I bought myself a little present tonight: a Nikon D40 digital SLR. When I began my research for a DSLR, I started out gunning for the Olympus E510, but while it was overall quite good and had lots of features it lacked refinement in the image processing department and there’s not nearly as many (affordable) lenses available as a Nikon/Canon. As I was told time and time again, when you buy an SLR you’re not just buying that camera, you’re buying into the brand’s SLR system.

So I started looking at Nikons and Canons, and it came down to the Nikon D40, Nikon D40x, or the Canon Digital Rebel XTi. I knew about the new Nikon D60 (which replaces the D40x), but it didn’t have anything I wanted over the others. So I read and read and read reviews and comparisons and pontifications by professional photographers, and I settled on the 6 megapixel Nikon D40 over my other two finalists (which were both 10MP) because with a lower megapixel rating it’s A) less expensive; B) more sensitive to light because fewer pixels are covering the same size sensor; and C) Megapixels don’t matter unless you’re making prints, and with 6MP I can still make ridiculous sizes like 24″ prints or something.

It was so tempting to go for the ones with more megapixels, but after reading stuff like this from real photographers, lauding the D40 and dispelling the megapixel myth, I realized I needed to get out of the point-and-shoot “more megapixels!” marketing mentality and focus on the other stuff that really matters.
That Ken Rockwell guy I just linked to, for example, has dozens of ridiculously expensive cameras and still uses his D40 more than anything — because it shoots with fantastic quality in almost all situations, is lightweight, and it very easy to use. I found that the Nikon D-series in general has some of the best in-camera image processing, comes with a fantastic kit lens to begin with and has very affordable quality consumer-grade lenses (the Canons tend to be more expensive for good lenses, it seems). I’ll be the first to admit I am totally new to SLR photography, but that’s what I based my decisions on. So I feel like I made a smart choice, and even though I was initially wooed by all the features ticked by the Olympus (LCD live view, image stabilization, etc), I’m glad I did my research so I was able to hone in on what’s really important. Saved me some money too.

The D40 is really small for a DSLR and feels great in my hands. Except for the Olympus E410, I think it is *the* smallest DSLR you can get. It just feels great, and there’s so much stuff to learn. Coming from an older-than-dirt Canon Digital Elph 2.1 MP point-and-shoot that tended to take dark, dingy pictures (hey, it was more than 7 years old…it had its day), I can’t wait until I’m some level of competent with my new D40. I believe I’m actually going to enjoy taking photos again!

• Nikon D40 reviews: Basic, Intermediate, Mind-blowingly detailed
• Buy the Nikon D40

Here’s a few of my first shots…all indoors and nothing particularly exciting, because it’s dark and raining outside, but I really wanted to try it out. I still have a lot to learn. Click on the photo to advance or hover over the caption area to see the thumbnails. Click the “Link” text for a larger version (in a popup).

I normally am eager to recommend products I find very useful. In this case, I feel it necessary to tell you all to avoid a product at all costs. That’s right: the Zune.

For those of you not in the know, the Zune, which launches this week, is Microsoft’s years-long billion-dollar effort to thwart the iPod. Microsoft is launching, as part of the Zune network, a music store very much like iTunes in that the tracks you buy will only work on the Zune (much like tracks you buy on iTunes will only work on an iPod). The Zune, although physically larger than the iPod and a little clunky looking, does have a big screen (although it’s the same resolution as the iPod’s), a nice rubberized plastic shell, and the ability to play several popular video formats in widescreen mode but can only play WMV and MPEG-4 videos and doesn’t actually have a wide screen (it just wants you to think it does by making you turn the player on its side to watch videos). [This correction was made after a comment below prompted me to do some additional fact-checking...this is what I get for basing some of my research on pre-launch media. Thanks -Matthew]

I wanted to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt this time. I really, really did. Even though I love my iPod, I hoped someone would come along and goose Apple into making even better iPods — there’s nothing like healthy competition. But after months of hype and expectation, the Zune launch has blown up into nothing short of an industry tragedy.

Avoid the Zune like the plague. Do not buy one. Ever. Why, you ask? Let’s take a look at where MS went wrong…

• Won’t work with any existing media player software. What, you say? Not even Windows Media Player? Nope. Microsoft couldn’t even leverage their existing software that they’ve been including in Windows since forever and of which they just released a brand new version (oh, and keep that in mind: Windows. No Mac support here). The Zune requires you to install a special Zune-only music player (which, in typical Microsoft fashion, turns out to be a magnificent disaster of a program — check out what Engadget had to go through just to get it installed — I lost track of how many times it crashed their computer. It almost made me cry for them). This special player allows you access to the Zune music store where you can buy the aforementioned songs that only work on the Zune. Well, that’s just like iTunes, you say. True, but — and this is a big but — now Microsoft has TWO media players, each with a music store, each completely incompatible with the other. Confusing for most novices? Absolutely. Idiotic? Without a doubt.
  
  
• The Zune has built-in WiFi. Wait, that’s a negative? Well, it could have been a fantastic plus had they not crippled it. For one thing, forget about connecting to wireless networks — can’t be done. Forget about wirelessly syncing your music library (that would have been so damn cool!) — can’t be done. What can you do with the WiFi? You can share songs with other Zunes in a 30-foot radius. Cool, right? Not really — the songs expire after 3 days or 3 plays, whichever comes first (and playing it for 1 minute counts as a full “play”), and then the song vanishes leaving — conveniently — a link to buy the song from the Zune music store. Maybe this wouldn’t be so bad if it only applied to songs that were already copyrighted, but here’s the kicker: if you make your own recording, or have any other recording that’s not copyrighted, and want to transfer it to another Zune, the same 3 days/3 plays restriction applies. Incredibly, incredibly stupid.
  
  
• Buying songs on the Zune music store. Oh, this is where my blood really boils. Most of you know how iTunes works — you put in your credit card once, and then you basically click one button to buy a song and its yours. With the Zune music store, you can’t buy songs with actual money — no, no, you have to purchase “points” first, and you must purchase them in minimum blocks of $5. Songs cost 79 points each, but — wait for it — 1 point is not equal to 1 cent. So you can’t use up all $5 of your points on several songs, you’re going to wind up with points left over, but not quite enough to buy a song — essentially giving Microsoft your money for free. So you see where this is going — you then buy another block of points. And the cycle continues. Someone on This Week in Tech calculated this out — to actually use up all the money you give to Microsoft and not have any left over, you have to buy 495 songs. So not only is Microsoft shadily squirreling away your money, but they’re creating a ridiculously complicated process and raising the barrier of entry to do a simple thing — all I want to do is buy a damn song! Just charge my credit card!
  
  
• Unreliable DRM scheme. Although the Zune environment is technologically analogous to the iPod/iTunes environment (1 music store, 1 player platform), Microsoft’s history with DRM (that’s Digital Rights Management, or what restricts you from copying those song files willy-nilly) should make you scared — very scared — about getting locked into such a scheme with them. Anyone remember PlaysForSure? For the last couple years, up until pretty much last week, it was the platform that Microsoft had dumped a ton of money into and convinced partner companies — Samsung, Rio, Creative, pretty much everyone that makes an MP3 player — to support in their players. It was a music store DRM mechanism that would, well, “play for sure” on any device sporting the PlaysForSure logo. When they decided to launch the Zune, Microsoft abandoned the entire PlaysForSure platform — the music store, the partners they got to build players for them, everything. So some people who spent a lot of money on songs at the MSN music store to get PlaysForSure media now have a collection that can’t be added to and that will be lost if they want to move to a new player. Given that kind of track record, you should be wary of anything Microsoft wants to lock you into next, because it might go the way of the Dodo — along with all your money — in a couple years. Even though Apple uses basically the same model, at least they’ve kept it the same for 5+ years now and it’s a time-proven system.
  
  
• Limited choices. As if the above weren’t enough, the Zune music store only offers about two thirds of the music library of the iTunes Music Store, not to mention that iTunes has hundreds of TV shows and movies available also, plus podcasting integration — all a distant dream on the Zune.
  
  

Like I said, I wanted to give Microsoft a shot. I wanted them to succeed. I wanted there to be more than one near-perfect media player to choose from. With the device itself, they had a shot. But by the very day of the Zune’s launch, they’d already managed to hang themselves. The business decisions, the shoddy software, and the nightmare that is the Zune music store are clearly the collective bazooka with which Microsoft has just blown its head off. Tons of reviewers, from tech sites to industry pundits to mainstream media, are already sounding the Zune’s death knell.

How can this be? How can a company with enormous resources at its disposal — both in manpower and, God knows, cash — spend years developing a product with a clear target and then set it up for failure with one bad decision after another? (Not to mention come up with a marketing slogan like “Welcome to the social.” What, an ice cream social? Where?) It just goes to show you that you can’t always buy success. You have to have some passionate people working on your product who care about more than just the bottom line — I’m convinced that’s what makes Apple so successful. Take that as you will, but no matter how you slice it the Zune at best will never come close to catching the iPod and at worst will be yet another monumental flop for Microsoft. One day, that company might figure out what people really care about. Today is not that day.

What would you prefer for $250? A sleek, thin, elegant and easy-to-use player that is paired with a music service that’s been around for years and has been proven again and again, or a bulky albeit larger-screened device that uses super-crappy software, imposes DRM even on your own files, rips you off when you buy music, and relies on a distribution model that may not be around very long? Yeah, that’s what I thought. Buy something else. Pretty much anything else. I think Engadget put it best in their review:

The Zune is a player riddled with a lot of small issues — death by a thousand cuts. Do we think any particular one is a deal breaker? Well, even given our nightmarish software issues, not really. Do we think they should have worked out the kinks and sat out this holiday season? Probably, yeah. Do we think there’s potential for betterment of the platform and especially the player through software updates? Given enough time, absolutely. Would we recommend the product for purchase, like, right now? Not a chance.

Introduction

For about two years now I’ve had a cell phone of one type or another that supports Bluetooth headsets, so for close to two years now I have been using such headsets when I’m in the car, at home, and really just whenever I can so I don’t have to occupy one of my hands with holding a phone. This is just going to a quick review, I’m not a professional, I’m just a gadget geek who appreciates well-designed products.

First, a quick background of what I’m comparing this against. My first phone-bluetooth combination was a Sony Ericsson T635 with a Motorola HS-810. I then bought (and hence became addicted to) a BlackBerry 7290. Despite the low volume and middling voice quality, I held onto the HS-810 because I love the quick-flip feature that turned it on and answered an incoming call at the same time. Once I lost that headset through a hole in my shorts, I bought a BlueTrek G2 — and promptly got rid of it a day later for sounding, frankly, like the cheapest piece of crap I’d ever heard. I searched around but couldn’t find anything I liked particularly better than the Motorola flip design, so I bought the HS-850 — the slightly louder successor to the HS-810 which also sported somewhat longer battery life.

Again, the Motorola HS-850 was only acceptable in most categories. It wasn’t loud enough, and people sometimes had trouble understanding what I was saying, but it was lightweight, the battery lasted quite a long time, and it had the flip formfactor I loved. It was while I had the HS-850 that I upgraded to the BlackBerry 8700c. The HS-850, however, met an untimely demise in the washing machine. I swear it snuck back into my pants pocket on its own.

After about two months of not having a Bluetooth headset, I couldn’t take it anymore and started searching again. Based mostly on size and sound quality, I was drawn to the Plantronics Discovery 645, only to discover it was about to be replaced by the Discovery 655. Update: I have been informed that the 655 won’t actually replace the 645, as the 645 will still be for sale and will have a slightly different accessory lineup. Although I couldn’t yet find any real reviews on the 655, I loved the way it looked and since the 645 seemed to fit the bill I figured its successor would too. So I took a chance and bought a new 655 on eBay for $100 shipped from a reputable seller.

Package contents and design

When it arrived four days later I immediately unpacked the box and surveyed the contents (see image). There is a wall charger, a battery charger with a AAA battery, a mini-USB charging adapter, a six-inch long USB to mini-USB cable, three sizes of ear gel pieces, an ear hook, the holster, and of course the headset itself. Quite a bit compared to the usual fare I received with other headsets.

The headset itself is the best looking Bluetooth headset to date, I think. It’s sleek and clean, very small but not ridiculously tiny, and very lightweight. The main button sits on the earpiece part of the device, and is ringed by a clear piece of plastic through which the blue and red LEDs shine. The two volume buttons are integrated into the black strip running down the top of the device. A small rubber standoff on the underside keeps the microphone from rubbing against your cheek when you’re talking on it. The soft silver and black color scheme ensures it will look good with just about anything.

Once I was satisfied that it looked as good in person as in the pictures, it was time to put it to use. The manual says to charge the headset for a minimum of one hour before use; I slipped the headset into the charging holster (with a firm, satisfying click — it’s not going anywhere), plugged it in and let it charge for about 90 minutes. The headset gives a quick vibrate when you connect it to a charger to confirm that it is receiving power. The one odd thing I’ve noticed is if the headset is completely drained — as it is when you first remove it from the package — it will actually vibrate five or six times when you first plug it in. At first I thought my new $100 headset was going nuts, but then it quieted itself and continued charging.

Pairing and fit

Pairing is simple: hold down the main button on the headset until the light starts flashing red-blue, then discover it with your handset. My 8700c picked it up with no problem. Subsequent pairings are quick — about 3 to 4 seconds from when the headset is turned on.

I next set about fitting the 655 into my ear. I didn’t want to use the ear hook, but I admit I had some trepidation about relying on nothing more than an ear gel to hold my $100 headset in my ear. However, the middle-sized gel fits my ear pretty well, and after figuring out how it slipped in I shook my head back and forth pretty violently — but the headset didn’t budge. It did take a little practice though before I could slip it into the right position quickly. Also, the ear gel rotates so the 655 can be put into either ear. It stays firmly in place, unlike what I’ve heard about the 645; this headset won’t droop down and point at your shoulder.

Sound quality and volume

My first call was placed to my voicemail. Wow! For the first time ever, I had to turn the volume down on a Bluetooth headset. The sound quality was good, at least as good as listening directly to my handset. Next I called my fiancé. Her voice also came through loud and clear, and when I told her I was on a new Bluetooth headset she was surprised. She reported it sounded perfectly clear and was definitely a lot better than the Motorolas I had had.

I also tested it in the car the next day when calling a few friends. I have a BMW 540i, and with no accessories turned on the car is very quiet so of course there was no problem with that. Then I cranked up the air conditioning to full blast and turned on some music at a moderate volume — my callers reported they could hear some of the background noise but didn’t have any trouble making out what I was saying. That is a huge improvement over the Motorola headsets I had, which when I had a call I had to turn the A/C down and turn the music off if anyone was going to understand what I was saying. The fancy DSP noise cancelling on the Plantronics 655 certainly seems to be doing its job.

Making and receiving calls

Making calls on the 655 is similar to any other Bluetooth headset. If the headset is paired to your phone when you place a call, it gets put on the headset. My BlackBerry also supports redial from the headset by tapping the main button twice. The 655 also supports initiation of voice command dialing if your phone offers that feature — my BlackBerry does not, unfortunately.

Receiving calls is what can be the real gem with this device. This is where the holster comes in, which I so far have not mentioned except in reference to charging. If the headset is paired to your phone and in the holster when a call comes in, it will vibrate and blink. Pretty cool, huh? Not only that, but removing the headset from the holster will then answer the call — and placing it in the holster when you’re done will terminate the call. I know some of you hate carrying things on your belt, but if you don’t mind like I do then this is a really handy feature. If you don’t want to use the holster, then you can still just press the main button on the 655 to answer and terminate a call.

Conclusion

I’ve had the 655 for over a week now and can confidently report that this is the best Bluetooth headset I have ever used (in addition to the Motorolas and Bluetrek I owned, I have also used the newer Motorola H700 and the Jabra BT500). It’s loud, it’s clear, I’ve only charged it once all week and haven’t been able to kill the battery, it looks good, has solid build quality, and is lightweight. I particularly like the holster, and the myriad of charging options — wall outlet, mini USB, AAA — ensure that you’ll never be without power. You can find the Plantronics Discovery 655 online from various vendors in the $100-$120 range, much less than the $149 MSRP. It may be a little pricier than many headsets, but it my opinion it’s well worth it. This is the first Bluetooth headset I’ve used that feels like there are no compromises.

Final verdict: 9/10

The good:

• Sleek design
• Lightweight
• Great sound quality and volume
• Lots of charging options
• Innovative holster
• Good battery life
• Solid build quality

The not-so-good:

• Can be troublesome to situate correctly in your ear
• Minor bug where it vibrates for awhile when charging from completely drained

Many of you are aware of my lack of love for AOL’s products, most particularly its AIM client software. It does all the nasty things that good software just shouldn’t do. The outgoing version that most people have been using for some time, version 5.9, has adware, installs things you don’t ask for (ViewPoint media player, for example), contains spyware, and installs a half dozen shortcuts for “Try AOL Free for 30 Days!” on your desktop, two places in your start menu, in your favorites, and in your links list. It also tries to hijack your browser’s home page to Netscape.com unless you specifically tell it not to during installation. All of these things are horrible tactics, at best poor decisions from a crappy software developer and at worst malicious attempts to control/brand your computing experience as much as possible.So it should be no surprise to any of you that I personally have not had an official AIM client installed on any of my computers for years now. If I want to get on AIM in Windows, I use Trillian, and if I’m in Linux I use Gaim (which also has Windows version). However, when I’ve tried to inform others about the inherent dangers of the official AIM client and what their alternatives are, some people find Trillian too difficult to setup (it’s really not that hard, just different) or the free version too limited (you have to pay to get stuff like video), and many (justly) don’t think Gaim has enough features (it can’t do voice/video and the file transfers are iffy). Long story short, many of you will only use the real AIM client. Which is exactly what makes the recent release of the new official AIM client (which AOL calls “Triton”) so important.

Most of you have used it by now, so I’ll just hit on the highlights: it features a shiny new interface which I think actually works quite well in most cases. The interface sports tabs and subtle animations for many windows — for example, when talking to several people at once they can all be contained in a single window with tabs for each conversation, sort of like FireFox does for web pages — although you can “tear off” the conversations into separate windows if you like it the old way. All other IM clients (Trillian, Gaim, Miranda) have had this for years, but it’s nice to see AOL officially join the 21st century. It also has tons of new features, including upgraded audio/video conferencing, an RSS aggregator, streaming radio stations, and access to the new AIM Mail service (AOL’s answer to Google Mail). If you want to see some screenshots of the new interface in action, take the tour on AIM.com.

Now for the not so good news. I admit, when I first installed Triton I was pretty excited. I thought, “Wow, AOL has made a good-looking IM client that works well and doesn’t install those stupid AOL shortcuts all over the place!” Unfortunately, my exuberance was short-lived. I quickly discovered that AOL was up to its old tricks again, just in different ways.

The first thing I noticed was the advertisements (which you never have to deal with in third-party clients), but at least those can be removed now – keep reading for more on that. And although Triton didn’t stick a million “Try AOL” shortcuts everywhere, it did something worse – it installed even more software that I didn’t ask for. AOL Browser is a junky, stripped-down version of Internet Explorer (which we already have little love for) that gets set as the default browser for links in Triton. That means that when someone sends you a link, it will open in AOL Browser rather than your default browser you have set in your operating system! That is just a huge, big, no-no. We set default applications for a reason – and Triton totally ignores it and tries to make you use their stupid browser.

Next, it also installs something called Plaxo. Plaxo is apparently an online contact-management service. Some people really like it, and I can respect that. But I can manage my own contacts, and I didn’t ask for it to be installed. If AOL wants to ask if I want to add that feature at installation, that would be great. But it didn’t ask, and I wound up with Plaxo shortcuts in my Start Menu, a Plaxo toolbar in Outlook that I could NOT make go away, and a wizard harassing me for personal information when I first started Triton.

Finally, closing the program is even worse than before. I thought the last AIM (version 5.9) was bad, in that if you clicked “X” on your buddy list window it didn’t actually close the program (here again we have AOL violating standards of operation – they effectively make the “X” like the minimize “-” button). Now, not only do you have to go down to the AIM icon in the system tray (by the clock), right click it and select “Exit”, but you have to do it twice! And even then, once the icon is gone, there’s still a process called “aolsoftware.exe” running in the background that cannot be stopped unless you use your task manager to terminate it.

So, all in all, a better looking AIM client with more features but with even more annoyances and inconsiderate violations of your right to control your computer. So, should you upgrade? Last week, I would have said probably not.

Now, there’s an answer.

AIM Ad Hack

I discovered this remarkable piece of software just a few days ago, and it is what inspired me to write this article. With me having switched to using Linux most of the time in recent weeks, Chris graciously tried out AIM Ad Hack on his computer so we could observe the results. And the results are fantastic.

AIM Ad Hack works as an intermediary during installation of Triton, and basically removes all the extra crap that AOL tries to install. It gives you the option to block the installation of ViewPoint media player, Plaxo, and (best of all) that damn AOL Browser – which means that when you click on links in IMs, they’ll open in your real browser!

Last, but certainly not least, AIM Ad Hack does exactly what the name suggests – gives you the option to remove the ads from Triton. After installation, go to Edit -> Preferences and then go to the “Ads” tab. You’ll see a setting for no ads. Brilliant!

So finally, you can have the full official AIM client with all of the features but with none of the advertisements and backdoor tactics that AOL usually uses.

Installation

If you do not have Triton installed already, just download AIM Ad Hack and run the file.

If you do already have Triton installed, you must exit it first (make sure the AIM Triton icon is gone from the system tray). Then press Ctrl-Alt-Del to bring up the Windows Task Manager, and on the Processes tab look for “aolsoftware.exe”. Select it, and press “End Process.” Now you’re ready to download and run AIM Ad Hack.

I encourage everyone to try this out – don’t let AOL control your computer! Post here if you have any questions or leave feedback on how it worked for you.

Download AIM Ad Hack | View AIM Ad Hack web site

The search company that spawned from a couple of college kids has been busy. Busy making sure that they’re not just known as a search company, that is. Google’s recently released Beta (that means experimental) version of Google Talk is a latecomer to the IM wars, the field of battle already crowded with AIM (41 million users), MSN Messenger (14 million), and Yahoo! Messenger (20 million). However, every clue points to what will eventually become an awesome piece of the incredible fabric Google is weaving across the web and your desktop. What? Well, let’s have a look…

GTalk vs. AIM

“Why do I want this?” “What makes it better?” “But it doesn’t have [feature]!!!”

Ah, the inevitable questions of change. And truthfully, all entirely valid. Here’s what we think the high points of GTalk are:

• Clean interface. There are no ads, no goofy buttons everywhere, no ads, slick menus, no ads, and did I mention no ads?
• Easy on your system. Resources, that is. On all observed systems so far, GTalk takes significantly less resources to run than AIM.
• Integration with GMail. GTalk automatically uses the same contact list you have for your GMail account! This means no more maintenance of separate user/address lists. And, you can have the “GName” (Google screen name) or the person’s real name displayed in GTalk.
• Window docking. Chat windows can be grouped together and can slide over top of each other to save screen space. It’s hard to describe, but just get two or more chats going and you’ll see how it works. It’s cool.
• Voice calling. Simply click the “call” button on any IM window, and if you have a microphone you can talk to your buddy. GTalk automatically adjusts microphone levels.
• Custom away and available messages. Every IM client has customizable away messages, but available messages? What’re those? Simple: you can have a message underneath your name even when you’re there and chatting. Kind of like a tag line. I use it a lot.
• No crap. No stupid news popups, stock tickers, banner ads, indecipherable options, gigantic menus, or a plethora of confusing and ultimately useless icons like certain programs from AOL Time Warner

There are tons of tiny little thoughtful items throughout the program that you just have to use to discover. The two most noticeably absent features are emoticons and formatted (colored) text. However, those are rumored to be coming in a later release (remember, this is BETA software right now).

The Bigger picture

Why is this so significant? Well, Google Talk itself, while a very nice program, is not. What makes it special, and what will drive Google to new heights and truly break it out of being just a web-search company, is Google Talk’s integration with Google’s other services. And GTalk is just one example.

How do these services connect? What is the central hub, the backbone? Simple: Google’s incredible search technology. We know Google all but axed the early search engines like AltaVista, AskJeeves, and DogPile with its efficient, fast, no-frills searching, and the company’s name has become synonymous with “to search.” Off of this foundation Google has begun building a series of interconnected tools designed to leverage the power of their search technology to do much more than just scour the web. GMail was Google’s first well-known foray beyond web searching, and it has been wildly successful. And what are GMail’s most attractive features? Its enormous storage space (currently 2GB), fast and clean interface, and the ability to search your emails with the same speed and accuracy with which you search the web. Which, when you get around 5,000 emails per year (like yours truly), would be a wonderful feature to have.

OK, great, you say, that’s nice. But so what? Well, the picture really comes together once you try out Google Desktop 2. This nifty little program resides on your desktop, in your taskbar, or, what I prefer, docked at the side of your screen where it can display the most information. Once installed, Google Talk and a number of other little applets (news, weather, automatic RSS feeds from the sites you visit [that’s über-cool]) are integrated right into it. It also indexes just about everything under the sun, according to your preferences, so that with just one little innocent-looking search box at the bottom of the screen you can simultaneously search your documents, pictures, music, movies, web sites, web history, email (GMail AND Outlook accounts), chat transcripts, everything. And it’s instantaneous. And I do mean instantaneous. You type, and there it is. No waiting. It makes poking through your My Documents folder for some long-lost file a thing of the past. Looking for that research paper on human spaceflight from 2002? You know it’s in there somewhere, but trying to decipher your own organization system after three or more years just isn’t your idea of fun. Just type “NASA spaceflight 2002” into your Google Desktop search box, and instantly your document is available.

The real power and importance of this technology will probably be lost on most people until they realize they’ve already been hooked. Not many think they need this, or know that they want it. But let’s look back to the mid- to late-90s, when there were a bunch of different search engines, each of which had different strengths and none of which were especially fast. Then Google came along. Today, most of us take Google for granted and don’t know what we would do without it. The fast, aggregated searching provided by Google Desktop 2 will now do the same for all of our documents, media, and email. It has the power to relegate the very act of browsing for files to the same distant corners of our memory as rooting through piles of CDs for a certain song. We just don’t do it anymore; we have massive digital music collections (usually) neatly organized on our computers and iPods.

It should be clear by this point that Google’s search technology touches every one of their products in a significant way. Now let’s look at your typical day on the computer and you’ll see that Google is slowly but surely starting to touch every part of your daily life as well. Web searching? Google.com. Email? Gmail. Instant messaging? Google Talk. News? Google News and News RSS feeds in Google Desktop. Searching your own documents and files? Google Desktop. There’s not much more most of us do each day than search the web, read news and email, and work on some sort of document on our PCs. There’s other tools I haven’t even mentioned, like Google’s photo database software Picasa.

Suddenly, Google is no longer just a search engine but an impressive presence on our desktops that leverages the power of interconnected tools and simplicity to deliver a truly revolutionary experience. None of these software programs by themselves are astoundingly innovative, and none of the technology is new, but combined with Google’s search technology and connected with each other, they really start to shine. Do yourself a favor and try some of them out. You should be able to find at least one feature that makes you say, “Oooh, that’s cool!”

Forget Microsoft. Google is going to rule the world.