Pathetic. In Japan the median download speed is 63.60Mbps. In South Korea it’s 49 mbps. For crying out loud, in Finland it’s 21.7Mbps.

How is it that the median download speed of the country that invented the Internet is this abysmal? No wonder it’s fallen to 15th place among industrialized nations in the percent of the population subscribing to broadband. No wonder broadband adoption slipped to a seven-year low in the second quarter of 2008.

Pathetic. In Japan the median download speed is 63.60Mbps. In South Korea it’s 49 mbps. For crying out loud, in Finland it’s 21.7Mbps.

How is it that the median download speed of the country that invented the Internet is this abysmal? No wonder it’s fallen to 15th place among industrialized nations in the percent of the population subscribing to broadband. No wonder broadband adoption slipped to a seven-year low in the second quarter of 2008.

Beginning this summer, as soon as next month, wireless Internet access will arrive in the passenger cabins of some commercial U.S. airliners.

On these Internet-equipped planes, any passenger with a Wi-Fi enabled laptop — or a cellphone with Wi-Fi — will be able to do almost everything he or she could do online at home or at the office. That includes surfing the Web, using email, having instant-messenger text chats, downloading and uploading files, and streaming video and audio.

In fact, I did all these things a few days ago on a test flight using the new system, called Gogo. During the flight from San Francisco to Denver, on a small test jet, I could operate online as if I were sitting at my desk, or in a Starbucks. I used Dell (DELL) and Apple (AAPL) laptops, a BlackBerry (RIMM), a Windows Mobile phone and an iPhone to perform all the most common online tasks, while soaring over majestic mountains and glorious national parks.

I sent and received emails on Microsoft (MSFT) Outlook and Apple Mail, including messages with hefty attachments. I conducted IM chats on AOL (TWX) Instant Messenger and Google (GOOG) Talk. Using all the major Web browsers, I called up dozens of Web sites, and watched video clips on Hulu and YouTube. I downloaded photos, songs, PDF files and Microsoft Office documents. I used all the Internet functions on the iPhone, and on the Wi-Fi-equipped BlackBerry and Windows Mobile phone.

One important caveat: Gogo is a data-only system. It doesn’t allow phone calls and will block all services that allow voice conversations to be made over the Internet.

Gogo will launch on three American Airlines (AMR) routes, likely in July. The first planes to use it will be American’s 15 Boeing 767s flying between New York and Los Angeles, San Francisco and Miami. Later in the year, Gogo will be available on all of Virgin America’s small number of routes, and possibly additional American routes, if the first deployment works well. It’s supplied to the airlines by a Denver-based company called Aircell, which says it is in negotiations to offer the Gogo service on several other major U.S. airlines by next year.

The Gogo service will cost a flat fee of $12.95 for flights of three hours or longer, and $9.95 for shorter trips. You log into Gogo as you would any commercial Internet service, registering on a special Web page. Aircell plans to allow advance sign-up, so you’d only have to enter an ID and password on the plane. No add-on software, hardware or cables are required.

A few Web functions will be offered free from Gogo, including access to the American Airlines Web site, to Frommer’s online travel guides and to a limited selection of articles from The Wall Street Journal.

Gogo isn’t the first in-plane Internet service. A few years ago, Lufthansa (LHA.MU) offered a satellite-based service from Boeing (BA), mainly on over-ocean flights, but it was canceled.

The service operates at respectable, if not blazing, speeds — similar to what you’d get on a cellular broadband service or a slow home DSL line. On my test flight, download speeds varied from 266 kilobits per second to about 1.4 megabits per second, with the most typical speeds hovering between 500 and 600 kbps. Upload speeds were between 250 and 300 kbps. I found that most of the tasks I tested, except for streaming video, felt smooth and normal.

Speeds could degrade on a large plane with scores of people online simultaneously. But Aircell claims it has the technology to make my experience representative for anyone doing common tasks, such as Web surfing and email. During my test flight, eight laptops and six Wi-Fi-enabled smart phones were using the system simultaneously. All registered decent speeds, except for a couple of minutes when the plane was crossing between the zones controlled by the company’s ground-based towers.

Aircell gets Internet access to the planes through a network of 92 towers scattered across North America. These essentially are cellphone towers, carrying a high-speed cellphone data signal, except that the Aircell antennas point up, into the sky. A receiver on the underside of the aircraft picks up the signal, which is then distributed through the plane via Wi-Fi.

The companies say Gogo is safe and won’t interfere with the plane’s operation. It is government-approved, and pilots can shut the system off should they deem it necessary.

Gogo has some limitations. The service plans to allocate its capacity so that low-bandwidth activities like Web surfing and email take priority over high-bandwidth ones like streaming video. That means you may find video to be slow and halting.

And Gogo is a North American, land-based service only. It won’t work over the oceans and, for now, it won’t work on other continents.

But for U.S. travelers who want to stay connected in the air, Gogo does the job.

• Find all of Walt Mossberg’s columns and videos online, free, at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com. Email him at mossberg@wsj.com.

I’ve been testing one of these new IdeaPads, a small, thin model called the U110, that’s sized to be ideal for travelers. It looks nothing like a classic black ThinkPad. It even comes in red, has swirls etched into its case, and can supposedly log you in by recognizing your face using its built-in camera.

At the same time, I’ve been trying out another similarly sized little laptop, the U2E from Asus (23571.TWO), a Taiwan-based company whose products are relatively new to the U.S. This computer has its own distinctive design: It’s clad in real leather. It also has a camera, and it can be ordered with one of the new solid-state drives, which have no moving parts, instead of a hard disk.

Both of these small laptops are subnotebooks, meaning they weigh 3 pounds or less. Like many subnotebooks, they have small 11-inch screens and somewhat cramped keyboards. And, like most subnotebooks, they are costly — an $1,899 starting price for the Lenovo and $1,999 for the Asus.

Each can only be ordered with Microsoft’s (MSFT) Windows Vista operating system, which means you can practically walk your dog in the time it takes them to start up. Each has a standard battery so wimpy that it provides poor battery life, so both companies throw in bigger batteries that provide decent power, but make the computers larger and heavier.

I wish I could recommend a clear winner between these two contenders, but both are mixed bags. The IdeaPad is lighter, thinner, and has a slightly faster processor. The Asus has a built-in DVD drive, while the Lenovo’s is external. The Asus also has the new, faster “N” type of Wi-Fi networking, while the IdeaPad is stuck with the older, slower “G” type.

Lenovo’s small, thin IdeaPad model called the U110.

The IdeaPad has two big flaws, in my view. First, it has blown the biggest advantage of its sibling, the ThinkPad: a great keyboard. The IdeaPad keyboard has huge, flat keys with slick, shiny surfaces and almost no space between them. I found typing difficult with this setup. I asked two people who are faster typists than I am to try it: One liked it, one hated it. The IdeaPad also dispenses with the TrackPoint, the little pointing stick for moving the cursor that many ThinkPad lovers revere.

By contrast, the Asus U2E keyboard, while nothing to write home about, is more conventional and more usable, with traditional tapered keycaps that provide better key separation. The mouse buttons underneath the touch pad on the Asus, while thin, were sturdier than the ones on the IdeaPad, which had a cheap feel to me.

The second big flaw in the IdeaPad is its most hype-worthy feature: face recognition, which is meant to spare you the need to type in a password to log in. In a dozen tests, it recognized me only twice. I asked my wife to try it, and it never once recognized her. It did recognize a colleague successfully, but we tried it only once with her.

The Asus’s biggest flaw is its solid-state drive. It adds $700 to the price, for a total of $2,699, but is only 32 gigabytes in size, tiny by today’s standards. To compensate, Asus throws in an external hard disk, but that’s an inconvenient solution.

You can order the Asus with a standard 120-gigabyte internal hard disk for the $1,999 price, but that’s still $100 more than Lenovo charges for the IdeaPad with the same sized drive.

Each machine has three USB ports, a video-out connector, a slot for camera memory cards, and an ExpressCard slot, typically used for cellphone modems. Neither has a built-in cellphone data modem. The Asus has three gigabytes of memory, the Lenovo just two.

In my tough battery tests, where I turn off all power-saving features, turn on the Wi-Fi, and keep music playing constantly, the Asus got about 1.5 hours and the Lenovo a miserable one hour and three minutes. This means that, even with a more normal usage pattern, you’d be lucky to get two hours out of the IdeaPad and 2.5 hours from the Asus.

With the included bigger batteries, the IdeaPad clocked out at three hours and 10 minutes, which means you could probably stretch it to over four hours with more normal use. The Asus’s bigger battery delivered an excellent five hours and 29 minutes in my test, which points to nearly seven hours in more normal use. Asus says it has tweaked its machines to improve battery life somewhat.

However, while the jumbo battery on the IdeaPad barely protrudes from the machine, and keeps the weight under three pounds, the one on the Asus U2E is so huge it looks like a tumor and pushes the weight to 3.4 pounds, well above the subnotebook cutoff.

If you’re a frequent traveler, both of these models are worth considering, but each has its own flaws.

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

There are two models for this legal Internet distribution. Some shows and movies can be purchased or rented from services like Apple‘s iTunes or Amazon’s Unbox. You pay a fee for these downloads, which don’t have commercials, and you can keep any videos you buy to watch repeatedly even without an Internet connection.

The other model, common on the Web sites of the TV networks, is free, ad-supported streaming directly within a Web browser. In this approach, you pay nothing, but you have to watch commercials that can’t be skipped. You must be connected to the Internet while watching, and you don’t get to keep the video.

This week, the ad-supported, streaming approach took a big leap forward with the launch of a Hollywood-backed service called Hulu, at hulu.com. Hulu aims to be a legal, one-stop shop for streaming of TV shows and movies from numerous networks and studios. It’s intended as an attractive antidote to pirate sites and to Google‘s YouTube service, which has angered the media companies by allowing users to post all or parts of movies and TV shows without permission or payment.

Hulu is a joint effort of two big media conglomerates, NBC Universal and News Corp., each of which operates multiple networks and studios. (News Corp. also owns The Wall Street Journal and the Web sites where this column is published.) But Hulu contains programming from other companies as well, including Sony and Time Warner. All told, it offers full episodes or clips from about 400 TV series, plus 100 feature films.

I’ve been testing Hulu, and I am very impressed with its design and ease of use, and with the fact that it allows users to edit and re-publish its content on their own sites. Despite some drawbacks, it’s the first Web property I’ve seen from mainstream studios or networks that shows a real understanding of both modern Web design and the Internet’s culture of sharing. In my view, it’s far better than the typical network or studio Web site.

Even though Hulu lacks programming from ABC, CBS and many cable networks, it has a fair selection of popular shows, such as “30 Rock,” “The Office,” “The Simpsons,” “Battlestar Galactica” and “Saturday Night Live.” Its movie catalog includes old favorites like “The Usual Suspects,” “The Big Lebowski” and “Sideways.”

The site is organized in a clean, elegant manner. You can browse shows alphabetically, by genre or by network, or you can use an excellent search system. The search system even brings up links to videos of shows on other sites, such as ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy,” that are missing from Hulu’s own collection.

Watching the material is a pleasure. You can view it in a fixed window or in full-screen view. You can also “pop out” the viewing window so you can place it anywhere on your screen and resize it to your liking. A feature called “lower lights” grays out everything on the computer screen but the video itself.

Even the advertising is relatively painless. TV shows contain just 25% of the commercial time that’s on regular TV. And Hulu allows you, in some cases, to choose the advertisers whose commercials you see, or else to opt to watch a movie trailer at the start of a video in exchange for seeing no further ads during that viewing.

In a break with Hollywood’s past rigidity, Hulu makes it easy to share, even edit, shows and clips. You can repost an entire video, or any portion of it, on your own blog or on social networking sites.

But Hulu also has some major downsides. Most important, Hulu lacks depth. Even with TV series from its owners’ own networks, Hulu typically contains only a small number of full-length episodes, and mainly offers short clips. In some cases, episodes expire after a while. For some shows, such as “Saturday Night Live,” there aren’t any full episodes, only clips. And the wildly popular “American Idol” isn’t in Hulu at all, even though it airs on News Corp.’s Fox network.

This stands in stark contrast to the depth offered on iTunes, where you can find multiple seasons of full episodes of many shows. And it doesn’t begin to compete with pirate sites, where you can find nearly everything.

Also, Hulu requires a decent broadband connection — a speed of at least 1 megabit per second is recommended, and even higher speeds are needed for some content. That means that using Hulu over the slowest DSL lines or cellphone modem cards will likely provide a poor experience.

Another problem is that, unlike iTunes or Amazon Unbox, Hulu can’t be used via a TV set-top box or a portable player. And shows can’t be saved for offline viewing, such as during flights.

Still, Hulu is a good start for Hollywood in finally providing a better experience for Internet streaming of TV and movies. If the service can add a lot more content and make viewing possible in more scenarios, it might strike a real blow against piracy.

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.

The slender Motorola Q, despite software that is markedly inferior to that of the Treo 700p, is wooing some users because it is much slimmer and now can be had for just $99, versus $299 for the Treo. The Nokia E62 is about the size of the Q and also costs just $99 these days. The tiny BlackBerry Pearl is just $199. And Samsung has introduced the skinny BlackJack for $199, too.

So, this month, Palm is striking back with a lighter, thinner, cheaper model of its own, the Treo 680, which is being offered by Cingular Wireless at $199.

Meanwhile, T-Mobile has introduced a new slim, light competitor called the Dash. It has built-in Wi-Fi wireless networking to supplement the slower cellphone data network. And it costs just $149.

I’ve been testing the new Treo and the Dash. Both are OK, but neither is as good as it could be. The new Treo still has great software, but it makes some compromises and still fails to match the new competitors in slimness, lightness or price. The Dash has very nice hardware, but is hampered by lousy software.

The Treo 680 is shorter than the Treo 700, because it doesn’t have the 700′s protruding antenna. It’s about 11% thinner and 14% lighter. But it’s still much larger than the new class of Q-type competitors. The Dash is slightly wider than the new Treo and about the same length. But it’s much thinner and lighter. The Dash feels great in your hand because it has rubberized paint.

This new Treo works just like the 700p. It uses the same Palm operating-system software, which is much easier and faster than the Windows Mobile software used by the Dash and the Q. As I have noted in the past, simple operations like deleting an email or displaying your calendar are usually one-click processes on the Palm OS devices, while they often take two or more clicks, or involve opening menus, on the Windows devices.

Also, the Treo 680, like the costlier 700p, comes with better functionality for handling Microsoft Office documents than the Dash does, even though the latter uses Microsoft software. The 680 has the same large, high-resolution screen as the 700p. By contrast, the screen on the Dash, while bright and vivid, is lower resolution.

But the new 680 is less capable than the 700 series Treos. First, it runs on a much slower cellphone network, called EDGE. This EDGE technology isn’t broadband speed, and is only about one-seventh as fast as the networks from Verizon Wireless and Sprint that the Treo 700 uses. Cingular does have a new network with speeds comparable to Verizon‘s and Sprint’s, but the Treo 680 can’t take advantage of it.

Second, the Treo 680 is a big step backward in terms of its camera. The camera’s resolution is only about a third of a megapixel, while the camera on the Treo 700 — and the Dash — is 1.3 megapixels. Finally, the stylus on the Treo 680 is cheap and just plain awful. It actually bends when you use it.

The Dash is also stuck on the slow EDGE network technology because that’s the best data network T-Mobile currently offers. It makes up for it with built-in Wi-Fi, which is much faster than EDGE, and potentially much faster than the Verizon and Sprint cellphone data networks.

In my tests, I was able to use the Dash for email and Web browsing via Wi-Fi in my office, my home and a couple of coffee shops. The Wi-Fi setup and connection process was fairly easy, and T-Mobile has added software to the Dash that guides you through setting up access at Wi-Fi hot spots it operates in airports, Starbucks shops and other locations.

In fact, T-Mobile offers a data plan for $30 a month that includes both cellphone Internet service and access to its Wi-Fi hot spots. This is on top of the cost of a voice plan.

There are some downsides. The Dash doesn’t automatically switch on Wi-Fi. You have to do it manually. And, in my tests, it was much slower using Wi-Fi than a laptop was. For instance, in my home, on my very fast Wi-Fi connection, the Dash got just under one megabit per second, while a Mac laptop inches away got over 14 mbps. On a slower network in my office, the Dash got around half a megabit per second, while a computer inches away got 1.3 mbps.

I also found the keyboard on the Dash to be more cramped and harder to use than the one on the Treo. And the touch strip it uses to control volume didn’t work well.

If you have always wanted a Treo, but couldn’t handle the price tag, the 680 may be for you. Just be prepared for its slower speed and inferior camera. If you yearn for Wi-Fi in a slender smart phone, and can put up with a clumsy software interface, go with the Dash.

• Email me at mossberg@wsj.com.