite this early design
prototype, it wasn't until a full decade had passed that the first
true laptop went on the market. The Osborne 1, first released in
1981, was the size of a full briefcase (poorly designed as being just
a bit too large to fit under an airline seat), yet only sported a
tiny 5-inch screen in the middle of its bulky frame. At $2,000, it was
certainly not cheap. However, considering the price of much larger
computers, it was seen as a steal. Although small enough to literally
be used on one's lap, the computer was not very portable, since it
required power from a standard wall plug to operate.

The Osbourne 1 sold well, and was
imitated wildly by competitors that popped up months after release.
On the success of its premiere unit, the Osbourne Computer
Corporation announced the Osbourne Executive, a new laptop design
that took all the positives from the Osbourne 1 and corrected many of
its predecessor's flaws. Unfortunately, when they announced the
successor, sales of the former computer plummeted; no one wanted to
purchase a computer that was about to become obsolete. The lost sales
forced the company into bankruptcy, and the Osbourne effect is still
spoke of today as a cautionary tale in when not to announce a new
product line upgrade.

Although some taut the Osbourne 1 as
the first laptop, its sheer size and shape made it uncomfortable at
best for being used on an actual lap. By contrast, the GRiD Compass,
introduced in 1982, sports the clamshell architecture that we all
associate with laptops today. Although few remember it today because
of its failure to sell in the consumer market, the United States
government took it as their standard portable computer, and used it
in locations as diverse as paratrooper backpacks to NASA space
shuttles.

The GriD Compass was truly a laptop in
every sense of the word, and performed very well for its time. The
main reason it did not succeed in the open market was not lack of
features, performance, or portability—it was because it ran its own
operating system, and was not IBM compatible. Data could not be
easily transferred from larger non-portable IBM computers to the GriD
Compass, and consumers didn't like this.

Laptop computer sales languished behind
their desktop counterparts for the next six years. Users didn't see a
need to bring computing power on the go, while manufacturers didn't
bother trying to create a need no one was sure would pay off. It
wasn't until 1987 when the US Government put in a 200,000 order for
laptops that computer companies first took laptops seriously.
Afterward, the need for laptops was created through innovative
advertising campaigns, and laptops became ubiquitous among computer
users.

To all who thought the iPhone was the greatest achievement in the '00s, I think you are somewhat wrong. Instead, I believe it is Apple's App Store that deserves a majority of the credit. The App Store is the platform that really enabled the iPhone to shine, and, without it, the world might be very different.

ABI Research is predicting that 5 billion smart phone applications will be downloaded worldwide by 2014. To compare, there were 2.3 billion mobile applications in 2009. This means that in 4-years time, mobile application downloads will be double what they are today.

That's a pretty big leap.

With that, you would have to assume that smart phone sales would possibly double as well.

If data and voice pricing for mobile phone providers grew more affordable in the near future, I could see this number growing even faster.

But let's get back to Apple's App Store, the platform that really kicked this into high gear.

The App Store is the platform that allows developers to create applications for the iPhone (iPod Touch and iPad too). Without it, the iPhone would be nothing more than a pretty looking phone. With it, however, the iPhone becomes the device that opens the door to a rich, social, interactive, and engaging experience — it opens the door for users to do things on their phones that were once thought meaningless or impossible.

Granted, the App Store is also a centralized place for application management and distribution, and that can sometimes cause problems. Specifically, it creates a gatekeeper, and if you don't play by the rules, you could get kicked out of this ecosystem. Some applications and developers have been mistreated, and that isn't fair.

This is why other ecosystems are being created. Google now has its own marketplace — Google Apps Marketplace — that enables developers to freely create, manage, distribute, and charge for their applications, without the interference from a gatekeeper.

But what about Windows Mobile and BlackBerry? Weren't they the ones that kicked off the mobile application craze? Well, there is no doubt that other companies did this before Apple. There were already mobile application marketplaces and devices that utilized applications. However, they were not nearly as successful as Apple's App Store.

So, Apple and the App Store, in particular, has to receive the credit for propelling these technologies forward.

Apple has not only pushed mobile technology forward, but it pushed our interests in mobile technology forward as well. As a result, hardware manufacturers, software developers, mobile technologies, and consumers are all benefiting from their efforts. And, depending on how Apple's iPad fares, that 5 billion number could be a gross underestimate.

Many of us are forgoing the days of owning desktop computers and working primarily with mobile laptop computers instead. However, the old-school desktop computer still has its uses: particularly as a media center. But what if you don't own a desktop yet still want to stream media to a television? Simple: use your laptop!

I regularly talk to people who have no idea of the true power their laptops have. They don't know that these mobile machines are media centers in their own right. Many can easily output 720p or 1080p video to that HDTV sitting in your living room.

The big question is, of course, how could you do this. Well, first off, you need to check on a few things to make sure it is possible. Mainly, you need to ensure that your laptop has the necessary outputs to render a picture to your television.

You will want to check your computer's ports, as there should be either a Mini-DVI, DVI, VGA, Mini-VGA, Mini DisplayPort, HDMI, or Mini-HDMI port (yeah, lots of possibilities here) located on the side or rear of your laptop. Having one of these is crucial in being able to use your laptop as a media center. Barring that, I am going to assume you have one of these ports (if not, it might be time to consider an upgrade).

Once you have found one of these ports, you are in business. The only thing left is to connect your computer to your television. This is where it can get a bit complex, and you will probably have to spend a few bucks or do some online shopping, but it isn't as bad as it sounds.

First off, I prefer purchasing a computer port to television port cable with the adaptation built into the cord, but sometimes this is not possible. However, if you are able to find one of these cables (as apposed to purchasing a stand-alone adapter and having to attach it to your television or laptop), it will make things much simpler.

As for audio, you need to read the instruction manual on how your laptop computer outputs audio, and you might want to look up how many channels it outputs as well. Many laptops offer audio output directly from the headphone jack or even a dedicated port.

In my case, I own a two-year-old Macbook, and it has a Mini-DVI port and it outputs surround sound from the headphone jack. After determining this, I went onto Amazon and purchased a Mini-DVI to HDMI (female) adapter, 3.5mm to Digital Fiber Optic Audio TosLink cable, and HDMI cable. The total cost, at the time, was around $16 for for everything, so that wasn't bad at all.

In any case, I would opt for HDMI, but for older televisions, this might not be an option. Choose to your own needs accordingly.

All recent laptops should be capable of outputting 720p or 1080p video as well as 5-channel surround sound.

All you need to do is ensure that you have the proper ports and that the computer actually does output these signals.

Once you get everything setup, you might need to tinker with the settings in your display preferences for both Mac and Windows, but you should have a picture on your television. After that, you could simply play your movies from the laptop and maximize the screen, or you could install media center software like XMBC or Boxee.

So, you finally have everything running now, right? However, let me quickly mention some of the pitfalls of using a laptop as a media center.

The first issue is that you'll need to have the laptop wired up in a hackish fashion. You'll likely need to have it plugged into a power source, the video converter, the audio converter, and, even then, you'll need to run these wires to the display. It is not going to look pretty, no matter how you handle this. Again, it won't be pretty, but it will work.

Another issue that became quickly apparent is that this will make your computer run hot — very, very hot. I have seen my Apple Macbook approach 85-degrees celsius when it normally runs, at max, at around 72-degrees celsius. It is sometimes concerns me that I am somehow reducing the life of the laptop at temperatures that high. So, this is something worth thinking about.

The final issue with using your laptop as a media center is that, quite simply, it isn't convenient. Does the thought of having to pull out a few cables, connecting them to your laptop, finding a place to put your laptop, setting up your laptop to play the movie, and then potentially having to stand up and come to the laptop to control it (if you don't own a remote) sound appealing, especially when wanting to just sit down, relax, and enjoy a movie at that very moment?

Those are some pretty big tradeoffs, but, again, you don't own a dedicated media center, this laptop solution could be for you.

I currently do this as I don't own a dedicated media center, and didn't feel the need to buy a media center extender — although I eventually plan on purchasing one. This solution is very affordable, and, as I've said numerous times before, it isn't convenient, but it works!

It's no secret that Apple is one of the few hottest companies in the world right now. Their products are praised around the globe, and they are declared as a leader in design and innovation.

So it makes sense that some smart financial folks on Wall Street have Apple pegged to do some serious damage in China, and I think they could dominate. However, I think they must be careful about how they do this, as expanding too fast could be dangerous.

That said, China is a gold mine for Apple; this is true for all companies. The country is developing quickly and dripping with opportunity, and if a brand isn't present in China, its future is certainly questionable (yup, we're talking about Google).

That brings us back to Apple.

There is a distinct correlation between Apple stores and Apple market share. Over the past seven years, Apple has opened over 120 stores, and, with that, their market share grew by several percentage points.

This correlation is even more apparent in Western Europe, where over 30 stores were opened and market share grew from 1.5% to 5% within a few years. While appearing insignificant, these numbers huge in terms of growth — this is why we have Apple constantly breaking new all-time highs on Wall Street.

Good for Europe and America, but how many stores should Apple plan for China? Well, I believe Apple should open 12 additional stores: one for each of China's largest cities to serve as a test of market interest. That would add up to 100,000,000 potential consumers in those 12 cities alone — that is around a third of the entire U.S. population. Apple would then have a pretty decent idea of where to expand next.

It should be noted, however, that Apple already has two stores in China: one in Beijing and one in Shanghai. Furthermore, the company has plans to open 25 stores throughout China within the next two years.

Unfortunately, I think that is a mistake. I would have been much happier if they cut that number in half, and the reason is that there are many uncertainties about the Chinese and American economies (both of which rely on each other so heavily). The threat of an economic failure is still apparent, and political struggles are growing in both countries as well.

With that in mind, if Apple turns out to be a hit, it could have a dramatic impact on the competition.

For example, Microsoft is already heavily embedded in China, yet Microsoft operates at a loss with in the country. The reasoning for this is that Microsoft has been unable to adapt to Chinese consumer and enterprise behavior.

Apple, on the other hand, is a much smaller company with a more distinct focus — consumer electronics, mobile, and computer technology — and with those specific niches, Apple can better target their products for Chinese consumption. This could allow Apple to build up in China slowly, and eventually expand with better a much better understanding of Chinese culture.

Either way, Apple has a golden opportunity here. China is the market that every company in the world wants to be invested in, and I think it is time for Apple to make its presence felt. That said, Apple should tread lightly at first, as the Chinese market is a tricky place — American companies are struggling to adjust. But if Apple properly adapts, it could make the Apple investors very happy and very rich.

Plenty of discussion about the iPad has been going on lately, but the bigger story here is that magazines and newspapers are investing time and resources to develop digital versions of their publications for Apple's tablet computer. The hope is that this will revitalize interest in their publications. But at what price?

This is, perhaps, a huge deal. This could really be the beginning of a new way for magazines and newspapers to generate money; however, it could also prove to these publications that people want their content for free and are completely satisfied with Web-based versions.

Either way, the next few months are going to be crucial for the print industry, which is exploring unknown territories in the hope of generating money with newer media formats while replacing older failing formats.

But the price of these digital versions of publications might be a barrier to entry.

The average price for a magazine or newspaper subscription can vary, buut how about some examples. The Wall Street Journal is $29 per month. Men's Health is around $4.99 per issue. Not bad, right?

To compare, the iPad version of the Wall Street Journal will be $18 per month while Men's Health will cost the same as iPad's version.

That isn't as cheap as many had hoped.

Let's consider for a moment that we wanted five magazine subscriptions. Let's assume each magazine subscription for the iPad will cost us around $8 on average for a month's worth of content. That could easily add up to $40 a month or $480 per year. Ouch!

Is $480 per year for five magazine subscriptions worth it (again, nothing this is only hypothetical)? To some people, sure it will be. But to others, it doesn't make any sense considering that anyone could fire up a browser window and view this content for free.

I pay around $20 a month for a Netflix subscription that allows me to watch as many movies as I want. So, where is the value with iPad's digital magazine subscriptions?

Let me make something clear though: I don't have a problem with magazines or newspapers making money. No problem at all. But these publishers must realize that the cost of their content must be considered with the cost of other publications. If these publishers invest a lot of time and resources into creating these digital magazines, it will certainly require plenty of subscriptions, but an increased price, however, might mean less overall subscriptions.

Sure, people will pay to be able to experience these cool magazine features with live video integrated, but I believe the appeal will quickly wear off.

Yet I assume that supply and demand will work these things out on their own. But I, for one, will not be having any of it. Apart from the fact that I am waiting for the 2nd generation of the iPad before I even consider purchasing it, I believe that the investment required is far greater than the price of the iPad itself.