In 1992 the Internet wasn’t available to the general public. There were no iPods or any other portable digital music players. Cellphones were big, bulky and analog, mainly used in cars in the U.S. The first consumer digital cameras had just arrived: crude models that cost $800, worked only in black and white, and held just 32 images.

Microsoft was offering the clumsy Windows 3.1, which seemed to crash if you sneezed, and many people were still using the geeky and limited DOS operating system on their “IBM-compatible” PCs. Apple’s technology was way ahead of Windows, but the company would soon enter a period of management mediocrity and product paralysis. And there were scores of PC makers in the U.S., most of them now defunct. The hottest one was Compaq, today a mere brand name for Hewlett-Packard. Dell was still an upstart.

Personal computers were typically sold without modems, networking ports or stereo sound. They had awful, limited color video, far short of what a cheap TV could produce. Too often their designers assumed PC buyers were techies or hobbyists, willing and able to perform complicated hardware and software upgrades and tweaks.

Then and now my main criteria for judging digital consumer products have been simplicity, ease of use and reliability — a sort of index for the burden on the user. And in 1992 most products failed miserably on that scale. They required far too much attention, knowledge and effort by users when theoretically they were supposed to do just the opposite — namely, to make their lives easier.

By around 2001, when the current major operating systems, Windows XP and Apple’s Mac OS X, made their debuts, personal technology had vastly improved. Many of the rough edges had been sanded off. The Mac had long been “plug and play,” and Windows was much closer to that goal. Both systems were fairly stable. The iPod arrived that year, and digital cameras and cell phones — by then well established and growing sleeker by the year — began a rapid evolution that added features and cut prices.

And by then the World Wide Web had changed everything. It had vastly enriched the experience of computing, adding information, entertainment, communication and commerce on a grand scale. Sure, too few people in America had real broadband or wireless networking by 2001, but the balance was getting better. The burden of use for personal computers and related gadgets was trending lower.

Enter the security crisis, which all but destroyed that welcome momentum. There had been viruses for many years, of course, including some big attacks in the 1990s. But over the past five years, the security problem has morphed into a major hassle for people who own and use Windows computers. Viruses and other malicious software programs are still with us, but now they’ve been joined by new categories of pernicious technologies, especially spyware, adware, and fake email and Web sites designed to steal your privacy, your money and even your identity. Spam has gone from a nuisance to a plague.

And the Internet, for all its numerous benefits, has become an engine for this digital onslaught. In the physical world, it isn’t hard to stay out of bad neighborhoods and avoid the company of crooks. But in cyberspace, it’s harder to read the signs — digital criminals, who range from vandals to organized thieves, mingle invisibly with the public in a world where everyone is easily connected.

Today, warding off the myriad threats online takes more and more time, money and effort than ever before. You have to run multiple security programs, interpret all their warnings and alerts, tell them what to do when they detect suspicious activity, and consistently update them. It’s a real hassle, one that seriously interferes with the productivity, and the pleasure, computers can and should provide.

In fact, the burden of using a Windows computer is higher now than it was in 2001. By contrast, Apple’s Macintosh is easier to use than ever, partly because it has so far remained free from viruses, spyware and adware — except for a few minor cases. After stagnating in the mid-’90s, Apple’s software and hardware are once again markedly superior to those of Windows PCs.

But even Mac users have to contend with spam and must learn to avoid fake Web sites designed to steal sensitive financial information. And users of both platforms must also contend with a welter of restrictions on the use of digital content such as music and videos.

So where are we heading?

I believe that in the future the Internet will become more like the electrical grid, a behind-the-scenes platform to which all manner of gadgets will be directly connected, each taking some power and intelligence from the network to perform its task. While personal computers won’t go away, they won’t be the main way to get online, or even needed as intermediaries by many devices. Whenever you watch TV or make a phone call, you’ll be on the Internet, though you won’t be browsing the Web in the manner you do on a PC. This will open up all sorts of new features and interactivity.

Even unlikely gadgets will be connected. Your microwave oven, for instance, will use the Internet to quietly download information that will allow it to recognize the bar codes or radio tags on packaged food products and cook them appropriately.

The star of this new world will be the cell phone — or, more accurately, the device formerly known as the cell phone. Already, some high-end phones, like Palm’s Treo, are essentially mini computers, complete with keyboards and expandable memory. They do many of the things for which people formerly required laptops.

These so-called smart phones can surf the Web, and send and receive e-mail and instant messages, at broadband speeds. They can take, display and edit photos and movies; download and play music, videos and TV shows; play ever more sophisticated games; and even view and edit Microsoft Office documents.

I expect these capabilities to be pushed down to phones that cost less. New competitors will enter the business of making phones and the software and services that run on them.

For these smart phones to flourish, however, they will have to get much simpler to use. The burden on the user will have to drop sharply. Complicated user interfaces will have to be replaced with better ones. Reliability must improve. And the stranglehold on innovation now imposed by all-powerful wireless carriers will have to be broken or loosened. Also, the security problems that plague the PC will have to be headed off somehow. Already, the digital criminals are trying to target cell phones.

But I remain optimistic. The digital revolution can’t be stopped, and the next 15 years should see as many exciting developments as the past 15 have.

Music services

The iTunes Store is the digital equivalent of a music shop. You buy individual songs or albums and own them thereafter, with some restrictions on their use. But several other services, such as RealNetworks’ Rhapsody, Napster and Yahoo Music Unlimited, take a different approach. They charge a monthly fee that entitles you to stream or download an unlimited number of songs. In effect, you’re renting these songs, typically for $10 or $15 a month. Some music lovers prefer this system, since it makes it easier to experiment with new artists and genres, and cheaper to fill a portable player, even though the songs can’t be used on an iPod.

Now Microsoft has joined the battle against iTunes with Zune Marketplace, its own online music service that offers both subscription plans and iTunes-style individual song purchases. Music from the Zune Marketplace will work only on Microsoft’s new iPod competitor, the Zune player.

There is another notable online music service: eMusic. It’s a sort of hybrid. You get to download and own tracks, as with iTunes, but you’re charged a monthly fee instead of paying by the song. The upside of eMusic is that its music is in the plain, unprotected MP3 format, meaning it will play on any portable music player including the iPod, and on every music-playing software program on Windows and Macintosh computers. The downside: eMusic offers songs only from independent record labels. It has none of the catalogs of the majors and tends to be nichey, not mainstream.

Music players

Companies like Creative, Samsung and iRiver offer many models that match up well in price and features against the various versions of the iPod. At one time their hardware and software designs were much clumsier than Apple’s, but they have improved a lot. They still trail the iPod in overall elegance. But many have features Apple gadgets lack, such as built-in FM radio, microphones, longer battery life and even transmitters for beaming music through car radios.

These non-iPod players have suffered because they use a Microsoft-developed system called “PlaysForSure” that supposedly allows smooth, iPod-like synchronization between players and Windows PCs. Unfortunately, PlaysForSure often behaves more like “PlaysMaybe,” with sync problems being common.

SanDisk, a company best known for its flash-memory chips, has roared into a distant second behind Apple, with a series of handsome flash-based players under the Sansa brand. These devices, roughly comparable to iPod’s Nano and Shuffle models, mostly use the PlaysForSure system. But recently, SanDisk debuted the Sansa Rhapsody, which uses RealNetworks technology and is tied closely to Real’s Rhapsody subscription service.

Certainly, the biggest news for iPod haters is the introduction of Microsoft’s Zune music player, an iPod competitor with plenty of marketing muscle behind it. The Zune holds 30 gigabytes of music, the same as the smallest full-size iPod, and costs the same $250.

But the Zune abandons PlaysForSure in favor of an Apple-style, tightly controlled, integrated approach. It works exclusively with Zune software, and the only encrypted songs it will play are those bought at Microsoft’s Zune Marketplace.

As for design, the Zune is bigger and somewhat clunkier than the iPod. But it has three things the iPod lacks: a bigger screen, an FM radio and built-in wireless capability. The latter can be used to send songs to nearby Zune players, where they can be played three times before expiring.

1. If you have a Windows computer, you must obtain and install all of the following: a reputable antivirus program, a software firewall, a junk-mail filter and an antispyware program. Even if you own a Macintosh (Macs have been unaffected by most of these threats to date), you will still need to turn on your computer’s firewall and employ a junk-mail filter.

2. Upgrade to the latest versions of the leading Windows web browsers, Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 7 and Mozilla’s Firefox 2.0, both of which warn you when a web page you’re visiting appears to be phony. (The new Internet Explorer also has under-the-hood security improvements that close some of the holes plaguing older versions.) You might also consider add-on software, like McAfee’s SiteAdvisor or the new Norton Confidential, which warn about fraudulent sites and, in the case of Norton, also about malicious software on your PC. On a Mac, consider using Firefox 2.0 instead of Apple’s Safari, which, while very good and generally secure, lacks a fake-web-site detector.

3. Never respond to or click a link within any unsolicited email message from a financial institution — even your own — no matter how official it looks. Crooks have become skilled at mimicking logos and typefaces used by banks, brokers and payment services like PayPal. When you click on links within these fake emails, you’ll be taken to web pages that look like the companies’ official sites, even down to the address, but they’ll steal your log-in information. Be especially wary of email from a financial institution that asks for account information or says you must log in at a linked site to address a problem. You can phone the company to see if there really is an issue. Obviously, this caution doesn’t apply to some financial emails, such as confirmations of online stock trades you’ve just executed. But in general, you shouldn’t conduct financial transactions via email or links in email. Instead, go directly to the financial sites you use.

4. Similarly, never act on emails offering stock tips, miracle pills or the chance to earn money by storing millions from overseas in your bank account. Sounds obvious, but in the past these scams might have cost you a little money. Now they may be part of more-damaging identity-theft schemes. Treat such come-ons the way you’d treat a stranger in a bad neighborhood who made such promises.

5. Never, ever download software from a company or web site whose honesty or veracity you’re not sure of. If a site says you’ll need special software to use its features, don’t bite. Even if the software is well known and safe — like RealNetworks’ RealPlayer, Apple’s QuickTime or Adobe Flash — don’t get it from a link provided by a random web page. Instead, visit the Real, Apple or Adobe sites to download it manually.

6. Finally, never use security software offered to you via unsolicited email or a popup window, or that suddenly appears on your PC. Such programs are almost always scams and often install malicious spyware, adware and viruses rather than cleaning them up. In general, stick with leading security brands like Symantec, McAfee, Zone Labs and Webroot. Check the software in the reviews section of PC Magazine or the CNET web site. If it isn’t covered there, it’s probably untrustworthy.

And like the technologies themselves, digital jargon changes and expands all the time. Just when you thought you’d mastered stuff like RAM (computer memory) and GSM (the cellphone technology invented in Europe), new terms pop up like weeds on your lawn.

So here’s a quick and dirty glossary designed to make holiday shopping for the latest tech products feel less like taking the SATs.

Computers

Some of the newest terminology to know when you’re shopping for a computer, whether it be a Windows PC or an Apple Macintosh, involves the processor, the chip that’s the brain of the box. Until recently, most consumer computers had a single processor. Now it’s common to find them with so-called dual cores, which in effect means two processors packaged into one chip. Two cores won’t make your word processing or email go any faster, but they do potentially give you more horsepower for such heavy-duty tasks as gaming or video editing. I say “potentially,” because to make the most of a dual-core processor, you need software that sends some work to each core, and most programs are not yet designed to do that.

The labeling of these new processors is also confusing. Intel called its first consumer laptop dual-core chip the “Core Duo”; now there’s a second generation known as the “Core 2 Duo.” (In techland, apparently, the “2 Duo” moniker is assumed to be crystal clear.) And there are still some single-core Intel processors, dubbed “Core Solo.”

For laptops in general, one of the latest terms you’ll encounter is “ExpressCard,” which refers to the new version of that slot on the side of the machine into which you can pop a wireless receiver or some other add-on. For years these slots have adhered to a standard called “PC Card,” but the latest laptops are showing up with slots that follow the new ExpressCard standard. Worse yet for confused consumers, it comes in two flavors: a narrower one called ExpressCard/34, and a wider one called ExpressCard/54. And naturally, neither can accept cards designed for the older, PC Card standard.

Cellphones

One hardly knows where to begin when talking about cellphone jargon. But an obvious source of confusion is the baffling nomenclature being given to the various new high-speed cellphone networks that can transmit a wide assortment of material — music, video clips and web sites — to phones at speeds rivaling home broadband.

If you’re shopping for a phone at Verizon or Sprint, the high-speed capability is called “EVDO” or “EV-DO” (which stands for Evolution Data Only or Evolution Data Optimized). At Cingular, it’s known as “HSDPA” (for High-Speed Downlink Packet Access).

Since T-Mobile doesn’t have a network in this speed class, salespeople there will brag instead about “EDGE” (Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution), which, despite its aspirational name, is a much slower technology.

TV

Buying a television used to be simple. No more. There’s a whole new vocabulary for digital TV shopping. It’s too expansive to cover completely in this space, but here are a few select terms.

In addition to the familiar plasma and LCD (liquid crystal display) sets, which have an expensive digital panel at the front, there’s now a third type of screen, called a “microdisplay.” This is actually a rear-projection television, although much skinnier than the old behemoths. There are three main microdisplay types. Each uses a different sort of very small digital circuit in the rear of the set to generate the picture, which is then projected onto the large screen at the front. And naturally, each has its own jargony name. The first, called “DLP” (digital light processing), uses a special chip loaded with minuscule mirrors. The second, confusingly called “LCD,” uses a tiny LCD chip. The third, “LCoS” (liquid crystal on silicon), is sort of a hybrid of the other two, in that it uses both liquid crystals and mirrors.

And don’t forget the digital video recorder — the now almost mandatory add-on used to record and save programs on hard disks inside cable and satellite receivers or inside a stand-alone unit — which unfortunately goes by two names. Sometimes it’s called a “DVR” (digital video recorder) and sometimes a “PVR” (personal video recorder), but really, they’re the same thing. You might even hear the technology referred to as “TiVo,” which is actually the best-known brand of digital video recorder. Think of TiVo as the Kleenex of DVRs — its name is sometimes used as a generic term for the whole category.

Wireless

Wi-Fi wireless networks are now pretty familiar. Many people even know they come in two main speeds, designated by letters. The “b” variety, which was the first version to gain public acceptance, was succeeded by the “g” variety, which is faster and backwards-compatible with “b.”

Nice and simple, right? Not for long. Chaos has come to the Wi-Fi world in the form of a new standard,”n,” which is supposedly even faster than “g” and, more important, offers longer range. The problem is, the engineering committee that sets such standards has been taking forever to certify “n,” so companies have begun selling Wi-Fi gear that purports to use the “n” standard in some form but may not be compatible with it when it finally emerges. Last year there were “pre-n” products, which used some parts of the emerging standard; this year there are “draft-n” products, based on a draft of the proposed “n” standard. Stay tuned for the real thing.

But the most important Wi-Fi term of the moment is “MIMO,” short for multiple-input multiple-output. This is a technique that can greatly improve range and speed by capturing formerly stray parts of a wireless signal and merging them. It is expected to be a key component of the “n” standard, but is already in some “g” products, as well as in the “pre-n” and “draft-n” products.

Broadband

There are two main types of high-speed Internet service: DSL (digital subscriber line) is sold by phone companies, while cable modem service is sold by cable companies. Most people know these terms.

But now there’s a third type, called “fiber optic,” being sold in some parts of the country. This technology uses glass fibers, lit up by a laser and connected directly to your home. (Some other systems use fiber under the street, but not running right up to the house.) The best-known brand of fiber-to-the-home broadband service is Verizon’s “FiOS,” which can deliver TV channels as well as the Internet.

All broadband service providers boast about their speed, and they tend to do so in techie jargon. Slower broadband is measured in kilobits per second, abbreviated as “kbps.” Faster speeds are clocked as megabits per second, or “mbps.” (Note that these terms end in bit, not byte. The latter ending is normally used as a measure of storage capacity, not speed.) One megabit equals 1,000 kilobits. So a DSL line that tops out at 768 kilobits per second, for example, isn’t nearly as fast as one that registers three megabits per second.

Music

Almost everybody knows that MP3 (MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3) is the most common format for digital music files. But what is AAC? And how about WMA?

All of the above are compressed formats, meaning they take a song that would occupy lots of space on a disk and squeeze it down to a fraction of its original size while trying to preserve the sound. AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is an industry-standard music-compression format favored by Apple, while WMA (Windows Media Audio) is a proprietary music-compression format that is owned and used by Microsoft. Which of the three you prefer depends on your taste.

Both AAC and WMA are available in two versions. One is an “open” version, which gets created when consumers convert their CDs into these digital formats, and imposes no restrictions on usage. The second is an encrypted, or copy-protected, version, which includes code that restricts how often and under what circumstances the song can be played or copied. Songs sold at Apple’s iTunes Music Store are in the encrypted version of AAC, while songs sold by music services that use Microsoft software are sold in the encrypted version of WMA, meaning there are limits to what you can do with these files.

Now the Treo has a new high-end competitor from Motorola and Microsoft that’s much thinner and cheaper, yet promises to match it feature for feature. It’s called the Motorola Q, and it’s popping up in the hands of more and more power users, intrigued by its stylish looks.

I tested the Q, comparing it mainly with the newest Treo, the 700p. I loved the Q’s hardware design and its price. At $199 (with a two-year service plan), it’s half the cost. And while a little wider, the Q is just half as thick as the Treo 700p and more than one-third lighter. It’s a heck of an engineering achievement by Motorola.

However, the Q’s beautiful hardware is dragged down by poor software. The Treo 700p uses the tried-and-true Palm operating system, which was overhauled a few years back to turn it into a phone-oriented interface you could control with one hand. But the Q is burdened with Microsoft’s Windows Mobile system, which hasn’t been fully converted to quick, one-handed phone use. The result is that it’s much more annoying to use the Q than the Treo, especially if you are a heavy mobile e-mail user. For too many functions, the Q requires more steps, more clicks and more opening of menus than the Treo 700p. (The Treo 700w, which uses Windows software, has many of the same software flaws as the Q.)

Despite being eye-catching, the Q’s design has a few drawbacks as well. Its screen is smaller and has 25 percent fewer pixels than the Treo’s, so you see less of e-mails and other documents, and photos are more squashed. And unlike the Treo’s display, the Q’s isn’t a touch screen, so you can’t use a finger to tap icons for quick results. The Q also has less battery life than the Treo, and while its keyboard is roomier, I found typing on it to be a tad more difficult.

Like the Treo 700 models, the Q works on Verizon’s broadband — like EV-DO data network, so it does a good job with both Web surfing and downloading large e-mail attachments. In my tests, the Q typically reached speeds of between 200 and 500 kilobits per second, only slightly slower than most wired low-end DSL connections at home.

Voice calls on the Q were also clear and strong, better in some cases than on the Treo. But unlike the Treo 700p, the Q can’t be used as a modem for a laptop, at least not out of the box. Neither phone has Wi-Fi wireless capability. Both have cameras with resolutions of 1.3 megapixels.

Many tasks took more work on the Q than on the Treo, even such basic things as muting the phone and locking the keyboard. Deleting e-mail requires two steps on the Q, one on the Treo.

The Q does have one nice navigation control the Treo lacks — a scroll wheel and back button on the right side, like what a BlackBerry sports. But the Q is more limited than the Treo in the way it handles Microsoft Office documents and PDF files. On the Treo 700p, Word and Excel files can be edited, whereas on the Q, they can only be viewed.

Still, the Q should sell well because of its price, speed and svelte appearance. It makes the high-end smart phone much more accessible and much more pocketable, which is no small feat.

And then this year everything changed. Apple Computer, the maker of the Mac, switched to the same Intel-made processors for which Windows was designed. The new Intel-powered Macs, which began shipping in January, still come with Apple’s own operating system, Mac OS X, which is more modern and more secure than Windows XP. But these Macs can now easily run Windows too, and they run it as fast as standard Windows-equipped PCs.

Why does this matter? It means that you can switch from Windows to the Mac and still use the one or two Windows programs you require that have no Mac equivalent.

Among the Mac models that can perform this feat are the iMac and Mac Mini desktop computers and the MacBook and MacBook Pro laptops. Apple’s most powerful model, the PowerMac tower, is likely to be converted to the Intel chips by the end of the year, after which it, too, will be Windows-capable.

There are two options for running Windows on the Mac. They take different approaches, but in my tests, both have proved to be fast, stable and widely compatible with Windows software. One, from Apple itself, is free. The second, from a small Virginia company called Parallels, costs $79. But each carries an additional cost: You have to supply and install your own copy of Windows, which can run $200 or $300, depending on which version you choose.

The Apple system, Boot Camp, uses a technique called Dual-Boot. It splits your Mac’s hard disk into two sections, or partitions — one for the Mac operating system and all its programs and files, and one for Windows XP and all its programs and files. You can start, or “boot up,” the Mac in either operating system, but you can’t run both simultaneously. To switch between a Mac program and a Windows program, you have to reboot the computer.

The Parallels system, called Parallels Desktop for Mac, uses a technique called Virtualization. It creates a virtual Windows computer inside a window within the Mac operating system. Parallels runs Windows a tad more slowly than Apple’s Boot Camp, but allows you to run both operating systems, and compatible software, simultaneously. You can switch rapidly between the two environments without rebooting. I’m writing this paragraph on a MacBook Pro laptop, but I’m not using any Mac software to do so. Instead, I’m using the Windows version of Microsoft Word, which runs inside Parallels Desktop.

For this paragraph, I’ve switched back to the Mac side of the computer and am using the Mac version of Word. And I copied the previous paragraph from the Windows side and pasted it into the Mac document. It was fast and flawless.

Each approach has its strengths as well as weaknesses.

Apple’s Boot Camp turns the Mac into a true, no-compromises Windows PC-just like a Dell or Hewlett-Packard computer. When you boot up the Mac in Windows, no trace of the Mac operating system is running; Windows has all the hardware and all the memory to itself. In my tests, Macs running Windows under Boot Camp were wicked fast and handled every single program I tried, including Microsoft Office for Windows, the Internet Explorer Web browser and various games. The downside is that pesky need to reboot when switching operating systems.

Parallels Desktop is much faster than the old software for running Windows on pre-Intel Macs, a Microsoft product called Virtual PC. That’s because Parallels makes use of special virtualization features built into the Intel chips. And it has the great advantage of running Windows applications at the same time you are running your Mac programs. But while quite fast, Parallels can’t match the speed of Windows running under Boot Camp, because it must share hardware and memory with the Mac operating system. Also, Parallels won’t work with certain high-end Windows games, and it can have trouble recognizing some USB drives and CDs. In my own tests, Parallels did handle everything I threw at it, but I introduced only simple games. Everything ran as fast as it would on an average Windows PC, though not as fast as the programs ran under Boot Camp.

Because Windows is much less secure than Mac OS X, when you run Windows on a Mac, you have to take the same precautions you would with a standard Windows PC. That means you need to install and run both antivirus and antispyware software that is generally not needed under the Mac OS.

Apple’s approach is more secure than Parallels’s in this regard — with Apple’s Boot Camp, Windows can’t see or access your Mac folders or files. That means any malicious software running in Windows can’t erase or damage your Mac files. Parallels, on the other hand, optionally allows you to share folders between the two operating systems; if you enable this feature, you could give a malicious Windows program an opening to damage or spy on the files on the Mac side.

Installing both programs is fairly easy, but it’s a multistep process. With Apple’s system, you first download and install Boot Camp. Then, using Boot Camp, you divide your hard disk into Mac and Windows partitions. Next you create a CD to be used later, under Windows, to install software “drivers” that Windows will need to control all aspects of the Mac’s hardware. Then you install Windows. Finally, you install the CD you created.

Note that Boot Camp requires a full retail version of Windows XP, called “SP2.” You can’t use any other version of Windows, and you can’t use an upgrade edition, which requires an earlier version of Windows to be present on the machine.

Parallels allows you to install any version of Windows, even a very old one. But if you use Windows XP, you will in most cases also need a full, retail version, not an upgrade package. You first must buy and install the Parallels program, which creates an empty “virtual machine.” Then you install your copy of Windows inside Parallels. Finally, to enable certain key features, you have to install a program called Parallels Tools, which is included.

This all sounds harder than it is. In each case, the whole process took me about an hour and required no technical skill.

And it’s worth the effort. Boot Camp and Parallels have turned the Intel-based Macintosh into the only computer that can run nearly every popular software program, whether it was written for Windows or the Mac. On the same computer you can edit photos in Apple’s iPhoto program and check your e-mail in Microsoft’s Outlook — simultaneously, if you choose Parallels. Now, that’s progress.

Vista is the biggest revision to Windows in over a decade. It will be a major change, not only for consumer and corporate Windows users, but for computer makers, software creators and many others downstream.

But what’s in Vista? How will it be sold? And what kind of computer will be needed to run it? Here’s a rough guide to the new Leviathan of the digital seas.

WHY VISTA?

Even after a major overhaul a couple of years back, Windows XP is a security nightmare. With Vista, Microsoft claims to have built in better security from the start, reducing — though not eliminating — the need to buy, learn and maintain add-on security software. The company says better security is Vista’s biggest advantage.

For instance, with the new program you’ll have to type in your administrator ID and password before installing software, to stop malicious software from installing itself silently. And Vista will have built-in parental controls.

Vista’s next big feature is built-in desktop search. Think of this as the Google Desktop search on steroids. From any screen, you’ll be able to start typing a search term and Vista will comb your hard disk for every document, photo, email, song and video that meets that criterion. It should be much faster and better than add-on search programs.

In addition, you’ll be able to save searches in “virtual folders,” which will automatically continue to collect files that meet your search specifications. So if you save a search for “Fountains of Wayne” as a virtual folder and check it a month later, it will contain every e-mail that mentioned the pop band as well as any photos you took at their concert and new songs by the band that you downloaded — even though none of these things existed when you first did the search.

The last major new feature is a rich new user interface. Called Aero, it includes a powerful new graphics system that enables such new extras as transparent windows, animation of certain screen elements (similar to the “funnel” effect Mac users are familiar with when closing a file) and the ability to see reduced, live views of all your running programs at once.

There are lots of smaller changes as well. For instance, there’s a dashboard with small programs (calendar, weather updates and stock tickers, among others) that run quickly, called Gadgets. There’s also new music and video player software; a new built-in Web browser with tabbed browsing; a new, free email program with junk-mail filtering; and a new photo-organizing program.

Many of these features are already available on the Apple Macintosh — some have been for years — but they will seem fresh to most Windows users.

HOW WILL YOU BUY IT?

Like past versions of Windows, Vista will be sold in two ways: The vast majority of people will get it by buying a new PC with Vista preloaded at the factory. That way, they’ll know the hardware and software are compatible. And a small percentage of people, either brave souls or those with PCs too new to replace, will buy Vista in a box and upgrade their computers manually.

Either way, Vista won’t be simple to purchase. That’s because it will come in at least five different flavors, compared with two versions when Windows XP launched in 2001. There will be two consumer versions of Vista, two business versions and one version that includes everything, called “Ultimate.” Also, two current special editions of Windows, the Tablet and Media Center versions, will be folded into some, but not all, of the five Vista editions.

For consumers, the biggest issue will be choosing between the Home Basic and Home Premium versions of Vista, either on new machines or in boxes. Home Premium will include the new Aero user interface along with all the security, search and other features described above. It will also have updated versions of the features currently included in the Media Center and Tablet editions of Windows XP. But Home Premium won’t run on most Windows PCs currently in the hands of consumers, and it also won’t run on new, low-end PCs. That’s because it requires hefty hardware to work right.

Most current PCs, and all the bargain-priced new ones preloaded with Vista next January, will be able to run only Home Basic, which is a stripped-down version of Vista. Microsoft insists that Home Basic will have the same security system and search features as Premium, but it won’t include the new Aero user interface and will probably lack some other features. In essence Home Basic will look and feel like a modestly improved version of Windows XP, even though Microsoft says there’ll be major improvements under the covers.

Power users, and those who want every option just in case, may go for the Ultimate version of Vista. It not only will roll up everything in the consumer and business versions, it may also have some added bells and whistles. Microsoft hasn’t announced prices yet.

WHAT HARDWARE WILL YOU NEED?

The stripped-down version of Vista, Home Basic, will run on fairly routine PCs, albeit ones with plenty of memory.

The Premium and Ultimate versions will likely require at least a midrange model or a high-end configuration.

Microsoft hasn’t officially released the recommended hardware specs. But I expect the company to recommend 512 megabytes of memory for Home Basic and a gigabyte of memory for Premium. Based on past experience, I advise doubling those amounts, to a gigabyte of memory for Basic and 2 gigabytes for Premium.

Another crucial hardware factor will be the computer’s video system. Basic Vista can run on any graphics hardware that creates a screen resolution of at least 800×600. That covers most bargain computers with graphics chips that are integrated with the machine’s motherboard and which share main memory. But Premium and Ultimate will run best on machines with a full-blown graphics card and dedicated video memory of at least 128 megabytes.

You will be able to run Home Basic on the slowest processors available, but for the better versions of Vista, you’ll need a processor running at a speed of at least 1 gigahertz. I would opt for as fast a processor as you can afford and for one with two “cores” rather than one. (A dual-core processor is essentially like having two processors on one chip.)

Vista will also support so-called 64-bit processors, which can gulp down more information than current machines. But I wouldn’t worry about that for now, unless you’re a power user. There’s very little 64-bit software available for consumers.

Vista may not be something to leap into right away. You may want to wait a while to see about defects and, especially, to see if it seems more secure, as promised.

Starting in January, six months earlier than promised, Apple began switching the Mac to the very latest Intel processors-allowing higher speeds at lower temperatures compared with the previous IBM chips. Apple’s sleek, slim computers can run faster without bulking up for extra fans or heat-dispersion space.

That change, in turn, enabled Apple to stun the world in April when it announced a free utility that permits the Intel-based Macs to run Windows as a complement to the Mac operating system. With this new software, called Boot Camp, a Mac user can start up the computer either as a Mac or as a Windows machine. That means people who resisted switching to the Mac because they need to run one or two programs available only in Windows can now convert without hesitation.

America’s slimmest brand-name desktop, the dazzling white iMac, now runs faster with Intel chips yet retains its slender form. So does the thin, aluminum-clad 15-inch MacBook Pro laptop, a renamed version of the PowerBook. Like its Mac siblings, the tiny Mac Mini desktop now includes an Intel processor that incorporates two “cores,” the equivalent of two processors in one.

These Intel models are Macs through and through because they still run Apple’s Mac OS X operating system, Tiger — which is so far ahead of Windows that it already contains the key features Microsoft is promising for its much-delayed new version of Windows, Vista, due in January.

But now Macs can run Windows as well. Apple’s other models should be converted to Intel by late 2006. They include the 17-inch-screen version of the MacBook Pro laptop, the thinnest and lightest portable available; the entry-level MacBook laptop, formerly called the iBook; and the top-of-the-line PowerMac towers.

The new Mac lineup doesn’t include some categories of computers offered by the likes of Dell and HP. For instance, Apple lacks an ultralight laptop like the 2.5- to 3.5-pound Windows models from Sony and Toshiba. It doesn’t offer gaming-specific desktop towers or big laptops, like those from Alienware and Dell. And it doesn’t offer models with built-in TV tuners and TiVo-like digital video recorders, like those available from most PC makers.

Also, while Macs now use standard ports and connectors, which can accommodate most any printer or scanner, they omit a couple of common features found on many Windows machines. They’re not equipped with readers for camera memory cards, and the laptops don’t have built-in receivers for the new, high-speed cell phone data networks. You can add both of these features as external add-ons, at extra cost.

On the other hand, Macs running the OS X operating system aren’t susceptible to the many thousands of viruses and spyware programs that plague Windows computers; most Mac users don’t bother to run antivirus and antispyware software.

Then there’s price. Years ago Macs cost much more than Windows PCs. That’s no longer true. The iMac is priced comparably to identically equipped Windows machines, though no similar Windows desktop is as slim. Mac laptops can run a few hundred dollars more than Windows models, though comparable Windows laptops tend to be thicker and heavier, with lower-quality screens.

But Apple has no offerings cheaper than its $599 base Mac Mini, which lacks a keyboard, monitor and mouse. It doesn’t play in the market’s bargain-basement segment, where Dell, HP and others have stripped-down models that sell for under $400.

Here’s a quick guide to the fresh Mac models, and to their new ability to run Windows.

DESKTOPS

The iMac. This is Apple’s flagship product, its main consumer desktop and, in my view, the best available consumer desktop. At first glance, it looks like just a sexy, white, flat-panel monitor. But there’s a powerful computer packed behind the screen, which can also run Windows. The iMac also has a built-in video and still camera, plus a special operating mode called Front Row that allows you to play music, videos, DVDs and photo slide shows from across a room, using an included remote control. The iMac starts at $1,299, complete with a built-in flat-panel screen.

The Mac Mini. The smallest desktop computer I’ve ever tested, at 6.5 inches square and 2 inches high. Yet it’s a full-fledged Mac, complete with the latest Intel chips, that can also run Windows. Starting at $599, the Mini includes Front Row with remote control and is often bought for connecting to a TV as a media hub.

The Power Mac. This is a heavy-duty tower, favored by graphic artists, musical composers, video producers and scientists. It has yet to be upgraded to Intel processors, but currently can be ordered with as many as four IBM G5 cores. For most consumers, it’s overkill. It starts at $1,999, without a monitor.

LAPTOPS

The MacBook Pro. Apple’s top laptop, a renamed, reengineered version of its famous PowerBook that looks and works pretty much the same-only faster. Though currently available only with a 15-inch screen, for $1,999, a 17-inch model may roll out. It’s not clear if the 12-inch PowerBook, which remains on sale at $1,499, will also be replaced.

The main difference between MacBook Pros and PowerBooks? The former use the new Intel processors, have built-in video cameras, and feature Front Row and the remote control. Oh, and they can run Windows. The MacBook.This is the rumored name for a new entry-level Intel-based laptop that will soon replace the iBook. It should be much faster and also be able to run Windows. Meanwhile, the iBook remains on sale, starting at $999. It uses the older IBM G4 processor.

WINDOWS ON A MAC

The new Intel-based Macs can run Windows via Boot Camp, a free Apple utility that overcomes some subtle hardware differences between the Intel-based Macs and standard Windows computers.

After you run Boot Camp, you simply buy a copy of Windows XP (Apple won’t sell or support Windows) and install it as you would on any regular Windows computer. You must use a full, nonupgrade copy of Windows that includes the update Microsoft calls “SP2.” These versions of Windows cost $200 to $300.

Once Windows is installed on a Mac, each time you start up you can choose whether to run the Mac OS or Windows. Only one operating system can be used at a time, and each controls its own walled-off section of the Mac’s hard disk.

In my tests, an Intel iMac running Windows performed like a fast, normal Windows computer and ran every Windows program and hardware device I threw at it.

Apple isn’t abandoning its operating system or switching to Windows. It’s making it easy to run Windows on a Mac in hopes of tempting potential switchers who would use the Mac OS most of the time, but need to shift to Windows periodically to run programs that don’t have Mac equivalents.

Macs aren’t for everyone. But they are superior computers, and with the new Intel chips and Windows capability, they are more attractive than ever.

Over the past few years, however, those extremes have begun to merge. Because of the spread of broadband Internet connections and improvements in cameras, software and computer processors, consumer videoconferencing has begun to look much better. It’s still not as good as expensive corporate linkups, but it’s finally usable.

As this affordable video technology has spread, online services offering video chatting have proliferated. Yahoo, AOL, MSN and Apple all offer videoconferencing. So do a host of less-well-known services, such as Paltalk, IVE and Skype. All are free or have free entry-level plans, but they still cost money to use. For one thing, you’ll need a broadband connection — on both sides of the conversation — to get the most out of them. And, of course, you’ll need a decent camera, with either a built-in or separate microphone.

I expect built-in cameras to become common in all but budget PCs in the next few years, but for now, they’re relatively rare — Sony has been building them into a few models for years, Apple included built-in cameras in its new iMac desktop and MacBook Pro laptop models, and some Hewlett-Packard laptops feature them as well. But most users will have to buy a camera. The biggest brand in add-ons is Logitech, and the best Logitech model I’ve seen is the Quickam Fusion, which sells for around $85 and works only on Windows PCs. The best bet for Mac users is an even better but costlier camera, the $150 iSight from Apple.

Both cameras attach to the top edge of your screen and deliver up to 30 frames of video a second, which is full motion to the human eye. Both include decent built-in mikes. And both also function as still cameras for snapshots. The Logitech has a higher resolution, 1.3 megapixels, while the Apple takes still pictures of under 1 megapixel.

One advantage of the Apple iSight, not surprisingly, is that it’s better integrated into the computer. No software need be installed; you just mount it atop the screen with an included clip or magnetic base, plug it into a FireWire port, and voil?†. In fact, it automatically launches Apple’s built-in videoconferencing program, iChat AV.

Like most Windows peripherals, the Logitech camera is a little trickier to hook up, but not by much. It does require a software installation. The camera plugs into any open USB port, though it needs a newer USB 2.0 connection for full frame rate.

Both cameras have a lens-blocking privacy mode, which allows you to avoid being seen during a video call or conference. Only your voice will be heard. But Logitech goes further — it includes an amusing software feature called Video Effects that permits you to disguise your appearance. You can add animated glasses, mustache, nose, hat and other features to your face. Or you can replace your image entirely with animated avatars of cartoon people and animals, including a dinosaur, a space alien, a cat, a dog or a unicorn. And while these visual effects aren’t exactly Hollywood quality, they do move with you as you speak, mimicking some of your visual expressions, like winking or raised eyebrows, and no special software or video service is needed at the other end of the conversation for your friends to see the special effects.

Once you have your camera/mike combination in place, you’re ready to roll. All you need do is pick your service, find some friends with a camera and mike, and you can start videoconferencing.

In tacit acknowledgment of IE’s shortcomings, Microsoft is currently mounting a crash effort to update the browser with something called Internet Explorer 7.

But it’s not ready yet. In the meantime, there are a handful of alternative browsers you can use every day instead of IE, on both Windows PCs and Macs — all of them superior to the current version of IE.

One caveat: Some Web sites, especially in the financial industry, have been constructed using proprietary features unique to Internet Explorer. Other browsers mainly stick to industry-standard features, meaning they can’t reproduce every component of these IE-oriented sites. It’s as if NBC decided to produce programming that would work properly only on, say, Sony TV sets. So the bottom line is this: If you are constantly using one of these nonstandard sites, you should continue using Internet Explorer, or at least keep it around for backup.

The best-known alternative to IE is Firefox, made by nonprofit Mozilla. Firefox is issued in nearly identical versions for Windows, Macintosh and the techie-oriented Linux operating system. By contrast, IE runs only on Windows. (Microsoft once made a Mac version of IE, but has discontinued it.) Another excellent choice is Safari, the browser by Apple that comes on every Mac, but has no versions for Windows or Linux. Opera, which comes in Windows, Mac and Linux versions, is also a fine alternative. One more option worth considering is the Windows-only Netscape browser.

These four options share two major characteristics. First, they’re generally more secure than IE. Theoretically, any browser can be attacked and used as a conduit for malicious software that can hobble your computer. Firefox, for example, has been forced to close numerous potential security holes. But IE is the least secure, for several reasons: It was designed in an era when security was less of a concern. Its very ubiquity makes it the favorite target of online criminals. And it uses a Microsoft-only technology called ActiveX that helps Web sites work better, but also allows malicious software to control aspects of the computer. The browsers mentioned above don’t use ActiveX, which is one reason they’re more secure, but it also helps account for their difficulty in handling some IE-oriented Web sites.

The second thing these alternatives have in common is tabbed browsing — the most important advance in browsers in years. This feature lets you open multiple Web sites simultaneously in the same window. Only one page is visible at a time, but the others are live and open behind it. Each is marked by a tab, like those found on paper file folders. To switch from the page you’re viewing to another, you click on a tab. You can also close any page without affecting the others, and if you follow a link on a tabbed page, it usually opens within the same tab. The real power of tabbed browsing comes in when you collect bookmarks (what IE calls “Favorites”) into folders. You can then click just once to open all the bookmarks in a given folder, each under its own tab. For instance, I have roughly 20 technology bookmarks in a folder, and I like to open them all at once in Firefox or Safari, the two browsers I use the most.

Why would you want to use a tabbed browser? First, it saves time. Second, it allows you to easily scan and compare related Web sites. Third, you can open a link in a new tab while keeping the original page open so you can easily return to it. All in all, I can’t imagine going back to Internet Explorer after using a tabbed browser. IE does allow you to open multiple Web pages, but only one at a time and in separate windows, which clog up your desktop and the Windows taskbar. That’s why even Microsoft recognizes the superiority of tabbed browsing and is building it into IE 7. (Note: Microsoft’s MSN online service currently offers an add-on that can bolt a simple version of tabbed browsing onto the current version of IE.)

Another feature the alternatives share, but IE lacks, is a built-in search box that appears right in the toolbar of the browser. This lets you perform a search without using an add-on toolbar or navigating to the home page of the search service.

If all the alternative browsers feature tabbed browsing, built-in search boxes and better security than IE, what are their pluses and minuses? Here’s a quick rundown of the three frontrunners.

– Firefox. This most popular alternative to IE is “open source,” meaning it’s open to improvement by any programmer anywhere. Thus, thousands of add-on features are available by installing free small software modules called “extensions,” which let you do things like download all links on a page with a single click or automatically fill out online forms; there’s even one that lets you view a Web page in IE. Firefox also offers a two-click method for clearing your browsing history and other evidence of where you’ve been online. Finally, its built-in search can be customized to use any popular search engine. That said, Firefox does have some rough edges. Closing tabs with the mouse is awkward the way it’s set up, and the command for viewing your history is illogically placed on the “Go” menu.

– Safari. This Apple browser includes an excellent built-in reader for so-called “news feeds” — summaries of blogs and news sites. It has a “private browsing” mode, which leaves no trace of where you’ve been online, and offers parental controls. It also does a great job of e-mailing entire Web pages, and it can save pages as PDF files, viewable on any computer. But Safari works exclusively on Macs, and its search box works only with Google.

– Opera. This long-established browser is loaded with features, including an excellent zooming capability, and if you have lots of tabs open, Opera can display them on multiple lines so you can more easily read their titles. But while Opera likes to claim it’s “the Fastest Browser on Earth,” in my tests it hasn’t proved itself swifter than Firefox.

You could download any one of these browsers for free today and be on your way to a better Web experience. Or you could wait for IE 7, which is likely to appear in the fall. It promises tabbed browsing, a built-in search box and a bunch of security improvements-that is, everything its rivals already offer.

But what about the other major function of a laptop-viewing and editing Microsoft Office documents? Well, it turns out you can do that, too, on these devices, at least to a point. Currently, you can read Word, Excel and PowerPoint files, as well as Adobe PDF files, on certain handhelds; you can even edit them and synchronize the changes back to a PC.

Here’s a look at how that’s possible, on the three most popular types of smart phones and PDAs in the U.S.: those powered by the Palm operating system, those powered by the Windows Mobile operating system (formerly known as Pocket PC), and the BlackBerry, which uses both hardware and software from RIM.

First, make sure your device has lots of storage capacity, either in internal memory or on a removable memory card, if your device can accept them. (The Treo, the iPAQ and most other devices running Windows Mobile software can; BlackBerry models cannot.) You will need that room to store your Office documents.

Second, I strongly advise those wanting to edit documents to buy a phone or PDA with a full keyboard, rather than one that relies solely on handwriting recognition or a phone keypad. The software for viewing and editing documents does work on devices without a keyboard, but unless you just want to read documents, the process is painful on these models.

You might think that the devices running Windows Mobile software would do the best job of handling Microsoft Office documents because both systems are made by Microsoft. Or you might imagine the BlackBerry was tops at this task because it is bought mostly by corporate computer departments, where Microsoft Office is the application software of choice. But in fact, the best devices for viewing and editing Office documents are those using the Palm operating system, such as the Palm Treo 650. That’s because of a helpful third-party program, Documents to Go, from DataViz, which is packaged with many Palm devices, including the Treo.

Next best are the Microsoft-powered phones and hand-helds, which come with built-in mobile versions of Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Bringing up the rear is the BlackBerry, which can display Word, Excel and PowerPoint files when sent as e-mail attachments, but doesn’t let you edit or synchronize them with a PC.

Palm OS devices. The best smart phone on the market is the Treo 650, produced by Palm and powered by the Palm operating system, which is made by a separate company called PalmSource. While the Palm software lacks the built-in capability to read or edit Office documents, the Treo comes bundled with Documents to Go, which can import and open Microsoft files in their native formats without downsizing them to some special “pocket” version. It also allows you to edit, or even create, these types of documents and synchronize your changes with versions on your PC.

You can get the documents into your Treo or other Palm device either by receiving them as e-mail attachments or via synchronization with your PC. Documents to Go includes a computer program that performs this document synchronization; I use it often on my Treo 650. It displays documents in their actual fonts, including colors and attributes like underlining, bold and italics. Indents and spacing are also preserved. The Treo 650 doesn’t support different font sizes, and it doesn’t include a spell checker. Documents can be opened from, or stored to, either the device’s internal memory or a memory card. You can also zoom the screen to show more or less of the document, especially important with spreadsheets, which often sprawl across the page and can be hard to read when resized to fit entirely on the small screen. PowerPoint files can be edited and synchronized only if you are using a Windows PC, though they can be viewed if you are using a Macintosh.

In my tests over the years, Documents to Go performed flawlessly, better than the built-in mobile Office programs on Windows-powered handhelds. In addition to being bundled with the Treo and some other Palm devices, Documents to Go is available for independent purchase, in several versions, for $30 to $90, depending on features. There are also versions for smart phones that use the Symbian operating system, including models from Nokia and Sony Ericsson. You can find information and purchase Documents to Go at www.dataviz.com [http://www.dataviz.com].

Windows Mobile devices. There are two kinds of devices powered by Microsoft’s Windows Mobile software. Some are confusingly named “smart phones,” though they generally lack keyboards and some key software capabilities, including the ability to edit Office documents. Others are full-featured handhelds, including some with keyboards, such as several of HP’s iPAQ models, the new Samsung i730 phone and the very latest and greatest Windows Mobile device, the Treo 700w.

The new Treo is the first device built by Palm to eschew the Palm operating system for Windows software. While it’s mainly aimed at the corporate market and, in my view, isn’t as good as the Treo 650, the 700w is probably the best Windows Mobile device. On the new Treo and others, you can read, edit and create Word and Excel files, and synchronize them with your PC. You can view PowerPoint files, but not edit or create them.

As with the Treo 650, you can get these documents into your device either by receiving them as email attachments or by copying them from a PC.

While the mobile Office programs on the Windows devices work okay, they aren’t quite as good as Documents to Go, in my experience. For instance, in a recent test I opened a simple Word document on two Treosa 650 running the Palm OS and Documents to Go, and a 700w running Windows Mobile and its built-in Office Mobile programs. Documents to Go opened the program perfectly in its Times New Roman font and sized it so the words were distinct, and the formatting was preserved. The Word Mobile program in Windows Mobile displayed the document in a different font and in a size that screwed up the formatting. And while Documents to Go allows you to create and edit PowerPoint files, Windows Mobile doesn’t.

BlackBerry. The BlackBerry can view Office documents when received as e-mail attachments, but the function is pretty primitive. You can’t directly import documents or synchronize them with a computer. And you can’t create or edit them, even though you have a full keyboard at your disposal.

There is a third-party program for the BlackBerry that claims to allow editing, creating and synchronizing of Word and Excel documents, but not PowerPoint files. It’s called eOffice, made by a company called DynoPlex, and it’s available in versions ranging from $120 to $200 at www.dynoplex.com [http://www.dynoplex.com].

I wouldn’t want to write a long report on a Treo. But in a pinch, I could have written this column on one. And editing a document like this is a breeze. So you really can leave that laptop at home, at least some of the time.

This year, however, Microsoft will up the ante with a new version of Windows called Vista. Due in the fall, in time for holiday computer shopping, Vista is an effort to make Windows truly secure from the ground up, while also making it easier to use and pretty enough to rival Apple’s current version of OS X, Tiger. (Apple is planning yet another new edition, called Leopard, due around the same time.)

Vista will be the most dramatic upgrade to Windows in more than a decade. But there will be a price for Vista’s improvements — most current PCs won’t be able to take advantage of all its features. To get full use out of the new system, you will very likely need to upgrade or replace your current computer. Vista will adapt to older or less powerful machines by disabling some of its features, but that’s likely to be unsatisfying for many users. Also, as of this writing, Microsoft is planning to sell Vista in as many as seven different configurations for different types of users. That will be not only confusing, but if you select the more capable configurations, probably expensive, too. (Microsoft hasn’t released pricing yet.)

So here’s a preliminary look at Vista’s major new features, as well as some guidance on hardware. Microsoft’s mantra for Vista is “Confident, Clear and Connected.” By “Confident,” the company means that it promises to clean up the security mess that has been the main headache for users of Windows. Microsoft says Vista will be much harder to hack into, and much less prone to viruses and spyware, than today’s Windows. For instance, Vista users will be asked for their user name and password anytime software is being installed –designed to prevent the surreptitious software installations that plant spy-ware on a PC. And Vista will have built-in systemwide parental controls, so you can limit what your child can see and do on the computer. Both features are already built into Apple’s Tiger and work well, so if they are executed properly on Vista, they should be a boon.

By “Clear,” Microsoft is referring to new ways of finding and visualizing your files. Vista will have rapid, modern, built-in desktop searching. And it will have something called “virtual folders” that capture all files meeting certain criteria you can set, no matter where you store them. For instance, you could set up a virtual folder to show all files and e-mails mentioning a certain person or topic. Again, both features are already in Apple’s operating system, where they have proved popular. Some editions of Vista will also incorporate the features of today’s Windows Media Center edition, including the ability to play and record TV programs.

The “Connected” promise from Microsoft includes a centralized synchronization feature, like the one already present on the Mac, that can keep data in sync on cell phones and PDAs. Vista will also look dramatically better — and more like Mac software — with 3D icons, transparent windows and tiny previews of file contents.

So what kind of hardware will you need for all this? Well, Vista won’t work well with the processors sold in today’s budget PCs. I suggest you consider a new computer with at least a midrange processor, and preferably a so-called dual-core processor, which packs two brains into its innards, though a single-core model will do. You might even look for a processor capable of handling future software called “64-bit,” though it’s not absolutely necessary.

Memory will also be crucial for Vista. I expect Microsoft to recommend 512 megabytes, but since the company tends to understate memory requirements, I suggest a full gigabyte, far more than what’s on the average PC today. You’ll also need a bigger hard disk, especially if you want to use the new TV-recording capabilities that will be built into some editions of Vista. I suggest at least 160 gigabytes. Luckily, large hard disks are now pretty inexpensive.

Likewise, video capability will be key to utilizing Vista’s new visual effects. Today’s PCs often use integrated graphics chips, which are pretty basic and drain memory. That won’t cut it for Vista, at least until integrated graphics chips are beefed up next fall. If you seek a Vista-capable machine before then, look for one with a separate graphics card with its own dedicated memory, preferably 128 megabytes, though 64 will do.

Vista will boost DVD recording — it will support the new, high-definition DVDs currently in development and make it easier to burn DVDs for both multimedia and file backup. You’ll need a high-end DVD-recording drive to reap the rewards.

I can’t say how good Vista will be until I test and review the final, or near final, product, in late summer. But from the demos I’ve seen, Vista has great promise — if you have the right hardware.

But as slick as it is, Apple’s latest baby isn’t the only path to portable digital video available to consumers. Others got there first. All, including the new iPod, suffer from a dearth of legal downloadable content, but that has begun to change as Hollywood and the television networks seem willing, suddenly, to sell individual episodes of television series.

Here’s a quick guide to some leading portable video devices.

Old reliables: All the new video gadgets should be measured against portable DVD players and laptops with DVD drives. The portable players combine relatively large screens with thin, light designs and low prices. The laptops are larger and pricier, but their advantage is that many people carry them anyway for other purposes. And both have a vast library of cheap content to draw from: DVDs. The downside is that you have to lug along a selection of disks.

Portable media centers: These are gadgets that are smaller than a laptop, but larger than an iPod. They use Microsoft software that mimics the nice user interface in its Media Center version of Windows. Leading examples are the Samsung Yepp PMC and the Creative Zen PMC, both of which cost $500, which is more than even the priciest video iPod. They have larger screens than the iPod, but smaller storage capacity. Little legally downloadable content is available for the PMCs, but users can transfer to them TV programs they have recorded on high-end Media Center PCs.

Sony: The new PSP, or PlayStation Portable, from Sony, has a large, bright screen that does a great job showing videos, even though it is primarily a game machine. This slick, black $250 gadget is handsome, but unlike the iPod, it’s too large to carry in a pocket. Also, getting video into the PSP is clumsy and expensive, mainly because it lacks either a hard disk or a standard DVD drive. You have to buy movies on special, small copy-protected disks. And if you want to transfer videos from a computer, you have to buy a high-capacity memory stick.

Archos: This small company has been a pioneer in handheld video and makes several models, in a wide variety of sizes and capacities, that cost from $500 to $800. In general, Archos buyers have been early-adopter techies and videophiles willing to do what it took to collect video clips and move them onto the Archos gadgets. But the company is now going mainstream, through a deal with EchoStar, the satellite TV firm. EchoStar will sell three Archos models, rebranded as PocketDISH players, that can copy and play back TV shows recorded by EchoStar set-top boxes with digital video recorders inside. The PocketDISH players range from $300 to $600.

iRiver: The Korean maker of portable music players has just introduced a tiny video player, smaller but thicker than the video iPod, called the U10. It’s a handsome gadget with a clever user interface: You select functions by pushing on the edges of the screen. But it has a meager storage capacity, only a gigabyte, in a top-of-the-line model that costs $250, just $50 less than a video iPod with a larger screen and 30 times the storage.

Apple: The video iPod, which Apple calls simply the iPod, comes in two models: a $299 version with 30 gigabytes of storage and a $399 model with 60 gigabytes. Like all iPods, it is beautiful, easy to use, and it’s thinner and lighter than the prior generation. Short videos look great on its screen. Apple is selling episodes of two hit TV shows, Desperate Housewives and Lost, for $1.99 each. Again, content for all these gadgets is sparse today. But as the availability of legal video downloads grows, so will the rationale for buying a portable video player.

The daunting security problems that have plagued Windows have also prompted many of its users to take a serious look at the Mac. This trend has been further reinforced by the “iPod halo effect,” in which Windows users who own and love Apple’s iPod music players are willing to consider the company’s other products. As a result, Mac sales, while still relatively small, have been growing much faster than overall personal computer sales.

Are you among the PC majority considering a switch to the Mac? Then you probably have some important questions.

How do Macs compare in quality with Windows PCs?

I believe that, at the moment, Apple makes the best computers, and the best operating system, for mainstream consumers doing typical tasks — e-mail, Web surfing, office — productivity functions such as word processing and presentations, photo organizing and editing, playing and collecting music, and editing home video.

Of all the major computer makers, Apple is the most focused on consumers and small businesses. Most make the bulk of their money, and take most of their cues, from the information-technology departments of large corporations.

Apple’s iMac G5 consumer desktop is, in my opinion, the single best home computer on the market. Its PowerBook laptops are among the top portables.

Do Macs run Windows and Windows software?

No: Out of the box, Macintosh computers run only Apple’s own operating system, called OS X, and software written by Apple and other companies that is designed to run on OS X.

You can rig a Mac to run Windows and Windows programs by installing a special, $250 Microsoft program called Virtual PC, which creates a virtual Windows computer inside the Mac. But I don’t recommend this for frequent use, because the faux Windows computer it creates is relatively slow and is susceptible to the same viruses and spyware as a real Windows machine.

How does Mac software compare with Windows?

The Mac’s OS X operating system, the latest version of which is called Tiger, is far better than Microsoft’s aging Windows XP and already boasts many of the key features Microsoft plans to include in its 2006 version of Windows, called Vista. And the Mac comes with an excellent suite of free software that’s generally superior to comparable Windows programs that cost extra.

Out of the box, the Mac has better photo, music, video and DVD — creation software than any Windows computer I’ve seen. It has a better free email program and Web browser than Windows does, a better free word processor and much better search capabilities.

About the only software a typical consumer would have to buy for a new Mac is the Mac edition of Microsoft Office. It includes versions of Word, Excel and PowerPoint that are very similar to their Windows counterparts, and a program called Entourage that is different from Microsoft Outlook but performs the same functions.

Are Macs more secure than Windows PCs?

Yes. Since the OS X operating system came out in 2001, there has never been a report of a successful virus for it — that is, a virus that has infected numerous computers, and spread from computer to computer, outside of a lab. And there is little or no known spyware for the Mac. By contrast, there are tens of thousands of viruses for Windows and untold numbers of spyware programs. Just as regular Windows programs can’t run natively on a Mac, none of these malicious Windows-specific programs can run on a Mac either.

The Mac isn’t invulnerable, but it has better built-in security than Windows, and such a small market share that virus and spyware writers haven’t targeted it yet. As a result, most Mac users have been able to dispense with running the morass of security software that Windows users must employ.

Are Mac files compatible with Windows files?

Yes. Unlike older models, the current Macs have been specifically designed for compatibility with Windows PCs. The Mac OS and software can handle, without translation or conversion, all of the common types of files you use on a Windows PC. You can copy to a Mac all your pictures, MP3 music files, text files and Adobe PDF files, and they will open right up in Mac programs. There are also free Mac versions of the Real Player and Windows Media Player, and of Adobe Reader.

Microsoft Word files also can be opened, edited and created in Apple’s free, built-in text editor. And if you buy Microsoft Office for the Mac, all Office files, including Word files, Excel files and PowerPoint files, can be opened, edited and created on the Mac. Office files created on the Mac can be opened and edited in Windows Office, and vice versa.

Some specialized files created by particular programs, like database files or financial files, won’t be usable. For instance, the Mac version of Quicken is quite different from the Windows version and uses a different file format.

For occasional use of these programs, you can install Virtual PC.

In addition, nearly all keyboards, mice, monitors and printers made for Windows computers can be used with a Mac, if they connect via the industry-standard USB or FireWire ports. Macs can also share networks with Windows PCs and even look into the hard disks of Windows computers, and vice versa.

Is there anyone who shouldn’t consider a Mac?

Yes. Serious game players should stick with Windows PCs, which are much better game platforms and can run many more game titles. People who use specialized software or custom corporate software for which there isn’t a Mac equivalent should stick with Windows. While the Mac has rich offerings in mainstream software categories, it has only a fraction of the niche software and specialized business software that Windows does.

Also, you should stick with Windows if your home computer choices are dictated by your company’s IT department and the IT department is ignorant of or hostile to the Mac, as so many are. Although modern Macs are designed to access corporate Windows networks, and many do, if your IT department won’t help you with the transition, it’s not worth the headache to switch to the Mac.

Ten years ago, when Apple was stagnant and its products troubled, I recommended that consumers shun the Mac. If Apple’s quality and innovation slip, I might revert to that position. But for now, the Mac is the best computer, with the best operating system and the fewest security problems, for average consumers.

But not anymore. Gradually, and with relatively little fanfare, Verizon Wireless has deployed a nationwide cellular data network in the United States that blows away the fastest widely deployed networks in Europe, the so-called 3G networks that have been rolled out there to huge publicity. And Sprint is starting its own rollout of a similar speedy network based on the same technology Verizon uses.

That technology is called EV-DO, for Evolution-Data Only, or Evolution-Data Optimized. It is the first wireless technology deployed over a wide area that matches the speed of home broadband — at least the slower reaches of that wired service.

Unlike the most common form of wireless broadband, Wi-Fi, the new EV-DO service doesn’t rely on hot spots. It’s available all over a metro area, wherever there is cell phone service — even in a moving car.

Verizon has been rolling out the new service, city by city, over the past year or so, and it is now available in 61 major metropolitan areas and 65 airports across the country, according to the company. Because it’s based on a technology called CDMA, developed by the U.S. company Qualcomm and not widely used in Europe, EV-DO has given the U.S. an edge, even if only for a while.

You can get the service in two ways. First, you can buy a data-enabled smart phone, like the $600 Samsung SCH-i730, which can handle e-mail, instant messaging and Web access over EV-DO. Or you can buy a wireless EV-DO modem card for your laptop, like the $170 Kyocera KPC650, which allows all your Internet-oriented PC software to access the Web via EV-DO.

There are also different rates. Verizon has been charging $80 a month for an unlimited EV-DO data plan. But recently, it cut that price to $50 a month for people who already have a Verizon voice calling plan.

For those with mainstream phones that are mainly designed for voice calling but are EV-DO capable, Verizon offers a $15-a-month plan that mostly covers viewing short video clips on an EV-DO service called V Cast, but also offers unlimited, albeit much clumsier, Internet access.

How fast is EV-DO? Verizon is predicting average speeds of between 400 and 700 kilobits per second. That’s up to 10 times its previous fastest data speed, on an older network called 1X. In my tests, Verizon’s promise proved realistic, and I often topped 700 kbps.

To put those speeds in perspective, many wired DSL plans in American homes operate at speeds of 700 kbps or less, so EV-DO is in the same ballpark.

There are faster wired broadband connections available, from both DSL and cable modem providers. Many homes with cable modems have service that runs at 3 megabits a second, or four times faster than EV-DO. And some Wi-Fi hot spots may operate at faster speeds as well, though that depends a lot on how they are set up. But EV-DO is clearly a broadband service, at least by the American definition of the word “broadband.” (In Asia, they laugh at our definition. They think of broadband as being 20 to 50 megabits per second.)

So how does it compare with similar services in Europe? European cell phone companies offer better phones, better coverage, and better features and options, in general, than do their American counterparts. But strictly measured on data speed in widely employed networks, they’ve lost their edge. Their high-speed wireless 3G technology peaks at 384 kbps, which is less than the minimum speeds Verizon is promising. And such peaks in any system are rare outside the lab. (EV-DO peaks at 2.4 megabits a second.) Actual throughput with European 3G networks averages 250 to 300 kilobits a second.

In my tests of EV-DO with a laptop card, I averaged 585 kbps. And with the Samsung EV-DO phone, I was able to achieve EV-DO speeds of up to 534 kilobits per second.

The U.S. edge won’t last forever. New generations of the technology used in Europe, to be rolled out in the next few years, will top EV-DO. But there are faster successors in the EV-DO line of technology as well, so Verizon (and Sprint, America’s other big CDMA carrier) have their own future weapons. It’s a battle that should continue, as rival technologies steal the lead back and forth in their quest for dominance.

How does EV-DO compare with Wi-Fi? I love Wi-Fi to death and use it in my home and office, at airports and coffee shops. Even if you have an EV-DO modem in your laptop, I recommend having Wi-Fi as well, especially since it can be faster, and it is treated by Windows and the Mac operating system as a network. EV-DO isn’t quite as seamless on laptops: It gets treated like a really fast dial-up modem call, and the required software is a bit clunky.

But Wi-Fi is limited to places with hot spots or transmitters, at least until citywide deployments become a reality. And using it on the road often means exorbitant short-term fees to a variety of network operators, fees that could each top the $50 a month Verizon is charging its voice plan customers for unlimited use of EV-DO.

By contrast, with EV-DO, you pay one fee to one carrier and can use it anywhere in a city. In my tests, I was able to connect in restaurants, parking lots and even moving cars. And unlike Wi-Fi, with EV-DO, if you leave a coverage area, you don’t get cut off. Verizon merely slows down your connection to the pace of the 1X network.

EV-DO may even find a place in the home, replacing a wired DSL line. If all you use are laptops with EV-DO cards and your home is covered by EV-DO service, then you have all you need for broadband at home. And several companies are working on home wireless base stations that would work with an EV-DO laptop card.

The downsides of using EV-DO at home are that it’s much costlier than wired DSL or cable service, which typically runs $15 to $45 a month, and slower than any wired broadband but the slowest DSL plans. In fact, I believe one reason Verizon has priced it relatively high compared with wired broadband is to discourage home use, which might overload its network.

But for frequent travelers who rely heavily on EV-DO on the road, it may make better sense to just use it at home instead of buying wired broadband service as well, unless of course you have family members who do most of their surfing at home.

So, true, unbounded wireless broadband has arrived in the U.S., if you live in the right place and can afford it. Now you don’t have to take guff from Europeans anymore — at least about wireless networks.

a Web site at low cost, some analysts compared the moment to the invention of the printing press. Millions of Web sites were started, but only a small percentage attracted a significant audience. Now a second eruption of Web publishing by amateurs is under way. And this time, more people are reading and even subscribing to sites published by folks who’ve never seen the inside of the New York Times, CBS or any other media firm.

This latest phenomenon is built on a foundation of three new online-publishing mechanisms that didn’t exist the last time around: blogs, podcasts and RSS feeds. Here’s a brief primer that explains them.

Blog. A contraction of the term “Web log,” the word describes a personal Web diary, organized by date, from the latest to the earliest. Bloggers add entries, called “posts,” to their sites frequently. Posts typically consist of text and photos, with occasional links to audio and video clips. Some blogs are made up primarily of links to stories or commentaries around the Web. Others feature the author’s writing, supplemented with links to relevant material elsewhere.

High-profile blogs, like the sarcastic, raunchy political site Wonkette.com, compete directly with the mainstream media, known as the “MSM” in the blogging world (which refers to itself as “the Blogosphere”). But the vast majority of blogs are written for narrower audiences: family, friends, fellow hobbyists, or fellow fans of favorite TV shows, pop stars and sports teams. A key feature of most blogs is the comments readers are encouraged to post, discussing or debating entries.

You can find blogs by checking blog search and listing sites, such as Feedster.com, Bloglines.com and Technorati.com. Anyone can quickly create a blog with little or no technical knowledge by using templates at free blogging services including Blogger.com and MSN Spaces (spaces.msn.com).

RSS. In order to avoid the obscurity into which the first round of amateur Web sites fell, bloggers have invented a way to distribute their latest entries: RSS, or Really Simple Syndication. It’s a technology that allows browsers or other software to display a constantly updated “feed” of headlines and summaries of blog entries. The way it works is too technical to get into here, but basically, special code inserted in a blog’s innards gets queried by an RSS reader program, which pulls headlines and summaries.

With the right software, a user can subscribe to the feed of a blog, or of a mainstream news site, and receive headlines as they appear. Just click on the headline to read the full entry. All the modern Web browsers, including Firefox and Apple’s Safari, can display these feeds. The most common browser, Microsoft’s aging Internet Explorer, cannot, although a new version due soon will be able to do so.

Podcasts. The newest personal publishing technology is the podcast, essentially an audio blog or personal radio show that can be played on a computer or downloaded to a portable device like an iPod (hence the name). Podcasts range from music programs to commentaries on politics, sports, technology, sex.

Podcasts are harder to create than blogs because you have to record them and then find a Web service where they can be published. Finding and subscribing to podcasts is much simpler because Apple has opened its popular iTunes Music store, on both Windows and Mac, to podcasters. They can register podcasts with iTunes, then iTunes users can download them just like songs, but free of charge. Also, iTunes allows users to subscribe to podcasts, so fresh episodes appear in your iTunes cache as they are created.

So get yourself some news-reader software and a copy of iTunes, and start sampling blogs and podcasts. Then do one of your own. Your public awaits.

There are three main reasons for the success of iTunes. First, it is tightly tied to the iPod, Apple’s wildly popular portable music player. The only legal downloads of major record label songs that the iPod can play are those sold by iTunes. Second, it is well-designed, works identically on the Macintosh and Windows PCs, and is easy to use. Third, its restrictions on the use of downloads are comparatively liberal: You can copy each purchased song to up to five computers and to an unlimited number of iPods and burned CDs.

For these reasons, nobody else has been able to gain any traction in the legal market by copying Apple’s model, and that includes companies as formidable as Microsoft, Sony and Wal-Mart.

So Apple’s music competitors are trying something else: a whole different model for distributing music legally. Led by the reincarnated (legal) version of Napster, by RealNetwork’s Rhapsody service and by Yahoo’s new music service, these companies are hoping to win by renting music to consumers rather than selling it to them.

In the download model championed by Apple, the music service functions like a physical record store. You choose a track, pay 99 cents, and you own it. As long as you abide by the restrictions, which are designed to thwart mass copying by pirates, the song will play anywhere you want to hear it forever, with no further payments required.

However, those 99-cent downloads can mount up fast. If you tried to fill up even the lowest-capacity full-size iPod-which holds 5,000 songs-with tracks purchased from iTunes, it would cost you nearly $5,000. (Granted, most people start with music they already own when loading a new iPod.)

By contrast, the rental services work on a subscription model. You pay, in most cases, $180 a year, or $15 a month, for the right to download as many songs as you want for use on computers and portable players. And the newest rental contender, Yahoo, has slashed those fees to $60 a year, the equivalent of just $5 a month. That means you could fill up a 5,000-song portable player for just $60 a year.

This rental model has attracted a solid audience, but it is nowhere near as popular as iTunes — not even close. That may be because the rental model is far more complicated and restrictive than iTunes, and has several big downsides.

The biggest problem with renting is that if you stop paying your subscription, even for one month, all the songs you’ve ever downloaded — going back years — will become inert and unplayable. Rental song files are rigged with computer code that requires a monthly digital confirmation the renter is continuing to pay. Without that, the song files die.

An iTunes user could pay $500 to acquire 500 individual songs (buying whole albums is somewhat cheaper) over two years, and those songs are always hers and will always play. By contrast, a Yahoo user might download 500 rental songs over two years for just $120 in subscription fees, but the songs will become unplayable unless she pays hundreds or thousands more in subscription fees over many years, even if the fees rise.

Also, the rules for rental songs are more restrictive than for owned downloads such as Apple offers. At Yahoo, for example, you can store each song on only three computers, versus Apple’s five. And you can install each song on only two portable devices, versus an unlimited number at Apple.

Oh, and you can’t burn rental songs to a CD. To get a nonexpiring, CD-burnable, iTunes-type song from a rental service, you have to pony up 79 cents a track over and above your monthly or annual subscription fee.

Furthermore, rental services are far more complicated than iTunes to operate. At the Apple service, every song is a 99-cent download you can own, but at rental services, there are different kinds of songs. Some can be both rented and purchased (for that extra 79 cents each); others can be either rented or bought outright, but not both. Some songs can only be “streamed” — that is, they can be played directly from the Internet, but not downloaded, even on a rental basis. And some can be rented, but not streamed. You get the picture.

Not only do the rental services feature different kinds of songs, but they feature different kinds of customers, with different privileges depending on how much they pay per month or per year. Some rental plans allow you only to stream songs. Others let you download, but only to store the songs on computers, not portable players. The costliest plans — $15 a month at most services, $5 at Yahoo — allow you to stream, download and store the music on both computers and portable players.

Another huge downside of the rental services is that the songs they rent — and even the ones they sell outright for the extra 79 cents — cannot be played on the world’s best and most popular portable player: Apple’s iPod. That’s because the rental-service songs are encoded in a format owned by Microsoft, Apple’s rival, and Microsoft software is required to play them on a portable player. Apple won’t build the necessary Microsoft compatibility into the iPod.

So rental users are stuck with inferior portable players that don’t sell well and thus don’t attract the huge number of accessories available for the iPod. Apple estimates the iPod has about a 75 percent share of the total U.S. portable player market, with the next-highest brand at just 5 percent. There are over 500 accessories sold for the iPod, such as customized car mounts and leather cases, and just a few for other players.

Given all that, why would anyone use a rental service? Well, the rental model is better for people interested in sampling a wide range of music without a large out-of-pocket expense. That might make it attractive to curious but cash-poor students, for example. The rental services also have many more “community” features than iTunes does, features that allow friends and families to share music recommendations, see what others are listening to and discuss music. So they may be better for people who view music as a social activity.

But for most people, it’s no contest: Right now iTunes and the iPod are the better choice in digital music.

Back in 2001, the iPod was the first widely sold product to use one of these little hard disks. With a diameter of just under 2 inches, it’s smaller than the hard drives used in most laptops, yet it can hold up to 60 gigabytes of data, or around 15,000 songs. The midsize iPod Mini uses an even smaller version, albeit with decreased capacity. It’s just an inch in diameter but holds up to 6 gigabytes of data, enough for around 1,500 songs. (The lowend iPod Shuffle doesn’t use a hard disk, and it holds relatively few songs in its memory chips.)

But now these little hard disks are migrating to other devices — including cellphones and personal digital assistants — made by other companies, giving these gadgets some of the iPod’s magical combination of diminutive size and expansive capacity. And since these devices can play music, along with the various other functions they perform, they could soon become a challenge to the iPod.

For example, two big cell phone makers, Samsung and Nokia, have designed music-playing phones with small internal hard disks that hold a few gigabytes of data. Samsung’s hard-disk model is sold so far only in Korea, but could make it to the U.S. by the end of this year. Nokia’s will be rolled out late this year, probably first in Europe.

By late 2006, I expect Americans to have numerous choices in hard-disk cell phones.

The first PDA with a hard disk to be offered in the U.S. came out in May. It’s the $499 PalmOne Life-Drive. PalmOne sells the LifeDrive — with its large color screen and 4GB hard disk — as a portable way to store and view or play back music, videos, photos and office documents. It also features the usual Palm calendar, contact and notes functions, and with its Wi-Fi and Bluetooth wireless networking, it can surf the Web and send and receive e-mail.

The LifeDrive is bulky — much larger and heavier than an iPod Mini with the same size hard disk. And it isn’t a great music player — it has touch-screen play, pause, fast forward and reverse rather than proper buttons, and it doesn’t come with headphones. But it could be the start of a trend for PDAs, since it should be possible to wedge a similar hard disk into a smaller device.

More likely, the bigger threat to the iPod will come from iPod-enabled cell phones. People have to carry their phones anyway, and some already offer music-control buttons and headphones. So if your phone can hold thousands of songs, why carry around a second, separate music player?

Of course, phonemakers still have to prove they can design music-playing phones that are as simple, elegant and cool as iPods. But that could happen.

Little hard disks could also revolutionize digital cameras, allowing photographers to store thousands of shots without lugging around a laptop, although I know of no camera to date that has a hard disk.

Another trend: Small hard disks will likely shrink even more. Already, there’s a company making one with a diameter smaller than an inch. But mini hard drives may also face a challenger of their own — high-capacity memory chips. The chips have tended to be costlier per unit of storage than the disks, but over time they could get competitive. Prices are dropping fast, and chipmakers are working on memory cards, like the one in your digital camera, that are capable of storing over 10 gigabytes.

For now, though, keep your eye on the little hard disk that powers the iPod. It may be powering lots of gadgets soon.

Its visual display of files stored in a nested hierarchy of folders has worked pretty well — until recently.

In the past few years, computer hard disks have become huge, and average consumers have begun to accumulate thousands and thousands of files each year — far more than in the past. And that is making it much harder to find any particular bit of information buried in the old folder hierarchy.

Every time you plug a digital camera into a PC to transfer images, dozens or even hundreds of files can be added to your PC in one fell swoop. The same thing happens when you rip CDs or go on a photo downloading binge. Email is accumulating in staggering amounts, and just surfing the Web can add hundreds of files — silently cached copies of Web pages and images.

So the familiar file and folder system is buckling. Unless you’re the rare person who is meticulously organized, who creates a perfect system of orderly folders and recognizable file names, locating information on your own computer can be harder than finding it on the Web. There have always been search tools built into the Apple and Microsoft operating systems, but they were terrible — slow and inaccurate, covering only some kinds of data, not all. So you had to rely on separate search systems built into individual programs, such as email software.

But now a wave of new desktop search tools is becoming available, some built right into new operating systems and others available as add-ons. Big names are getting in the game — Apple, Microsoft, Google and Yahoo. I’ve been testing the leading candidates and previewing some future contenders. So here’s a rundown of the latest methods for finding all that lost or hidden information lurking on your hard disk.

Spotlight: This is the new universal, speedy search system built into Apple’s latest operating system for the Macintosh, called Tiger. Because it is an integral part of the operating system, which handles all files, Spotlight knows about all the key kinds of information stored on the computer. It can rapidly find words or phrases deep inside emails, Microsoft Office files, address books and calendars, Adobe PDF files and more. It can even probe the “metadata” — descriptive information — attached to song and picture files.

Spotlight is always available on the Mac, no matter what program you are in. You just click on a blue magnifying-glass icon at the top right corner of the screen, and a search field appears. As you type each letter of your search term, Spotlight begins generating results in a list of files that drops down almost instantly, organized by type of file. If you click on “Show All,” the list expands into a larger window where you can see more results, organized in almost any way you choose — by date, by person mentioned, by name or location on the computer.

On my Mac, I typed “Hawaii” into Spotlight and instantly got hundreds of hits. Every email mentioning the state came up, as did Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, the address entries of contacts who live there, calendar entries for my vacation in Honolulu and pictures of my trip. Spotlight even showed thumbnails of those pictures and, with one click, presented a slide show of the images. It also found the theme song from the old Hawaii Five-O television show in my music collection.

Because Spotlight is part of the operating system, it avoids one of the big flaws of add-on search systems — the need to periodically “index” new files in batches, a process that spins the hard drive continuously, sometimes for hours. Spotlight needs to do this only once, when you first install Tiger.

Longhorn: Microsoft plans to emulate Spotlight in the next version of Windows, code-named Longhorn. But it’s way behind Apple. Longhorn won’t reach consumers until the fall of 2006 at the earliest.

Based on previews of Longhorn I’ve seen, its planned built-in search system will also be fast and universal, and will avoid long indexing sessions. Microsoft also plans to allow more customization of searches, and many more instant previews of files, than Apple now provides. But these apparent advantages may evaporate.

By the time Longhorn arrives, Apple will likely have a second, even better, version of Spotlight.

Google: Until Longhorn arrives, Windows users must rely on add-on search software, and the best known is Google Desktop Search. It does the annoying indexing, but only when your machine is idle. Plus, it’s fast and fairly comprehensive, including even the contents of cached Web sites.

But the familiar Google search results page, which works so well for the Web, is very limiting for a desktop search. And the software offers only a crude way to sort the results and no way to preview content.

Yahoo: The big online service bought a desktop search engine from a company called X1 and re-branded it. This is a robust product, which indexes and searches many kinds of files and previews most of them in a built-in window. You can also take direct action on e-mails that turn up in your search — for instance, you can launch a reply right from within the search results.

The main problem with Yahoo’s offering, in addition to the fact that it isn’t buried deep in the operating system, is that it betrays its techie heritage. X1 was originally built for techies and hard-core search fanatics. Although Yahoo has cleaned it up a bit, the many choices and settings in the user interface may be daunting to mainstream users. Also, it has much more of the feel of a separate, heavy-duty program than the Apple or Google products.

MSN: The desktop search add-on from MSN prefigures what Longhorn will do, and it’s very good. Like Yahoo, it offers previews of most files right in its search results screen. And like Apple’s Spotlight, it is fast and presents a clean, simple interface that begins generating results as you type your search terms.

The main downside to MSN’s search is that in order to get it, you have to download and install a “toolbar suite” that lives in the Internet Explorer Web browser and adds a bunch of functionality that’s unrelated to search, which you might neither want nor need. Also, by default, MSN’s search product searches only your e-mail (which must be run by Microsoft products) and the My Documents folder. You have to tinker with settings to get it to search your whole computer, something all its competitors do by default. The limited search horizon cuts down on MSN’s indexing time and makes it look faster than it really is, but it will likely cause you to get only partial search results.

There are some other good search products out there from smaller companies, notably one called Copernic, by Copernic Technologies, which has a loyal following of users. Whichever you choose, once you trust desktop search, you may never again find yourself creating a subfolder.

The big advantage of Web mail is that any computer, anywhere, with a browser and an Internet connection can access it. The PC you’re using needn’t have an e-mail program like Outlook installed on it, and it doesn’t have to be configured for your e-mail account. The disadvantages: Since the type of e-mail software the Web providers use is essentially just a Web page, their services typically lack the power and speed of installed programs; they also place limits on how much e-mail you can save.

That’s why, for many years, Web-mail services have most often been the preference of light users attracted to the free email they offer. They’ve also been popular with people who use Outlook or another heavy-duty program at work, but who want an account on the side for personal e-mail. Lately, however, the major Web-mail offerings have gotten much better, to the point where they’re plausible candidates even for serious users. Here’s a quick rundown of how they compare. (A note on methodology: Although you can receive Web-based e-mail via a local program like Outlook Express, I tested the services in their most common mode — Web-based e-mail delivered through Web-based programs.)

All three of the major Web-mail providers now offer much more free storage than was common a couple years ago. Gmail leads with more than 2 gigabytes. Yahoo offers 1 gigabyte for free, and Hotmail provides 250 megabytes. All three also now have decent antispam and antivirus features, and they are a bit less susceptible than Outlook to being exploited by e-mail containing harmful computer code, particularly if you access them via a browser other than Microsoft’s Internet Explorer. That’s because malicious software writers have targeted Outlook (and IE) for years. But the three still lack some key features. For instance, none offers a full preview of e-mail content, though Gmail does show you a few words of each message. None allows you to set up multiple signatures you can attach to different outgoing messages. And the Web-based e-mail filters these services provide are fairly crude compared with those in local programs.

As for how they rank, Yahoo Mail takes the lead. It’s fast, and its gigabyte of free storage is more than enough to free most users from deleting old mail. I also like Yahoo’s autocompletion of addresses, as well as its folder and filter systems. Plus, its overall user interface is clean and clear.

Google’s Gmail is also pretty good, though its quirky design could put off some users — it’s clearly still a work in progress. Gmail has the most free storage of the Web-based providers, which is a big plus, and searching all that mail is fast and accurate. But a simple operation such as deleting an e-mail takes more steps than in Yahoo. Gmail’s biggest, most beguiling quirk is its insistence on displaying e-mail in “conversations,” groups that include all back-and-forth responses. This view can be useful, and most local e-mail programs offer it as an option. But inexplicably, Gmail refuses to let you view e-mail one message at a time. It also runs ads alongside every e-mail, based on a scan of the message’s contents.

Hotmail comes in last. It offers only a fraction of the free storage of Yahoo and Gmail, which, for my money, flatly disqualifies it as a serious contender.

Whichever program you choose, Web mail has finally arrived as a viable option. Let’s hope a good thing keeps getting better.

There have long been computer viruses, but until the past couple of years, they were mainly a nuisance. Now they have grown into a serious problem — by one account there were 5,000 new Windows viruses discovered in the first six months of 2004. And the virus plague has been trumped by a new type of malicious software, spyware, which can track your activities, bombard you with unwanted ads, even steal your identity.

Spam has also grown exponentially, clogging e-mail boxes and carrying with it malicious software. For some people, e-mail has become a curse.

And that’s not all. Every minute of every day, hackers using automated software scan the Internet looking for computers vulnerable enough to invade and, in some cases, to surreptitiously take over. Without your knowledge, they can turn your computer into a “zombie” machine rigged to help them spread their nasty viruses, spam and spyware.

So for consumers and small businesses — everyone without a large IT department to manage security — the Windows computers they use have become huge burdens instead of helpful tools. If you do get a severe virus or spyware infestation, you may have to spend hundreds of dollars and many hours to wipe your hard disk clean and start fresh, quite possibly losing crucial data in the process.

And prevention is almost as painful as the disease, because the computer industry has so far come up with only half-baked and piecemeal solutions to these threats. You have to watch every move you make online and install a bunch of security programs, which require monitoring, constant updating and, often, annual fees.

Each of these security programs deals only with a narrow slice of the problem. Firewalls can keep out invaders, but they don’t stop viruses, spyware or spam. Antivirus programs don’t catch most spyware. Antispyware programs don’t stop viruses. And neither stops spam. For that, you need anti-spam software, which does nothing about viruses or spyware that invade your system through avenues other than spam.

You can buy “suites” that combine all these programs, but they are really just bundles of separate applications of widely varying quality stuffed into the same box.

It’s as if you needed a separate burglar alarm system, each with its own control panel, password and monthly fee, for every door and window in your home.

What users need is a simple, all-encompassing security service that would deal with all these threats with minimal user involvement. For now, though, you’ll have to do it yourself.

So here’s my quick guide to Windows security measures. Some of the products I recommend below are free, but others cost money. I like free stuff as much as the next guy, but I don’t believe security is an area where price should govern. You don’t want to entrust your computer’s security to some unknown software author, or even to a well-meaning individual or very small outfit that lacks the resources to keep up with the threats.

Download and install all the security fixes Microsoft issues for Windows. If you have Windows XP, set it to automatically fetch and install these patches (you can do this by clicking on the “Automatic Updates” or “Security Center” icons in the Windows control panel). You should also probably install the massive Service Pack 2 revision of Windows XP, which plugs many security holes. But back up your data first. A significant minority of users have reported big problems with SP2.

Stop using Microsoft’s Internet Explorer Web browser, which has become a four-lane highway for malicious invaders. I recommend instead Mozilla Firefox, which is free at www.mozilla.org [http://www.mozilla.org]. I use it all day, every day.

Windows comes with a firewall program, designed to keep out hackers. But in most versions of the operating system, it’s hard to turn on and configure. Even the improved firewall in the new SP2 revision of Windows XP is inferior to several third-party products. I recommend, and use, ZoneAlarm, a free firewall from Zone Labs, available at www.zonelabs.com [http://www.zonelabs.com]. There are some fancy paid versions of ZoneAlarm, which are also fine, but if you want the free one, you’ll have to look hard on the Web page.

Software to stop spyware is still in its infancy, so I suggest keeping two or three anti-spyware programs on hand. Each program will likely find spyware the others miss. But I recommend relying most on the one I use, Webroot’s Spy Sweeper, available at www.webroot.com [http://www.webroot.com]. It costs $30, including a year of updates, and runs all the time to block incoming spyware. To back up Spy Sweeper, go to www.download.com [http://www.download.com] and get two free programs: Ad-Aware, and Spybot Search and Destroy. Use these for manual scanning.

I recommend Norton AntiVirus from Symantec. It costs $50, including a year of updates. But it works well and has a good automatic updating system. I have been receiving many reports of problems with Symantec’s customer service, so I may have to change my recommendation down the road. But for now, I prefer Norton, and I use it myself.

No antispam program I have tested is wholly satisfying, but I suggest one of two. The first is MailFrontier Desktop, available for $30 at www.mailfrontier.com [http://www.mailfrontier.com]. The second is SpamSubtract, from Intermute, available for $20 at www.spamsubtract [http://www.spamsubtract]. com. They are very different, and each has its strengths and weaknesses. I oscillate between the two every six months or so.

Beyond installing, monitoring and updating all this software, you need to be careful online. Don’t open email attachments you don’t expect and that come from strangers. They may contain viruses or spyware. Don’t download software unless you really need it and are 100 percent certain of the author’s trustworthiness. It could be an infection in disguise. Never click on a link in an e-mail purporting to be from a financial institution, even if it’s your own bank and it looks official. It could be a scam to steal your identity.

And if you’re totally fed up with the security crisis but want to continue using your computer for common tasks, consider dumping Windows altogether and switching to Apple’s Macintosh, which uses its own operating system, called OS X. There has never been a successful virus reported on OS X, and there is little or no spyware for the Mac.

In my view, Macs have better hardware, a better operating system and better bundled software than Windows PCs. They are as good as, and often better than, Windows PCs at e-mail and Web surfing; at word processing and other productivity tasks; and at handling digital photos, videos and music. And most popular Windows file types open right up in Mac programs, without the need for any conversion or translation.

Stay safe out there.