Despite what your friends might be telling you, not everything worth using is a mainstream attention grabber made by Google. Sometimes, the best programs and webapps are the ones that sit just below the surface. That is about to change. On this action packed, two-day edition of the Showdown, we will be giving (yes, ten) of these semi-obscure marvels the patented “Free Line once over”  that you have come to expect. With that said, on with the introductions!

App #1: Evernote

Website: http://www.evernote.com/
Company: Evernote Corporation
Specialty: Note taking
Program Types: While Evernote is primarily a webapp, a separate download version is available for many of the major platforms, including Windows, the iPhone, and the Palm Pre.
Competes With: Namely Microsoft OneNote.

App #2: TurboCASH

Website: http://www.turbocash.net/
Company: Pink Software
Specialty: Finance
Program Type: Windows download
Competes With: All of the major players in the accounting market — Peachtree, Quickbooks/Quicken, DAC Easy, GNUCash, etc.

App #3: Lavabit

Website: http://lavabit.com/
Company: Lavabit LLC
Specialty: Email
Bold Claim Ripped Directly From the Site Itself: “…A system so secure that even our administrators can’t read your e-mail.”
Program Type: Web service
Competes With: Gmail, AOL, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc.

App #4: First Page 2006

Website: http://www.evrsoft.com
Company: Evrsoft
Specialty: Web development
Program Type: Windows download
Competes With: Adobe Dreamweaver

App #5: Adventure Game Studio

Website: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/
Developer: Chris Jones
Specialty: Programming, with a special focus
Program Type: Windows download
Full Disclosure: Angela the product tester is a huge fan of this program.
Competes With: N/A

App #6: Runecats Explorer

Website: http://www.runecats.com/
Company: Runecats
Specialty: Web browser
Program Type: Windows download
Rendering Engine: Trident (Internet Explorer)
Competes With: Other web browsers — IE, Firefox, Opera, etc.

App #7 Theora

Website: http://theora.org/
Company: Xiph.org
…You Might Remember Them From Such Codecs As: OGG Vorbis
Specialty: Video
Program Type: Open source video codec
Fun Fact: The codec in question is named after Theora Jones, Edison Carter’s highly talented “partner in crime” on the short-lived Max Headroom television series. Hmm …  Max Headroom … That name sounds familiar, but I’m not sure why…
Competes With: Divx, XViD, H.264 (The kind of files you would find on iTunes), etc.

App #8: aTunes

Website: http://www.atunes.org/
Company: The aTunes Team
Specialty: Media player
Program Type: Multi-platform download
Competes With: Mainly iTunes and Songbird.

App #9: Malwarebytes’ Anti-Malware

Website: http://www.malwarebytes.org/
Company: Malwarebytes Corporation
Specialty: Malware removal
Program Type: Windows download
Competes With: Anti-virus programs of all shapes and sizes.

App #10: QQ

Website: http://www.imqq.com/
Company: Tencent
Specialty: Instant messaging
Program Type: Instant messaging service
Fun Fact: QQ is easily the most popular instant messaging client in mainland China, with roughly 318 million citizens subscribing to the service.
Note: The official QQ client is considered by some to be low-level adware. Because of this, we will be accessing the network using the Pidgin third-party app. If we have a last second change of heart, or if we find that the nasty “ad problem” has been fixed, we will definitely let you know.
Competes With: AOL Instant Messenger, Live Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, ICQ, etc.

Hello and welcome back to “Web Programming for Smart Phones,” our landmark five-part series dedicated to unlocking the mysteries of the mobile web. Today we continue our journey with looking at your friend and mine, in-site content.

Why should I worry about my content? – As we mentioned last week, most of the major smart phones feature a screen resolution of 320 by 480. Having a wall of text that rivals Stephen King’s “The Stand” or tons of high bit rate images are simply not good ideas. This isn’t ten years ago, when mobile devices were as powerful as a graphing calculator and featured a small, blurry, monochrome screen. The iPhone, for example, is more powerful than the standard desktop built in 1999. Simply put, mobile users matter. Lose them, and you can potentially lose a large chunk of your audience.

So people on smart phones have short attention spans. – No, not at all. Look at it this way: staring at a pocket-sized screen is naturally harder on the eyes than staring at that beautiful flat screen you have at home or at work. Having a site with tons of small text and/or several massive image files will not be doing your mobile user base any favors. The “trick,” for lack of a better work, is to have a nice, easy to use site that is accessible to mobile users, while not insulting the traditional desktop and laptop crowd.

Wouldn’t it be easier to just make a mobile site? - Not necessarily. For the average site proprietor, spending a load of time, effort, and most importantly, money on a separate site does not make sense in this current financial environment. At this point in time, it would be best to concentrate your efforts into perfecting your main site.

Content gone bad – The “bad content for a mobile computing device” award goes to tech industry news site WebProNews. Every last article we clicked upon appeared to be nothing more than line after line of blurry, incomprehensible text. While it was nice that the ads were visible to the naked eye (we here at the Free Line prefer to live in the real world), they had a tendency to both overpower and overwhelm. For all of the effort it took just to make everything readable, we could have found a similar article on another site.

Good examples of mobile content – Out of all of the major tech sites — present company excluded, of course — TechCrunch fits the criteria described above the best. Each article and advertisement is easy enough to read on a mobile device, yet still carries all of the appeal and charm of a “traditional” news site.

Our suggestion – Our advice boils down to one, easy to remember phrase: keep it all within proportion. The last thing that anyone would want is a site filled to the brim with overpowering pictures and unreadable text. Still, you have to keep in mind that a site filled with pages and pages of text will bore the living daylights out of your “on the go” constituents. If you keep everything on an even keel, your site should be ready for any situation that might present itself.

…And there you have it. Be sure to come back next Monday for our part three of our series: Load Times. Expect the classic Free Line for the rest of the week. Until then, we bid thee adieu.

It seems that everyone has a thought or two on Google’s new Chrome operating system. In our continuing effort to cover the best of the tech world, allow us to present the top ten comments about the much talked about — and highly controversial — OS of the (near) future.

1. “Who knows what this thing is. To me, the Chrome OS thing is highly interesting (in) that it won’t happen for a year and a half and they already announced an operating system.” – Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
2. “[Chrome] is an extraordinary market play. And an unsettling one. For it seeks to place Google, which already collects vast amounts of data about our Internet use, at the very center of our information experience.” – John Paczkowski, All Things Digital
3. “If the Chrome OS can help change consumer perceptions about the utility of online applications and cloud storage, it could be a big success for Google, even without wide adoption.” – John Timmer, ArsTechnica
4. “Google’s decision to create its own Linux distribution and splinter the Linux community decisively once again can only be seen as foolhardy and self-obsessive.” – Renai LeMay, Silicon.com
5. “Google wants to see multiple devices connected to the web in every household. A web device in your pocket, one on your wrist, in your car, on your boat and in every room of your house; not to mention computers in homes in the developing world. The Microsoft tax ($50 per unit for instance) has hindered the market adoption of these types of devices.” - Amanda McPherson, The Linux Foundation
6. “It’s disappointing that they’ve chosen to go it alone this far rather than working with the existing [Linux] communities.” – Joe Brockmeier, Community Manager for openSUSE
7. “As the long-foretold ‘Internet of Things‘ emerges — allowing everyday objects to be addressed via online queries — Chrome OS will be well positioned to help Google organize even more of the world’s information than the company already handles.” – Thomas Claburn, Information Week
8. “Nobody seems to appreciate how hard it is to make an operating system. You don’t just wake up one day and fall out of bed and make one. Not even the smarty pants kiddies at Google can do that. These things take years. Decades, even… Whatever Google might release in the second half of next year, it will just be a starting point.” – Dan Lyons, aka The Fake Steve Jobs
9. “If Google wants to succeed in its boldest product launch to date, the Chrome OS, the company needs to focus on its success with the same intensity it once dedicated to search. If it doesn’t, Chrome OS will end up just like Chrome: yet another irrelevant skunkworks [sic] project used by a handful of digerati and Microsoft-haters and ignored by everyone else.” – Henry Blodgett, Silicon Valley Insider.
10. “If anyone thinks that the recent attention being paid to Microsoft’s new search engine, Bing, and the sudden announcement of a free OS from Google is a coincidence, then you haven’t been following the tech business closely. Everything is strategic.” – John C. Dvorak, MarketWatch.com

…As for us, it all comes down to a very concise list of pros and cons.

Pros:

• Google starting small. Honestly, no one would give them the time of day if they immediately targeted traditional desktop and laptop systems. It would just be another small fish living in a pond inhabited by the likes of Windows, OS X, Ubuntu, and Fedora. By going to the comparatively uncharted world of netbooks first, Google has the opportunity of making considerable headway in a relatively short amount of time.

Cons:

• Google seems to have a hard time picking good hardware providers. Their “temporary alliance” with mediocre phone manufacturer HTC is proof of that. Now the folks at the “big  G” could always surprise us by linking up such heavy hitters as Asus and Dell. They could even go with an “under the radar” firm with a stellar reputation, such as Cowon or Archos. Unfortunately, we do not see that happening any time soon.
• Despite what many might think, the original Windows lineup — 3.1, 95, 98, and ME, etc –  were not operating systems in the strictest sense of the word. They were actually specialized suites called “extender programs” designed to make the aging DOS system structure more user friendly. As it stands now, Chrome OS is that very thing, only for Linux instead of DOS. While being a fancy extender program isn’t a “bad” thing, it doesn’t necessarily make it a true operating system, either.
• The thoughts of having to rely exclusively on cloud-based applications such as Zoho Office makes us want to cry. Now don’t get us wrong here — we love online apps just as much as the next person. Still, man cannot live on Google Docs and Adobe Acrobat Online alone. Even if there is a way to load external, offline programs onto the operating system, the bulk of these apps will have been designed specifically for Linux. In the minds of many, Konqueror, KOffice, and GNUCash are not adequate replacements for the likes of Safari, Microsoft Office, and the Peachtree Accounting Suite.

Our Verdict: Too soon to tell. I guess we will have to wait until the Chrome source code is released in November before we immediately start jumping to conclusions. Until that time arrives, consider the Free Line’s involvement in the matter to be officially closed.

…After a few weeks of rest and relaxation, the “review it all” cavalcade that is the Showdown back on the desktop where it belongs. On today’s award winning episode, we take a look for four free, online desktops that attempt to set the standard for what cloud computing should be. So sit back, relax, and enjoy our trip to the stratosphere in our beautiful virtual balloon.

Desktop #1: EyeOS

Website: http://eyeos.org/
Developer: The EyeOS Team
First Impression: “It has a really nice interface.”
It Reminds Us Of…: It’s what OS X would look like if the Windows task bar permanently slept on its couch.
Positives: Widgets. No matter what you might say, you simply cannot go wrong with these handy little additions. The interface is also fairly responsive, which is nice in an online system such as this.
Negatives: There really isn’t much to it. We were kind of expecting something more — more programs, more options, etc.
Overall: 7

Desktop #2: Online OS

Website: http://oos.cc/login.html
Developer: iCUBE
First Impression: “I got a Java error. Why did I get a Java error?”
It Reminds Us Of…: A dead-on clone of Windows XP. It even has the classic green “start” button.
Positives: It really does look like Windows XP, which brings the old “learning curve” as close to zero as humanly possible. It also features a free copy of the classic puzzle game “Lemmings” — a nice little bonus for anyone who owned the original game fifteen years ago.
Negatives: We had to boot up our long dormant copy of Internet Explorer in order to get the desktop working properly. Even then, it took us a few minutes to actually get the program running on all cylinders. Once we were finally logged in, we found that the entire system was painfully slow. Although it isn’t bad for someone who desires to have an “emergency backup” desktop, the speed issues could make long term use difficult.
Overall: 5

Desktop #3: G.ho.st

Website: http://g.ho.st/
Developer: Ghost Inc.
First Impression: “Aww … It’s so cute…”
It Reminds Us Of…: Windows Vista, “but not in a bad way.”
Positives: Thanks to a beautiful, lag free experience, G.ho.st actually feels more like a offline desktop than a “cloud setup of the future.” Several major desktop features — widgets, shortcuts, preloaded software — are all present and run surprisingly well, almost to the point that they don’t feel like “online apps” at all.
Negatives: It’s not a real operating system.
Overall: 8; “If this was a real operating system, I would load it in a second.”

Desktop #4: Lucid Desktop

Website: http://www.lucid-desktop.org/
Developer: Dojo Foundation
First Impression: “I can play Mindsweeper! Woo!”
It Reminds Us Of…: Fedora Linux, in a way.
Positives: It is nicely put together. Everything runs “as advertised,” as they say.
Negatives: It’s basic. Painfully basic. And boring. It’s so boring, we cannot think of anything funny or creative to say about it.
Overall: 6; “It isn’t really ‘bad,’ but it isn’t good either.”

And the Winner Is: G.ho.st by a landslide. This is what an online desktop should be. G.ho.st receives our highest recommendations.

As you might have heard, Google is throwing their hat into the “full operating system” game. Called Chrome, the new OS is a Linux-based system designed to let users navigate their computer quickly and efficiently. This is done by replacing the traditional “operating system” setup with a powerful, “always on” version of the Chrome web browser. From there, the “theory” states, users can go about their day to day activities without having to worry about their operating system getting in the way. Users without Internet service will be able to use a combination of Google Gears and HTML 5 to access their apps offline. Supporters of the new plan say that the OS is the perfect “antidote” to the so-called “Microsoft-centric” desktop experience. Detractors, on the other hand, say the lack of specialty programs, combined with the bare bones nature of many existing web apps, will essentially kill the fledgling OS before it even has had a chance to take off. Many critics also claim that Google’s penchant for monitoring the browsing habits of the user will completely undermine online privacy in a way never before seen. No matter which side of the fence you sit, there is one thing that we all can agree upon: Things are about to get very interesting. Expect to see Chrome on a netbook computer near you in the second half of 2010.

This isn’t the first time a major player in the tech world attempted to make an operating system of their own. Sometimes, it was a success. Other times … well, not so much. So join us as we take a trip down memory lane to visit the “next generation operating system” that time has seemingly forgotten: OS/2 Warp.

OS/2 Warp

Lifespan: 1994 to 2001
Company: IBM
Philosophy: Windows 95, IBM style.
Back Story: Once upon a time, IBM and Microsoft worked together to make an operating system called “OS/2.” This partnership lasted until 1990, when the two split due to what the lawyers call “irreconcilable differences” — coding practices, hardware limitations, and various GUI issues where among the sticking points. Undaunted, IBM set out to build a “next generation” operating system that could compete with Microsoft. The resulting project, called “OS/2 Warp” by the team, was formally released to the public in 1994.
The Result: Despite the endless list of promises and “advanced” support for Windows apps, OS/2 Warp promptly went nowhere. While many of the IBM faithful enjoyed the effort, most would rather stick with their copies of Windows 3.1 or 95 than try something new. The operating system would get one more major release (OS/2 Warp 4) before being discontinued in December 2001.
Is It Still Around?: Yes, in a way. Aside from a few ATM machines and cash registers that rely on it, OS/2 Warp isn’t really used by many people or businesses anymore. For a more “modern” version, we suggest checking out eComStation. It’s Warp, only under a different name.

Our tour through browsers of all shapes and sizes continues in earnest. On today’s special edition of the Showdown, we look at four iPhone-specific browsers.

Browser #1: Safari

Developer: Apple
Rendering Engine: Webkit
First Impression: “It’s nice. A little basic at times, but nice nonetheless.”
Ease of Use (Out of ten): 7
Positives: By now, we have all seen those iPhone ads that show off what the Safari browser can do. Good news: there is actually some truth in advertising for once. Everything works, from the zooming functionality to the on-screen keyboard to the vertical/horizontal “orientation switching.”
Negatives: No Flash. Everyone seems to complain about this, and for good reason. There is supposedly an “unlicensed” version coming soon, but we’re not holding our collective breaths.
Overall: 8

Browser #2: Mango

Website: http://leopardmac.tistory.com/
Developer: Guho Choi
Rendering Engine: Mango
First Impression: “They have a ‘report bug’ button that you can push easily. That does not make me feel secure. And while we’re on the subject, why is it constantly linking me to Safari? I don’t like that one bit.”
Ease of Use: 5
Positives: The “forward” and “back” commands are accompanied by a nifty “page flip” animation. Oh … and it’s yellow. That’s a plus, I guess.
Negatives: What exactly is it that we like least about Mango? Is it the absence of an adjustable screen orientation? Is it the nearly broken zooming options? Is it the fact that it desperately wants you to go back to Safari in the worst way possible? Truth be told, it is all of these things and more. Simply put, it’s a bad browser.
Overall: 3; “…And I’m being generous here.”

Browser #3: iCab

Website: http://www.icab.de/
Developer: Alexander Clauss
Rendering Engine: WebKit/Proprietary
First Impression: “It looks like Safari.”
Ease of Use: 8
Positives: iCab is seems to have more in common with the desktop edition of Safari than it does with the mobile version. Anything that one would want in a browser is here and (gasp) functional, including tabbed browsing, an advanced “find” feature, and full screen support.
Negatives: The full screen is a bit difficult to get out of.
Overall: 9

Browser #4: Journey

Website: http://www.apptism.com/apps/journey-web-browser/
Developer: Nathaniel Herman
Rendering Engine: Unknown
First Impression: [Singing] “Don’t stop believin’… [Pause] What? That that’s my first impression.”
Ease of Use: 7
Positives: It does everything it should be doing. That’s surprisingly hard to come by in a mobile browser.
Negatives: There is a button near the bottom right portion of the screen that looks suspiciously like that old “Netscape Navigator” logo. Hate to be a killjoy, but it has nothing to do with the legendary browser. It actually opens up a new tab. It took us ten clicks to realize that we would not be seeing Navigator on this day.
Overall: 7

And the Winner is – iCab. It’s everything a mobile should be and more.

…And there you have it. Be sure to tune in tomorrow for part two of our feature on advertising, technology, and you.

As anyone who has turned on television can tell you, “web surfing” on the go is definitely the hip and trendy thing to do. In an effort to stay toe to toe with both the beautiful people and the so-called “in-crowd,” we here at the Free Line dedicate today’s Showdown to web browsers of the mobile variety. Unless otherwise noted, all of the browsers were tested using a Nokia N81 handset running on the AT&T mobile network.

Browser #1: Opera Mini

Website: http://www.opera.com/mini/
Developer: Opera
Compatible Handsets: Various
Rendering Engine: Presto
First Impression: “So … when are we going to get widgets?”
Ease of Use: 9; “It’s that good.”
Positives: Let us start from the top: It’s stable, much faster than the built-in S60 browser, supports almost every format we threw at it (save for Flash, of course), extremely easy to download … we think you see where we are going with this.
Negatives: It’s slightly harder to rotate the screen on the fly.
Overall: 8

Browser #2: Skyfire

Website: http://www.skyfire.com/
Developer: Skyfire Team
Compatible Handsets: Various
Rending Engine: Unknown
First Impression: “It has a really nice interface.”
Ease of Use: 8
Positives: Flash works! Sure, it isn’t the greatest install of Flash were have ever seen, but at least it works. Although it does not exactly reach “Opera levels” of speed, it does feel a bit faster overall compared to the pre-installed S60 browser.
Negatives: Try as we might, we simply could not figure out how to rotate the screen.
Overall: 7; “If I could figure out how to rotate the screen at all, it would have gotten an 8. Some things are just better in landscape mode.”

Browser #3: Bolt

Website: http://boltbrowser.com/
Developer: Bitstream
Compatible Handsets: Various (Including Blackberry)
Rendering Engine: Proprietary
First Impression: “Well it took me to YouTube in record time…”
Ease of Use: 6 “It’s a bit trickier than the rest.”
Positives: Not only does Bolt do Flash, it does YouTube. It’s a tad cramped on our tiny screen, but that doesn’t really matter at the moment.
Negatives: It took us a while to actually find this browser. We quite ran across it at the last possible second. It also has the tendency to be a bit “too careful” when it comes to “protecting” the user — warning messages are nice in moderation, but we really don’t need to see one every five seconds.
Overall: 6

Special Attraction: Mozilla Fennec

Note: The Fennec alpha test is only available for “select” handsets. Sadly, our unlocked N81 is not one of them. Because of this, we were “forced” to use the developer version designed for Windows. While we will give the browser the ol’ “once over,” we will not be comparing it to the other browsers listed. It just wouldn’t be fair.
Website: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/fennec/
Developer: Mozilla
Compatible Handsets: Nokia S180 tablet
Rendering Engine: Gecko
First Impression: “It seems to be designed for touchscreen devices. Oh … and it has tabs.”
Ease of Use: 7; “This score will definitely go up once the official version is released.”
Positives: It’s made by Mozilla and it supports tabs. ‘Nuff said.
Negatives: If you don’t own a phone with a large screen or a touchscreen, you might be out of luck.
Overall (As of now): 7; “I think there is a lot more that they could do with it.”

…And the Winner Is: Opera Mini. There is a reason why it reigns supreme over mobile devices.

PS: For all of those who are wondering why we didn’t cover the likes of Safari for the iPhone or the Blackberry browser, don’t worry. They are coming soon enough…

I know that we are officially a week away from the end from our 30 Days of GNU experiment, but I think it might be best to call it a day right now. We here at the Free Line have a few big projects in the works, and these “specialized” GPL beauties will just end up interfering with them. With that said, here we go:

Our little pulls into port battered, but still surprisingly resilient. Although there are still some parts of this “test run” that gave us a hard time — Evolution and K-Meleon, I’m looking in your direction — it was still a generally worthwhile endeavor.  That being said, there is still one part of this whole ordeal that still seems to be eluding people, and that is the very nature of the word “free.”

On the surface, the word is simple: if you get a legal, full featured application without having to pay anything, then that application is free. If it costs money, then it isn’t. Things get muddled a bit, however, when the words “how much” are thrown into the equation. In the minds of many, only a program that bares its source can truly be considered “free.” Sure, that shiny new copy of  Windows Live Mail or even Garage Band might appear to be free, but the closed off nature of the code is making you rely on the folks at Microsoft and Apple, respectively. A program like Evolution is free, but that is only because I have the ability to “take a peek under the hood,” as they say. In essence, it all breaks down like this:

When a program is given away at no cost to you, said program is considered to be “freeware.”
When a program and its source code is given away at no cost to you, said program is considered to be “free.”
When an organization and/or corporation charges for an application, but still gives the source code away for free, said program is still considered to be “free.”

While the strategy mapped out above might appeal to a programmer or to a person who likes the idea of “community involvement,” it tends to leave the average user out in the cold. It is our experience that “normal people” prefer performance, not the ability to stare blankly at pages worth of source of code. It is for this reason that we have to call our little “run with the GNUs” a marginal failure. Don’t get us wrong: we fully support of using GPL-supported programs. Applications such as Firefox, OpenOffice.org, and even aMSN are standard tools in our arsenals. It’s just that limiting ourselves to only GNU-approved applications left us angry and frustrated. Our advice is simple: use the free software that appeals most to you. It doesn’t matter if the code for it is kept on a website or on some protected server in Redmond. If you like it, use it. It’s as simple as that. Do this, and you’ll be happy. We guarantee it.

As we mentioned in yesterday’s post, it seems as if 95% of the tech world has two things on their collective minds: smart phones and Twitter. Since I think we have covered Twitter, Twitter clones, Twitter apps, and that goofy “Twitter apocalypse” thing that didn’t really happen to death, we are going focus on the wonderful world of mobile phones. But as you might have already guessed, I am going to do more than just merely “talk” about these phones. I will actually give one of these lucky mobile devices a thorough going over, making sure to tell you everything that you would ever need to know. Let’s face it: “smart phones” such as these could very possibly be the future of mobile computing. If your business isn’t ready for it, you could find yourself in very, very hot water. It is our duty, nay, our mission to make sure that this does not happen to you. Before we begin however, I do have a few notes:

Note #1: While the iPhone is definitely on my “smart phone” shortlist, we will not be doing a write up about it in this post. The reasoning for this is simple: anyone who is anyone already knows about it. We don’t know about any of you, but none of us here are necessarily fans of regurgitating common knowledge.

Note #2: The touchscreen Blackberry that Verizon peddles is all but out of the equation. First of all, it’s a Blackberry. Aside from the touchscreen, there really isn’t much different between the new phones and old “trackball” versions from last year. Secondly, I am not a big fan of Verizon Wireless. While their overall network is a bit better than the competition, it doesn’t justify the bloated, overinflated price that they charge. In short, I can get better equipment at a cheaper price. ‘Nuff said.

…With all of that laid out, here we go…

G1 (Dream)/G2 (Magic)/MyTouch 3G

Manufacturer: Google (OS); HTC (Phone; more phones from other companies will be arriving at some point in the near future)
Cell Network (US): T-Mobile
Open Source?: Yes.
Positives: Having been able to actually use this phone, I have to say that this phone’s biggest asset is the Android operating system. It has more of a feel of a scaled down desktop OS instead one designed for a mobile device. The ability to run a few third-party applications in the background doesn’t hurt things either.
Negatives: there’s something about the physical phone hardware than I just don’t like. It feels “cheap” and really isn’t all that much to look at. If I do decide to go with this phone, I will wait until the myTouch 3G is released in August.

Palm Pre

Manufacturer: Palm
Cell Network: Sprint
Open Source?: Yes
Positives: Palm is finally back. This is the phone that loyal users have been waiting for for quite some time now. While some might be upset at the loss of “classic” Palm OS software library, most will find the available apps to be suitable replacements. (A “classic OS” emulator is available for those who do not.)
Negatives: Not everyone likes the Sprint network.

Remember the email clients from Monday? Let’s see how they are holding up four days later.

Client #1: Evolution

Positives: The account setup wizard is surprisingly intuitive. All you have to do is enter your POP3 and SMTP settings and the program does the rest. Specialized ports? Evolution detects them. Security settings? It picks them up as well. It also runs pretty quick for a program that isn’t a fan of Windows 7.
Negatives: First and foremost, the “included” spam filter simply does not work. If you want spam to “disappear,” you have to program it in yourself. Another thing: the automated “email check” is apparently broken as well. While it might not seem like a big deal, it can be bothersome to a person who routinely forgets to press that dreaded “send and receive mail” button. (If you haven’t guessed already, I am definitely one of those people.)
Overall: 3; “It’s alright, I guess. Could be better though.”
Worth a Download?: Sadly, no.

Client #2: Thunderbird

Positives: The ability to load add-ons is a big plus. Nothing says “try me out” quite like the prospect of total customization. The aforementioned setup is also a nice touch. While it isn’t the easier setup we have run into thus far — that award goes to, of all programs, Evolution — it does make life a bit easier.  And since it’s made by a subsidiary of Mozilla, complete and total compatibility with Firefox is a given.
Negatives: Aside from the much lauded add-ons, Thunderbird comes off as rather “basic.” Yes, it checks, writes, and sends email, but that’s all it does … without modification, of course.
Overall: 7; “It’s nice and stable.”
Worth a Download?: Yes.

Client #3: Zimbra

Positives: Unlike the rest of the clients on this list, Zimbra is more than just a simple “email client.” It’s actually a highly diverse desktop system, designed to eliminate the need for Google Apps a variety of third-party freeware (and in some cases, shareware) applications. Zimbra also gets a few extra points for presentation. As cliche as it might sound, the simple fact that it “looks” nicer than the other clients does wonders for this little underdog.
Negatives: It’s a bit on the slow side starting up. Although the plethora of extra features are nice, they have a tendancy to “get in the way” from time to time.
Overall: 8
Worth a Download?: Yes

Client #4: Sylpheed

Positives: Wait … give us a moment. There has to be something in this program that can be construed as a positive … [Pause] There it is! Sylpheed is the only program that, to our knoledge, allows you look at the source code of your messages. We’re not exactly sure as to why you would want to do that, but it’s always nice to have the option.
Negatives: The words “extremely basic” were bandied about more than once. Furthermore, the following “standard” features are not available in Sylpheed: A spam filter, automatic mail check, the ability to view messages in an HTML format, the ability to send emails at all … I think you get the idea here.
Overall: 3; “Outlook Express 4 that was bundled with Windows 98 First Edition can do more things than Sylpheed.”
Worth a Download?: No