Do you still recommend the Dell XPS One all-in-one computer that you favorably reviewed last December? I am not a techie at all but need to replace my 5-year-old Dell and was interested in an all-in-one.

Yes. In fact, I now own two of these Dell XPS Ones and use them as my Vista desktop computers, at home and in the office. I still believe, as I wrote in my review, that this Dell’s hardware is superior to that of the competing Apple iMac, though the Vista operating system is inferior to Apple’s. And the base XPS One now costs the same as the base iMac — $1,199 — instead of $300 more, as it did last year. So, if you want the Windows operating system, and like the look and convenience of an all-in-one desktop, I still favor the XPS One. You can find my review at tinyurl.com/2xw 6mv.

Will Apple’s new MacBooks and MacBook Pros run Windows directly without an intervening “virtual machine” program like Parallels or Fusion?

Yes. All Apple Macs running the current Leopard operating system, including the new laptops, come with the ability to directly run Windows XP or Vista. Using Apple’s built-in “Boot Camp” feature, you can start up the computer in Windows, instead of the Mac’s own operating system, which turns the Mac into a pure Windows machine, with no trace of the Mac operating system running. The upsides of this approach are maximum Windows speed, and compatibility with the most graphics-intensive Windows programs, including games. Note that, to run Windows on a Mac, you must obtain and install a fresh, boxed, full version of XP or Vista. Apple doesn’t supply Windows.

I have a Yahoo email account, and wonder if Yahoo allows receipt and storage of email directly via a computer email program, such as Outlook, or is it all Web storage? Can you do both?

Yes. Yahoo offers a “Plus” option, for $20 a year, that permits users to receive and store their Yahoo email using a locally installed, instead of Web-based, email program. This approach does work with Microsoft Office, as well as many other local email programs. And you can still use Yahoo’s Web-based email interface at the same time. The Plus option also includes other benefits, including the elimination of ads and a doubling of the size limit on individual messages, to 20 megabytes.

• You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, online free of charge at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

I read your recent column about running Windows on a Mac. Is there a way to run the Mac OS X operating system on a PC, like a Dell or a Sony?

Yes, but it is really only for tinkerers and hackers, and even then, it may not work fully or smoothly. Apple makes the process difficult, both technically and legally, because, unlike Microsoft, it is not in the business of selling its operating system for use on other companies’ hardware.

Therefore, I know of no simple software for average consumers that can install OS X on a non-Apple computer without any technical knowledge and with full assurance that the operating system will be completely compatible with the hardware. There is nothing on the market like the products that allow people to run Windows on a Mac.

A small number of techies do install Mac OS X on non-Apple PCs every day, and some people have created software to make this possible for people with plenty of technical knowledge. There is even a company called Efix that is selling a hardware module that it says will make this easier. Its maker warns the product is only for “enthusiasts” and it requires that you attach it to the computer’s internal circuitry. Also, it only works with certain types of personal-computer hardware.

One more thing: Apple takes the position that its licensing terms limit the use of OS X to Apple hardware, so, even if you can pull it off technically, there could be legal jeopardy involved. In fact, Apple is suing a company called Psystar that sells non-Apple PCs with OS X pre-installed.

I have a new PC that came with a 64-bit version of the Windows operating system. It gives me a choice between using a 32-bit Internet Explorer or a 64-bit Internet Explorer. Which should I use?

The 64-bit version of Windows, which is rarely used by average consumers, can make the computer faster, but only when running programs that have been written in special 64-bit versions. In the consumer arena, there are too few such programs, and thus too little benefit, to justify paying extra for 64-bit machines. In fact, most people who have computers running 64-bit Windows are mostly using older 32-bit programs, which run fine, but aren’t made quicker.

So, the 64-bit version of Internet Explorer may run faster. But there is a downside. Because of the relative rarity of 64-bit users, some browser add-ons and toolbars and some of the Web technologies that power the features of Web pages, aren’t compatible with the 64-bit version of IE. On top of that, you may not notice any huge speed difference as the perceived speed of Web browsers depends more on the speed of your Internet connection than anything else. So, for now, I would stick with the 32-bit version, for compatibility’s sake. You can always install the 64-bit version later, if you decide that the Web sites you frequent and the add-ons you use work well with it.

I am running a Mac with Windows XP Pro in Boot Camp, which requires rebooting to change operating systems. Is there some way I can use my already-installed Boot Camp setup as a virtual machine using VMWare Fusion, so I can run my Windows and Mac programs side by side?

Yes, there are two ways. First, Fusion allows you to treat the Boot Camp section of your hard disk, called a “partition” — which is essentially a separate Windows PC stored on your Mac — as if it were a “virtual machine.” This approach still allows you to reboot the entire Mac into Windows when you’d like to do so, in order to perform the few tasks that Fusion can’t handle, such as advanced 3D graphics.

The second approach is to simply import the Boot Camp installation and turn it into a purely virtual Windows computer, as with any virtual Windows machine you would create in Fusion. If that meets your needs, you can then actually remove your original Boot Camp Windows installation, which will likely free up some hard disk space. To do this, just select your Boot Camp partition, which Fusion automatically detects, and click on Import under the File menu.

You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox and my other columns online free at the All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

Write to Walter S. Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

The first approach uses a feature called Boot Camp that comes free on every new Mac. Using Boot Camp, the entire Mac is turned into a Windows PC, with the full capabilities and speed of a standard Windows machine. No trace of the Mac operating system is left running. The downside is that you can’t run Windows and Mac programs side by side.

The second approach uses one of two third-party programs to create a virtual Windows PC inside your Mac. This faux Windows machine runs at normal speeds and can operate simultaneously with the Mac’s own operating system. Programs native to each operating system can run side by side. The downside is that, because Windows doesn’t get complete control of the computer’s hardware, it isn’t quite as fast as in Boot Camp, and a few of its functions, like 3D graphics, don’t work as well.

This latter method is enabled by two excellent, closely matched $80 programs: Parallels, from a Swiss-based company of the same name, and Fusion, from VMWare, a U.S. company. It is Fusion that just got better, because VMWare just issued version 2.0 of the product with lots of new features, some of which let it catch up to the older Parallels and some of which push it ahead.

I’ve been testing Fusion 2.0 for a couple of weeks on two different Macs, and using it to run both Windows XP and Windows Vista. My verdict is that while you won’t go wrong with Parallels, Fusion edges it out as the better product.

The new Fusion 2.0 is a free upgrade for owners of version 1.0. It can be obtained at vmware.com/mac and at various retailers.

Like Boot Camp and Parallels, Fusion requires you to obtain and install a fresh, boxed, full version of Windows on your Mac. But once you’ve done that, your Mac becomes two computers in one. If you need to run programs that are available only on Windows, you can do so with ease.

For instance, as I write this column on a MacBook pro laptop, using a Macintosh word processor, I am using Fusion 2.0 to simultaneously run Google’s new Chrome browser, which is so far available for Windows only. I can switch between the two with a couple of keystrokes and copy text from one to the other.

Like Parallels, Fusion allows you to run Windows programs in one of three ways. You can see the entire Windows desktop, with Windows programs running within it, inside its own window on your Mac. Or, using a feature called “Unity,” each Windows program can float free, as if it were just another Mac program, with the Windows desktop invisible. If you minimize a Windows program, it disappears into an icon in the Mac’s Dock, just as Mac programs do.

Finally, you can devote the entire screen to the Windows desktop and hide the Mac operating system entirely.

Parallels can also do these things. Both programs can now also “mirror” your most common Windows and Mac file folders so that, for instance, all of the files in your Mac’s Pictures folder also appear in the My Pictures folder in Windows XP. This is a new addition to Fusion, as is the ability to take multiple “snapshots” of your Windows virtual machine, so if something goes wrong, you can roll back to a previous state when things were stable.

But Fusion has some other features Parallels lacks. For example, it allows you to automatically take those protective snapshots at timed intervals. It also permits you to completely customize keyboard commands so that the same common key combinations work in both Windows and Mac programs. It allows the faux Windows machine to take full advantage of multiple monitors, if you have them.

Fusion also uses a more modern and capable version of the proprietary 3-D graphics system in Windows, called DirectX. That means some Windows-only games and other programs that won’t work in Parallels will work in Fusion. I successfully tested two such programs, both from Microsoft: Worldwide Telescope and Photosynth.

And, in my experience, Fusion is a bit faster than Parallels. Both programs put a strain on your Mac when performing major tasks, like starting up or shutting down Windows. But Fusion seems to affect the Mac less. And, unlike Parallels, it can make Windows quicker by optionally assigning it control of the multiple “cores” in most modern processor chips.

Fusion also offers a one-year free subscription to Windows security software, while Parallels offers only a six-month subscription.

However, Fusion has its limits. Like Parallels, it cannot run the 3-D visual effects in Windows Vista. And, in my tests, it wouldn’t allow Windows running on one of my Macs to use the printer that was configured on the Mac, although that feature did work on my other test Mac.

In my view, Fusion is now the better choice for running Windows on a Mac virtually.

Find all of Walt Mossberg’s columns and videos online, free, at the All Things Digital Web site, walt.allthingsd.com.

Write to Walt Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

My IT department will not turn on the feature in our servers that would allow me to receive corporate email on my iPhone. This has forced me to revert back to my BlackBerry Pearl. Can I transfer my iTunes music to my Pearl?

It depends on what you mean by “iTunes music.” If you mean music you bought from the iTunes store in protected format — which describes most of the store’s catalog — the Pearl can’t play it, unless you go through a laborious multistep process to convert it to unprotected files. If you mean unprotected music that is managed by the iTunes program on your PC, the Pearl can handle it as long as it is in open formats supported by the Pearl, including the MP3 or open AAC formats.

To get these files into your Pearl, simply use the music-transfer software that came with the Pearl to copy the songs from your computer’s hard disk to either the Pearl’s internal memory or to a flash memory card you may have in your Pearl.

I recently purchased a new iMac with the Leopard operating system, and have installed Windows Vista on it as well, using Leopard’s Boot Camp feature, so the Mac can boot into either OS. I would like both of those operating systems to share an external hard drive so I can back up my files. Is it possible to do that?

Yes, provided you follow one of two scenarios. The first would be to format the external drive as a Windows drive, but be careful to use the Windows format called “FAT32,” not the one called NTFS. Out of the box, Macs can see all Windows drives and can read from them all. But they can only save files to Windows drives that use the FAT32 system for organizing files. The downside of this is that the FAT32 system only allows files of up to 4 gigabytes each.

The other scenario would be to use a Mac-formatted external drive, which doesn’t have that limitation. Of course the Mac operating system can handle such drives perfectly, but Windows can’t even see them. However, in your Vista setup, you can install a third-party Windows program called MacDrive 7, which allows Windows to both read from, and write to, Mac-formatted drives. I have tested it successfully with Vista under Boot Camp on an iMac. The $50 program can be downloaded from mediafour.com.

The hard disk on my new Sony VAIO laptop is filling up fast. It is trying to get me to watch a lot of movie trailers. Is all that video stored in my machine somewhere and if so can I dump some of it out?

If your Sony laptop is like mine, not only are the unwanted movie trailers pre-loaded on your hard disk, but so are the entire movies, which Sony actually charges you to watch. In my case, these files took up over 4 gigabytes of precious disk space. This is a particularly outrageous example of what I call “craplets,” unwanted trial software that litters new Windows desktops. You can delete these files and reclaim all that disk space without any harm to your computer.

You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, online free at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

I currently spend about $50 to $60 per year for Norton Security software. Is this necessary when Windows XP has its own security built into the operating system?

Windows XP doesn’t include antivirus or antispyware programs, so you definitely need some sort of add-on security software. If you don’t want to pay for it, there are free alternatives available.

How do we determine when to purchase a new PC? Our current Dell is about five years old. I’m feeling a little worried because I have my music and photos on the computer and don’t want to lose them.

There’s no universal answer to your question. In general, I don’t believe people should replace computers that are working well for them just because they reach a certain age. On the other hand, five years is pretty old for a PC. At that age, the odds increase that the hard disk may develop problems, and that newer versions of the software you like will require hardware upgrades that may cost more than you want to invest in an older machine.

Assuming your Dell is working fine, that you aren’t a power user, and that your music and photo activities are simple and basic, there’s probably no urgent need to replace the PC. But, to assuage your concern about “losing” your pictures and music, you might back up those precious files to an external hard disk or an online backup service.

Last week, you compared the start-up time of Windows Vista to Apple’s new Leopard operating system, and found Vista to be much slower. But you used different laptops for each. What would the numbers be on the same Macintosh running the two operating systems?

I ran the tests again on a single computer, a fairly new Apple iMac, which can be started up, and restarted, in either Vista or Leopard. I used the Mac’s Boot Camp feature, in which only one operating system is running at a time, has its own dedicated portion of the hard disk and fully controls the hardware. The machine uses an Intel processor and other key components commonly found on Windows machines, and runs Windows just like a Dell or any standard Windows PC, without any involvement from the Mac operating system.

This Vista installation doesn’t include any of the speed-robbing trial software commonly included by PC makers, though it does have security software from Symantec. However, the test results were very similar — Leopard started and restarted much more quickly than Vista did.

In this simple test, I timed both operating systems from a cold start and a restart until the computer was fully ready for operation, with the hard disk quiet and the network connection established. The cold start, beginning with the computer completely off, took Leopard 46 seconds, but took Vista one minute and 42 seconds. A restart, beginning with the computer running an email program, the Firefox Web browser, and Microsoft Word, took one minute and two seconds for Leopard, and three minutes and 17 seconds for Vista.

You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, online for free at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

Write to Walter S. Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

There are several reasons for this, including the security problems in the dominant Windows platform from Microsoft; spillover from Apple’s blistering success with its iPod music players; the fact that Macs can now run Windows programs; and Apple’s highly successful chain of company-owned retail stores.

But another key factor has been the Mac operating system, called OS X, which came out in 2001. It has proved to be as powerful and versatile for mainstream consumers as Windows, yet easier to use and more secure. And Apple has upgraded OS X far more rapidly than Microsoft Inc. has upgraded Windows, bringing out major new releases roughly every 18 months, while Microsoft struggled for more than five years to produce the latest Windows iteration, Vista, which came out in January.

On Friday evening, Apple will release yet another new version of OS X, called Leopard, to replace the current version, known as Tiger. I’ve been testing Leopard, and while it is an evolutionary, not a revolutionary, release, I believe it builds on Apple’s quality advantage over Windows. In my view, Leopard is better and faster than Vista, with a set of new features that make Macs even easier to use.

Leopard will come preinstalled on all new Macs. It can also be purchased for $129 as an upgrade to existing Macs that, depending on configuration, can be as many as six years old. Unlike Vista, which is sold in four noncorporate upgrade versions ranging from a $100 stripped-down “basic” edition to a $259 deluxe “ultimate” edition, there’s only one version of Leopard. It includes all the features, from those aimed at novices to those aimed at power users.

For me, the marquee features in Leopard are a new function called Time Machine that automatically backs up your entire computer in the background; two new methods, called Cover Flow and Quick Look, for rapidly viewing the contents of files without opening any programs; and new techniques that allow you to access the files in, and to remotely control, other computers on your network or connected over the Internet with a few clicks and no technical expertise.

Plus, Apple’s free software for running Windows on a Mac, called Boot Camp, which was formerly an add-on users had to download and install, is now built right into the operating system. And, in my tests, the third-party Fusion program for running Windows and Mac programs simultaneously continued to work fine in Leopard.

I did notice a few drawbacks, but they were minor. The menu bar is now translucent, which can make it hard to see the items it contains if your desktop picture has dark areas at the top. The new folder icons are dull and flat and less attractive than Vista’s or their predecessors on the Mac. While Time Machine can perform backups over a network, the backup destination can only be a hard disk connected to a Mac running Leopard. And, on the Web, I ran into one site where the fonts on part of the page were illegible, a problem Apple says is known and rare and that I expect it will fix.

While Apple claims the new system includes more than 300 new features, there is nothing on the list that could be considered startling or a major breakthrough. Some of Leopard’s features are unique, but many others — such as backing up data and quickly viewing files — have been available on both Windows and the Mac via third-party programs or hard-to-find geeky methods buried in the operating systems. Leopard has made them easy to find and use.

When I upgraded my personal iMac desktop to Leopard, it took less than an hour, and after the process was complete, all my programs, including the Mac version of Microsoft Office, the Firefox Web browser and Adobe Reader, worked rapidly and fine. I was still able to run Windows XP via Fusion. And my previous installation of Boot Camp, which turns the iMac into a speedy, full-fledged Vista machine after a reboot, worked perfectly. All my Vista programs and files continued to function properly.

With Cover Flow, users get a visual preview of a computer’s files without having to open programs.

In fact, every piece of software and hardware I tried on two Leopard-equipped Macs — a loaned laptop from Apple and my own upgraded iMac — worked fine, exhibiting none of the compatibility problems that continue to plague Vista. My old Hewlett-Packard inkjet printer, for which Vista lacks the proper software, worked instantly in Leopard, even over the network. And, unlike with Vista, it was able to print on both sides of the page. I popped my old Verizon cellphone modem card into the test Leopard laptop and it worked, too, with no software installation or tweaking.

Leopard felt about as fast as Tiger, and it started up much faster than Vista in my tests. I compared a MacBook Pro laptop with Leopard preinstalled to a Sony Vaio laptop with Vista preinstalled. Even though I had cleared out all of the useless trial software Sony had placed on the Vaio, it still started up painfully slowly compared with the Leopard laptop.

It took the Vista machine nearly two minutes to perform a cold start and be ready to run, including connecting to my wireless network. The Leopard laptop was up, running and connected to the network in 38 seconds. In a test of restarting the two laptops after they had been running an email program, a Web browser and a word processor, the Sony with Vista took three minutes and 29 seconds, while the Apple running Leopard took one minute and five seconds.

Here’s a rundown of some of Leopard’s key features. Much more detailed information is available at apple.com/macosx.

File management: Apple’s Finder, the equivalent of Explorer in Windows, now offers two new ways to quickly see what your files contain. You can still view them as icons or lists. But you can also use Cover Flow, the same system Apple uses in iTunes and on the iPhone to display album covers for music. In Leopard, a large preview of each file you select appears above the list of files in a folder, and you can rapidly scroll through these icons. These previews are live, and their contents can be viewed without opening the program that is normally needed to display them.

Time Machine backs up files.

For instance, if the file is a video, you can just click on it, and it will play. If it’s a multipage PDF file, you can click on it, and arrows will appear allowing you to flip through the pages.

An even better and deeper look can be obtained using a feature called Quick Look. Just hit the space bar or click on a toolbar icon, and a preview of any selected file zooms out. You can even view multiple sheets in an Excel file via Quick Look without launching Excel.

Another quick new way to see your files is available in the Dock, the Mac’s equivalent of the Windows Task Bar. Here, any folder you place on the right side of the dock will display its contents, after a single click, either as a grid of icons displaying miniversions of the file or as a “fan,” or arc, of such icons. These special Dock folders are called “Stacks.” Leopard includes one by default that is the destination for everything you download from the Internet, so your desktop will no longer get cluttered with downloads,

Time Machine: This built-in feature will continuously back up all of the contents of your Mac to either an external hard drive directly connected to the computer, or to a hard disk connected to another Mac running Leopard that’s on your network. The initial backup, in my tests, took all night, but after that, the system updates the backups hourly and I didn’t notice any slowdown during the process.

To recover any file you deleted, you simply click on the Time Machine icon, and you are taken to a view that shows file folders — or your email or address book or photo collection — in a stack of windows that appear to go on infinitely. You click on an arrow and the stack of windows zooms until you arrive at the last view in which the missing file existed. Then, you click “restore,” and the file is recovered in your normal desktop view. You can also restore whole folders, groups of files, or even an entire hard disk.

Shared computers: In Leopard, any computer that has been set to be shared on your network shows up on the left side of every Finder window. Click on it, and you can access whatever folders have been shared on those machines. Depending on the remote computer’s security settings, you may first have to enter a user name and password. It’s the simplest method I’ve ever seen for accessing other computers on a network. And it works with Windows PCs as well as Macs. When I first turned on the Leopard laptop in my office, it immediately found a shared folder on my colleague’s old Dell running Windows XP. She hadn’t even remembered sharing the folder, which contained files from 2003.

You can copy or move files to and from these shared computers, or view their contents with Cover Flow and Quick Look, or open them in programs on your own computer.

If you are a member of Apple’s optional .Mac service, which costs $100 a year, you can use a feature called “Back to My Mac,” which can access your Macs from thousands of miles away over the Internet. However, this feature works only over certain kinds of routers (not all of them Apple’s) and, as my router didn’t qualify, I couldn’t test it.

Remote control: For any Mac in your shared-computers list for which you have permission, you can take over the screen by simply clicking on a button called “Share Screen.” You can also remotely control distant Macs over the Internet using Apple’s built-in iChat instant messaging program, as long as you have permission and the Macs are running Leopard.

Stacks displays the files in folders in the dock.

iChat: Apple now allows you to use its instant messaging program with Google Talk as well as AOL’s AIM service, and you can set up a video chat in which you can present a slide show or display a document. You can also add special backgrounds that can make it look as though you’re someplace else, like Paris. In my tests, this even worked with someone on the other end using a Windows XP computer running the latest version of AIM.

Spaces: In order to cut down desktop clutter, Leopard lets you set up as many as 16 different desktops that can run simultaneously, with different programs open in each. You switch among these desktops by using keyboard commands or a menu.

For instance, you might have your iPhoto and iTunes running in one “space,” or desktop, your Web browser and email program in another, and Windows XP in another.

Leopard isn’t a must-have for current Mac owners, but it adds a lot of value. For new Mac buyers, it makes switching even more attractive.

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. Find all my columns and videos online free at the new All Things Digital web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

In a recent column, you said Microsoft had imposed a legal prohibition on running the Home versions of Windows Vista on a Macintosh using virtualization programs like Parallels and Fusion. Does the same prohibition apply if you are installing Vista using Apple’s Boot Camp software?

No, because Boot Camp doesn’t create a virtual Windows computer — it actually carves out part of an Intel-based Macintosh’s hard disk and turns it into a full-blown physical Windows computer. To Windows, a Mac configured this way looks just like any Dell or Hewlett-Packard or other standard Windows computer. Boot Camp is free, but, such as Parallels and Fusion, it requires you to purchase a full, boxed copy of Windows to install.

The upside of the Boot Camp approach is that, when you are running Windows on the Mac, all of the computer’s hardware is devoted to Windows, because the Mac’s own operating system, OS X, isn’t running at all and a portion of the hard disk is reserved for the exclusive use of Windows. The downside is that you cannot run the two operating systems simultaneously, as you can with virtual solutions such as Parallels and Fusion. To switch between using Windows programs and Mac programs, you must restart the machine while holding down the Option key and then choose whether you want it to boot into Windows or Mac OS X. Both Parallels and Fusion can, however, use a Boot Camp Windows installation to create a virtual version of Windows that can be used simultaneously with the Mac OS.

If you install Boot Camp on a well-equipped Mac model, it can become a blazing fast Vista computer. A few days ago I bought a top-of-the-line model of Apple’s new iMac line, and installed Boot Camp and Vista. I then tested the machine using Vista’s built-in Windows Experience Index, a rating system that goes from 1 to 5.9, with scores above 3.0 generally required for full, quick performance. My iMac scored a 5.0, the best score of any consumer Vista machine I have tested. Obviously, a tricked-out high end Dell or HP box might do as well or better, and a lesser Mac might do worse. But the score was very impressive for a computer that wasn’t designed with Vista in mind.

We have a Sony PC and a 17-inch LCD monitor. Currently, we have a separate old-fashioned TV in the room, with a cable box connected to it. Is there any way to buy a larger LCD monitor and be able to watch TV via the cable box and also use the same screen when we use the computer?

A good approach would be to buy an LCD television that has both the usual connectors for your cable box and a connector, or input, for a personal computer. There are many such models, in various sizes. If you bought such a TV, you would switch between the PC and the cable box by changing inputs on your remote. Just make sure the PC input is compatible with your computer, or that an adapter is available to make it compatible. Many PCs and PC-friendly TVs use the older, common VGA connector, which is an analog input, but others use various newer digital connectors. You can also connect some computers to LCD TVs using standard connectors that aren’t specifically labeled as being for PCs. This is especially true for some Windows Media Center PCs that are designed to work with TVs.

Have you rated any of the Web businesses that assemble personal photos into a book format?

Yes. My colleague Katherine Boehret and I reviewed three contenders in that category in December, and in our judgment, at that time, MyPublisher (www.mypublisher.com) was the best of that group. You can read the column at http://solution.allthingsd.com/20061206. However, the books from Apple, Shutterfly and Blurb are also favorites of many readers.

You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, online free of charge at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

Write to Walter S. Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

In classrooms and offices, homes and coffee shops, Macs are far more visible in the U.S. than they were just a few years ago. Part of this success results from the fact that Macs are excellent machines that handle the most important and common tasks as well as — or better than — computers running Microsoft Windows.

But the new popularity of the Mac is also partly due to the fact that it can now run Windows along with Apple’s superior Mac OS X operating system. That means that if there’s a program you need that comes only in a Windows version, you can run it on any current Mac model, speedily and with all its features.

Starting next week, there will be a new way to do this. A company called VMWare, long the leader in what’s called “virtualization” — running multiple operating systems simultaneously on a single computer — will be selling a program called Fusion that allows Windows, and Windows programs, to run on a Mac.

I’ve been testing Fusion, and I’ve found it works well. For instance, as I write this column on a Mac laptop using the Mac version of Microsoft Word, Fusion is allowing me to simultaneously run several popular Windows programs — Microsoft Outlook, Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer. Each is running in its own window, just as if it were a native Mac program. I can switch from one to the other rapidly and smoothly. Their icons show up on the Mac’s “Dock,” just like the icons for Mac programs.

In my tests, Fusion never slowed down my MacBook Pro laptop or two other Macs on which I tested it. As I write this, the Mac version of Word and all three Windows programs are performing normally, even though I am also running five other Mac programs. My MacBook Pro, which isn’t the latest or most powerful model, has two gigabytes of memory and an Intel processor that is a generation behind the current model.

Fusion, which will be available for $80 at vmware.com, becomes the third major option for running Windows software on a Mac. It will go up against a fine program called Parallels Desktop, also available for $80 at parallels.com and at retail stores. The third option is Apple’s own Boot Camp, currently a free product available at apple.com/bootcamp. Boot Camp will become a built-in feature of the next version of Apple’s Mac OS X operating system, due in October.

All three programs require users to purchase a full version of Windows and install it on the Mac. Like Fusion, Parallels is a virtualization program that allows you to run Windows and Windows programs simultaneously with the Mac operating system and Mac programs. Boot Camp works differently: It requires that you restart the Mac to switch into Windows, and it runs only one of the operating systems at a time.

In my tests, I compared Fusion and Parallels, which is its closest competitor. I used Windows XP Professional. Each also works with the new Windows Vista (and with older versions of Windows and various versions of the Linux operating system). But Microsoft has imposed a legal prohibition on installing the most common consumer versions of Vista, Home Basic and Home Premium, via virtualization programs.

The two programs are very similar. In most scenarios, they function nearly identically. Both allow you to run the full Windows desktop either in a window on your Mac or in full-screen mode. Alternatively, both allow Windows programs to float on their own, with the Windows desktop hidden, so they look and feel just like Mac programs. Both permit you to fetch and save files from folders already on your Mac. Both support copying and pasting between Mac and Windows programs. Both automatically use your Mac’s Internet connection.

Parallels has more features than Fusion. It comes with a set of utilities Fusion lacks, such as a program that can migrate the contents of a physical Windows PC into a Parallels virtual Windows PC, and another that allows you to retrieve files from the virtual Windows machine even when Parallels isn’t running. Parallels also has a nice feature that lets you assign any file to automatically open in a Windows program instead of a Mac program. And it makes it much easier to use a printer over a network than Fusion does.

But I found Fusion puts less strain on the computer overall. While I like Parallels and have used it since it came out, it sometimes slows down my Mac, especially when it is starting up Windows or performing some other major task. Fusion has a much smaller impact on the Mac’s overall performance.

You won’t go wrong with either program. Both give the Macintosh a level of versatility that can’t be matched by Windows-only machines.

• Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. Find all my columns and videos online free at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

Here are a few questions about computers I’ve received recently from people like you, and my answers. I have edited and restated the questions a bit, for readability. This week my mailbox contained questions about using Microsoft Word to handle page layouts, deleting favorites in Internet Explorer and running Windows Vista on a Mac.

I use Microsoft Word 2003 for writing family histories with many photographs. But the program doesn’t handle photographs well. Is Word 2007 any better?

Word isn’t primarily a page layout program, so I can’t say if you’ll consider the new version dramatically better for photos. But Microsoft did put some effort into improving the graphics, layout and photo-handling features in the new 2007 version. If nothing else, Word’s system for positioning and manipulating photos is easier to understand because of the new interface Microsoft introduced.

In Internet Explorer, is there a way to delete favorites other than one at a time? I have tried to select several while holding the Shift or Control key, but only one at a time is deleted.

One way to do it is to avoid using the very limited Organize Favorites feature in Internet Explorer itself, and locate the folder on your hard disk where the files that represent the Favorites reside. Then, you can delete the Favorites like any other files.

This folder is called Favorites, and can be found through Windows Explorer (as opposed to Internet Explorer). It’s under Documents and Settings, inside a folder bearing the name of the user or account you use in Windows.

For example, if your user account name (the name that appears at the top of the Windows Start Menu) is “Janet,” the Favorites folder would be C:Documents and SettingsJanetFavorites. The icon for this folder is a star, rather than a picture of a folder.

Is it true that Microsoft’s license terms for Vista prevent Mac users from installing it using the Parallels software that creates a virtual Windows machine on a Mac? And does this also apply to Apple’s Boot Camp system for running Windows on a Mac?

Microsoft has decided to legally bar the installation of the most common consumer versions of the new Windows Vista operating in a virtual machine. A virtual machine is a software environment that allows one operating system to run inside another by creating a faux, or virtual, computer. This prohibition covers Vista Home Basic and Home Premium, and it applies not only to Parallels on a Mac but to other virtual-machine systems on other kinds of computers, even Windows computers.

Vista Home Basic and Home Premium will, in fact, work fine in Parallels on a Mac, according to the maker of Parallels. But if you install them in Parallels, or any other virtual machine, you will violate the Microsoft license. To comply with the license, you have to buy and install the more expensive Vista Business or Vista Ultimate versions.

However, I don’t believe the Microsoft license prohibition applies to running Windows on a Mac via Apple’s Boot Camp system, since Boot Camp doesn’t create a virtual machine. When you run Windows on a Mac under Boot Camp, the computer becomes a real Windows computer, not a virtual one. No other operating system is running; Windows is in total and sole control of the Mac hardware. I should note, however, that Boot Camp was designed to allow Macs to run Windows XP, and Apple hasn’t yet modified it for Vista.

* * *

Because of the volume of e-mail I receive, I can’t routinely answer individual questions by e-mail, or consult on individual problems or purchasing decisions. I read all questions I receive and select three each week to answer in the column.

Write to Walter S. Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

Here are a few questions about computers I’ve received recently from people like you, and my answers. I have edited and restated the questions a bit, for readability. This week my mailbox contained questions about old programs and Windows Vista, Vista Ultimate and Vista for Macs.

Can we run our old programs in the new Windows Vista? Can we use our old peripherals?

Vista should be compatible with most software that runs on Windows XP. I tested a handful of these programs, including the Firefox Web browser, Microsoft Office 2003 and 2007 and Apple’s iTunes, and all worked fine. However, in any transition between operating-system versions, some programs get broken, especially older ones. You will likely need to buy new security programs, for instance.

Peripheral hardware is another matter. It depends on having the right software drivers — special small programs that control hardware — for Vista. Many hardware companies still are completing these drivers, so some functionality may be missing. For instance, while Vista was able to use my Hewlett-Packard printer, it didn’t have the driver for my exact model, so I couldn’t get the printer to print on both sides of the page. This driver update situation will likely persist for months.

In your review of the new Microsoft Vista, you said that “some regular users may need Vista Ultimate if their companies have particular network configurations that make it impossible to connect to the company network from home with Home Basic or Home Premium.” Can you elaborate?

Some companies require that employees logging in from home be able to do something called “joining a domain.” This practice makes it easier for network administrators to control access to various items on the corporate network. Microsoft doesn’t consider this capability to be consumer functionality, so it isn’t included in the new Vista Home Basic or Home Premium editions, just as it wasn’t included in Windows XP’s Home edition.

To get this domain-joining capability, you could use Windows Vista’s Business edition, but it may be hard to find a consumer personal computer with that edition installed, and this edition lacks some consumer features that are in Home Premium. So, for many consumers in this position, the best choice probably is the Ultimate edition, if you have the extra money it requires.

Not all corporate networks require domain-joining, and even some that do include ways around it. If you must often log into a company network from home, a good rule of thumb is this: if you are getting in with Windows XP Home, then Vista Basic or Premium should work fine. If your company required you to use XP Professional, then you probably need Vista Business or Ultimate. To be certain, ask your network administrator at work.

Will Windows Vista run on a Macintosh?

Parallels Inc., the company that makes the Parallels software for running Windows on a Mac, says its product already can run Vista. Apple, which makes the free Boot Camp software for running Windows on a Mac, hasn’t said if Boot Camp can run Vista, or whether it plans to add Vista capability, either now or when it folds Boot Camp into its forthcoming Leopard operating system this coming spring. But I would be very surprised if Boot Camp wasn’t updated at some point to run Vista.

* * *

Because of the volume of e-mail I receive, I can’t routinely answer individual questions by e-mail, or consult on individual problems or purchasing decisions. I read all questions I receive and select three each week to answer in the column.

Write to Walter S. Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

Here are a few questions about computers I’ve received recently from people like you, and my answers. I have edited and restated the questions a bit, for readability. This week my mailbox contained questions about Macintosh computers’ ability to handle Windows Vista, Quicken, and the best iPod to use when exercising.

Will the currently available range of Macintosh computers accommodate Microsoft’s new Windows Vista? When will Apple formally offer the successor to Boot Camp, allowing a Mac user to simultaneously run the Mac OS and Vista?

I haven’t tested the new Intel-based Macs with pre-release versions of Vista, Microsoft’s forthcoming version of Windows. And Apple hasn’t made any announcements about Vista compatibility with its Boot Camp program, which allows a current Mac to boot up in Windows instead of in the Mac’s own operating system. Officially, Boot Camp only works with Windows XP.

However, a third-party company, Parallels Inc., has announced that its $80 product, Parallels Desktop for Mac, now allows Vista to run on the 2006-model Macs. Unlike Boot Camp, Parallels permits Mac users to run Windows inside a window in their Mac environments, with no restarting needed. More information is at parallels.com, where the software also can be downloaded.

As for the future of Boot Camp, Apple doesn’t plan any major new releases of that program, though I can’t swear it wouldn’t offer a minor tweak. The company is focused on integrating the functionality of Boot Camp into its own 2007 operating system release, called Leopard, which is due out next spring. I assume that, with this functionality built in, Leopard-equipped Macs should be able to run Vista out of the box, provided you buy and install your own copy of Vista. However, Apple hasn’t specifically promised that Vista will run on Macs.

Quicken has been unstable on my system and is much more complicated than I need. Is there a program available on the Web that simply allows me to track my income and expenses against a budget?

Yes. Microsoft makes a stripped-down $20 version of its Microsoft Money program, called Money Essentials, that does just what you want, and not much more. It runs only on Windows PCs, and can be purchased and downloaded at microsoft.com/money. We reviewed it and found it worked fine. If you use a Mac, you might consider Moneydance, available at moneydance.com. It’s designed to be quick and simple, but I haven’t reviewed it. Moneydance runs on Windows and Linux machines, in addition to Macs using OS X.

What model iPod would you recommend that is affordable and can be easily used while I exercise in a cardiac rehab program? I’d like to record and play back several hours’ worth of classical music.

The best iPod model for exercising is also the least expensive — the tiny new $79 iPod shuffle, which even has a built-in clip for easy attachment to clothing. It holds one gigabyte of music, which should play for more than a few hours. But the shuffle lacks a screen and many features that other iPods include. If you want these things, you should consider the smallest, least expensive iPod nano, which costs $149, holds twice as much music and is still quite small and light. You can get a lanyard or armband made especially for the nano.

However, as a former heart-surgery patient who benefited immensely from cardiac rehab classes, let me suggest that isolating yourself with an iPod may not be the best way to go through the program. In my experience, the information provided by the professionals and the support from fellow patients was invaluable. To absorb those, I found, you have to be social and involved.

• Write to Walt Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com.

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.