The maker of consumer networking products posted revenue of $171.1 million and non-GAAP profits of 31 cents a share, trouncing the Street consensus of $156 million and 8 cents. Revenue was down from $189.4 million a year ago, but up from $144.7 million in Q2.

For the fourth quarter, the company sees revenue of $170 million to $180 million, which topped the Street consensus of $164.8 million.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Kvaal lifted his 2009 EPS estimate for the company to 35 cents, from 26 cents. For 2010, he goes to 90 cents, from 78 cents. That’s well above the Street, at 24 cents for the year and 78 cents for next year.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

For the quarter, the networking and storage products company reported revenue of $161.4 million, ahead of the Street at $157.2 million, but in line with guidance of $155 million to $165 million. However, the company also posted a non-GAAP loss for the quarter of 8 cents a share; the Street had been looking for a profit of 7 cents a share. NTGR had been expecting a non-GAAP operating margin of 9.5-10.5 percent; the figure actually came in at 5.6 percent.

In a statement, CEO Patrick Lo said the company’s revenue and operating income were “unexpectedly weighed down by rapid declines in value of foreign currencies against the U.S. dollar.”

Read the rest of this post

For Q3, NTGR posted revenue of $179.4 million, beating the consensus at $176.9 million. But non-GAAP profits of 19 cents a share were well short of the Street at 26 cents.

Also, the company sees Q4 revenue of $155 million to $165 million, below the Street consensus of $186.7 million. Netgear sees non-GAAP operating margin in the quarter of 9.5-10.5 percent.

In a statement, CEO Patrick Lo said the that the company suffered “weakness in demand for our consumer products across both retail and service provider channels in all geographies.” Lo added that the company expects subdued spending conditions to persist over the next few quarters. The company also was hurt by the strengthening dollar, reporting a currency loss in the quarter of $4.7 million.

Read the rest of this post

In a statement, CEO Patrick Lo said the company “experienced weakness in September demand on our consumer products across all channels and in all geographies, particularly in the service provider channel, where our carrier customers worldwide requested shipment delays on previously placed orders, thereby preventing us from recognizing revenue on those orders.”

Read the rest of this post

I am in the market for a new HDTV and the newspaper ads are using terminology that I’m unfamiliar with. Do TVs rated at “720p” provide the same quality picture as those rated at “1080p”?

Technically, the answer is no, but it may not matter. The 1080p resolution is certainly higher, but almost nobody can tell the difference between the same material shown in the two resolutions on TV screens up to around 50″ in size and at the typical distances from which people watch those screens. Not only that, but most sources of video content, with the exception of Blu-ray discs, can’t even fully utilize 1080p. Major TV networks don’t use it yet because it requires a lot of bandwidth.

If you can afford a set that can handle 1080p, you might want to buy it so that you are ready in case a lot of 1080p content one day becomes available. You might also want a 1080p set if you are a videophile; have an enormous screen or a projector that fills a large wall; or if you play a lot of Blu-ray discs and believe you can discern the difference on a typical-sized screen. Otherwise, you could save money by buying a 720p set and you might never know the difference.

In 2006, you recommended a powerline adapter for Internet access by Netgear, the XE104. Is this still a good buy or are there others by now that are better?

I haven’t tested powerline adapters, the gadgets that route computer networks over standard home electrical wiring, since that date. Netgear and its competitors — such as Linksys and Belkin — have, naturally, come out with newer, faster units since then. But I am still personally using the XE104 successfully and feel I continue to get my money’s worth from it. It is still being sold. The newer units typically have greater speed in order to do a better job of streaming video around a home, but they work in basically the same way.

I have a Windows XP system, and things work well with my cable modem in my office. But when I’m on the road using Wi-Fi, I can receive emails, but can’t reply or send out. Any idea on how to resolve this problem?

This usually happens because the Wi-Fi provider is blocking the outgoing email server (called an “SMTP” server) that you or your IT department has set up in your email program. Some providers block all such outgoing servers. There are a number of possible solutions. The simplest is to use a Web-based email service, like Gmail or Yahoo Mail, or the Web-based version of your usual service. If your email is provided by your company, you may be able to access a version of Microsoft Outlook over the Internet that will work.

Another possibility is to ask the provider at the hotel or airport what SMTP server it does allow — usually its own — and enter it into your email program’s settings, if you know how. Yet another option would be to use a data card from a cellphone carrier, which I have found can usually overcome this problem. There may be other workarounds, and I invite readers to suggest them.

You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, 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 antispyware software, Powerline adapters and the Mac mouse button.

I set my parents up with a new Dell PC, and included antispyware software that I run periodically to clean up the computer. I recently discovered they had more than 200 instances of spyware on the machine. This may be because my 81-year-old father surfs porn sites ALL the time (this isn’t a joke). Is there any way to keep his computer bulletproof and safe?

Assuming you can’t dissuade him from the porn sites, which are common sources of spyware and adware, your best option is to switch to a type of antispyware program that blocks the installation and operation of spyware and adware programs as it is happening, rather than waiting until they are installed to clear them out. The best program I have tested of this type is Spy Sweeper from Webroot, but there are others. These types of programs usually aren’t free, but their prices are modest and they would allow your dad to spend his golden years as he sees fit.

Last week, you recommended Powerline adapters that can route an Internet connection over the regular electrical wires in your house. I have two questions about these products. If a home has two different circuit-breaker boxes, can adapters plugged into outlets connected to the different boxes communicate? And, could a neighbor who shares an outside electrical line potentially spy on my Internet usage?

I am not an expert on electrical systems, and neither of these circumstances applied to my tests. So I asked Netgear, the manufacturer of the XE104 adapters I reviewed last week.

The company says that if the two adapters are plugged into outlets that are on totally independent electrical “loops,” they won’t be able to communicate, because the electrical current itself wouldn’t pass between the loops. However, Netgear claims it is “extremely rare” for a home built after 1950 to have two wholly independent loops, even if they have two different circuit-breaker boxes. The company says that, at least in newer homes, separate circuit boxes are often linked.

However, I would add that electrical layouts vary so much that there is no guarantee that any two electrical outlets will have a connection that will work with Powerline adapters. I believe it will work in the vast majority of cases, but not all. In my home, which is 36 years old, the adapters did work between rooms with different circuit-breaker boxes.

On the security issue, the company says it is theoretically possible, but very unlikely, for a neighbor on your same outside electrical line to spy on a network running over your interior electrical wires. To do so, Netgear says, the neighbor’s house and yours would have to lack a filter between them, and those are commonly present. Even then, a nosy neighbor would have to know that you have a Powerline network — and buy a compatible adapter — in order to access your network.

This is likelier, but still not very probable, in an apartment building, because circuits in such buildings are often shared. The company does include optional encryption software for such situations, so that even if a neighbor can snoop on you, he wouldn’t be able to decipher your network traffic.

I am thinking of buying an Apple MacBook, but I notice it only has one button below the touch pad, and no obvious scrolling control. Without buying and using a mouse, how can you right-click and scroll on a Mac laptop?

The Mac operating system and Apple software do in fact support right-clicking, displaying the same sort of pop-up menus that Windows does. However, on a Mac laptop with the single button, the traditional method for right-clicking has been a clumsy one: holding the Control key while clicking the button.

Now, the latest Mac laptops have a much easier and cleverer method for right-clicking: you just place two fingers on the track pad and click the button. It’s fast and easy, though still not as good as if Apple abandoned its odd mouse dogma and simply built dual buttons into its laptops.

Also, the new Mac laptops have a method for scrolling that I find superior to the methods common on Windows laptops: you just place two fingers on the touch pad and drag them up or down together. It quickly becomes second nature.

* * *

Because of the volume of email I receive, I can’t routinely answer individual questions by email, 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

But there’s more than one way to get a strong, fast Internet signal all over your house. You aren’t limited to using a single wireless router. You don’t have to install a bunch of complicated wireless “range extenders.” And you don’t have to snake networking cables through your walls.

Instead, there’s a simple alternative that’s often overlooked: Using small gadgets called Powerline adapters, you can route your Internet connection around your house over your regular electrical power lines, the ones already in your walls. It really works, it’s fast and it doesn’t disrupt your electrical system. Even better, it requires zero technical skill.

You just plug one of the adapters into a standard electrical outlet near the place where your Internet connection enters your home. Then, you connect the adapter to your wired or wireless router. Next, you plug a second, identical adapter into an electrical outlet in a distant room where you lack an Internet connection. Finally, you plug a computer (or even a wireless access point) into that second adapter. There’s no setup, no required software and no technicians or tools are needed.

When you plug in a computer into the second Powerline adapter, it’s as if that computer was right next to your cable or DSL modem and router. You are on the Internet at full speed. If you plug a Wi-Fi wireless access point into the second Powerline adapter, it will create a wireless network in and around the distant room, which multiple computers can use.

I first reviewed these Powerline adapters in 2003. I liked them, but they were a little slow and never took off. Now, however, one of the leading home network product makers, Netgear, offers a whole line of faster Powerline adapters.

I’ve been testing one of Netgear’s newest models, the XE104, which costs $100 per adapter, and I can heartily recommend it. It couldn’t be simpler or more effective. In my tests, the XE104 gave me wicked-fast connections. I tried plugging Windows and Macintosh laptops directly into the adapters in rooms where my wireless signal was weakest. I also tried plugging a Wi-Fi wireless access point into an XE104 adapter and picking up the connection wirelessly on the laptops. (An access point is a wireless gadget that takes a wired Internet connection and propagates it through the air.)

In all scenarios, the Netgear XE104 adapters delivered nearly the full speed of my Internet service, which in my case is very fast — 15 megabits per second downstream and two mbps upstream. In fact, the XE104 can handle speeds up to 85 mbps, far faster than any common connection.

You can use up to four Netgear adapters at once, and the company claims they will cover a 5,000-square-foot home. Netgear includes optional software to encrypt your Powerline connection, but this is needed only if you share an electrical system with other families.

Linksys, Belkin and other companies also make Powerline adapters, sometimes called bridges. But Netgear is the leader in this category, and I didn’t test the other brands.

The XE104 is a small, white rectangular gadget about 4 inches high, 3 inches wide and 1.5 inches thick. It carries a standard two-pronged electrical plug and mounts right into the wall outlet.

On the side, there are four standard Ethernet network ports, like the kind on your router and laptop. Netgear includes a short Ethernet cable so you can connect the first adapter to your router and the second one to a PC or a wireless access point.

The four Ethernet ports are what make the XE104 a “switch.” They allow you to connect each adapter to multiple devices. For instance, the first adapter can be connected both to your router and to a PC. The second might be connected to a PC, a wireless access point and a device like a game console.

Netgear makes a similar model without the multiple Ethernet ports, called the XE103, for $80. There’s also a costlier model that goes up to 200 mbps, though that’s overkill for 99% of people.

The company also makes a Powerline adapter with a built-in wireless access point for the distant room, the $150 WGXB102 model. This saves you the cost and hassle of buying and connecting a separate access point. But it’s slower and uses older technology. In my tests, it was less than half as fast as using the XE104 with a separate, modern wireless access point.

Unfortunately, like a lot of network-equipment makers, Netgear is clueless about naming products so that normal humans can understand what they are. The XE104 is officially called the XE104 85 Mbps Wall-Plugged Ethernet Switch. That’s like calling a table lamp the LS482 75 Watt Wall-Plugged Switched Illumination Device.

Netgear even makes it hard to find the XE104 on its Web site, netgear.com. It lists it under a section called “Bridges, Access Points, and Range Extenders.” You can buy them at computer stores and other retail outlets.

These adapters are a terrific way to clear up Internet dead spots.

• Email me at mossberg@wsj.com.

Many folks would rather listen to Internet radio in rooms where their computers don’t live, or where they’d rather not lug a laptop. To do so today, you have to buy a device that transmits music from a computer to remote speakers. These include the Squeezebox from Slim Devices Inc., Netgear’s MP101 Wireless Digital Music Player and Roku’s SoundBridge M1000.

None of these devices includes its own built-in speakers. You have to attach them to your audio system, and some require you to manage software on the computer that allows them to work over your network, a tricky process.

But, this week, we tested a new Internet radio product that’s totally self-contained and requires almost no setup. It doesn’t depend on a computer to bring in Internet radio, but does the job itself, wirelessly connecting to your broadband service, just like a computer does. And it doesn’t require an external audio system. It has its own built-in subwoofer and speakers, just like a traditional radio. It even looks like a traditional radio, but it does much more.

This new product is called the SoundBridge Radio, and comes from Roku LLC. It’s due to hit store shelves in a few weeks at around $400, which includes a remote control.

By including speakers, Roku eliminates the intimidating extra step of fiddling with wires to attach the device to a separate sound system. With its own sound system, the SoundBridge Radio can also function as an alarm clock, and it can receive your local AM and FM stations over the air, in addition to Internet radio.

Roku’s SoundBridge Radio, priced at $400, includes a remote, built-in speakers and a subwoofer.

And, even though it doesn’t require a computer for radio, the SoundBridge can pull music off your computers wirelessly and play it. It can even play music stored on a SecureDigital memory card.

We rocked out all week, listening to all different types of radio stations, and concluded that the SoundBridge Radio is a decent product, but its user interface could stand some improvement.

In addition to playing roughly 100 preprogrammed Internet radio stations, the SoundBridge Radio also detects and plays music from all libraries within range of your wireless network — without having to install any special software on your Windows or Mac computer. These libraries can include content running on Apple’s iTunes, Real Networks’ Rhapsody, Windows Media Connect and Windows Media 10, as well as services like MusicMatch, Napster, MSN Music and Walmart.com.

To add your own Internet radio stations onto the SoundBridge Radio, you must use a convoluted method involving iTunes. This summer, Roku plans to upgrade its software so as to include many more preprogrammed stations on each device.

The SoundBridge Radio is black and measures 11 inches wide, 6 inches high and 6½ inches deep. Two speakers are built into its front panel, and a subwoofer is built into its rear. A horizontal display with blue-green lettering runs across the front panel, and 13 buttons are built into the top ledge, including a hard-to-miss sleep button and six numbered preset buttons. A headphone jack and SD card slot are positioned on the player’s right side.

We had no trouble setting up the SoundBridge Radio. We plugged it in, and its display screen immediately came to life, asking us a few simple questions, which we answered by pressing the Select button on an included remote. After a few seconds of waiting, we were on our way.

This text in the display screen can be adjusted to one of six different fonts; we chose the average-size type. While the smallest enabled us to see more text, it was impossible to see across the room, and the largest font had to constantly scroll to display song information. Unlike on some other devices, the remote has no built-in little screen of its own.

Navigating through the SoundBridge Radio was confusing at times. A Source menu listed the six sections of the player, including each of our share-enabled iTunes music collections, and read: Play Walt’s iMac, Play Katie’s Music, Play AM Radio, Play FM Radio, Play Internet Radio and System Configuration. The radio itself had a Source button on it that, when pressed, easily retrieved this menu, but the remote had no such button.

The remote does have a Home button (represented by a house icon), but this goes only to the main menu within the current source, not to the useful Source menu itself.

After selecting each of our music libraries, options for how to play the music appeared on the screen, such as by selecting premade playlists or by browsing through and choosing a specific artist. We played a few songs from each of our iTunes libraries, including Billy Joel and Coldplay, and were impressed by the sound.

Music bought on Apple’s iTunes Music Store will not play on the SoundBridge Radio because of Apple’s refusal to license its digital rights management software. Instead, the title of that purchased tune shows up in the display line with a tiny padlock icon next to it; playable music is distinguished with a music note.

But backing out of a song while it played wasn’t as easy as we had hoped — pressing the Back button didn’t do anything. We pressed the Home button, which took us two steps further back than we wanted to navigate.

AM, FM and Internet radio each had its own list of stations. We attached two separate antennas to the SoundBridge so the AM and FM radios could be received, then used seek buttons on the remote and radio itself to find stations. About 100 Internet stations were preloaded on the SoundBridge Radio, but these could be sorted by various categories like name, genre or language.

We listened to various Internet radio stations, including Beatles Radio, Swiss Radio, Smooth Beats, Southern California Public Radio and CNN Radio. But we had trouble with a few stations — like ESPN and Pacifica Radio — that failed to stream content to our radio after five tries. Roku said that this might have been because the stations’ servers were busy.

Without the remote, the Roku SoundBridge Radio functions — but not completely. The six numbered preset buttons are categorized into A, B and C, so there are really 18 places to save a station from AM, FM or Internet radio. You can also use the preset buttons to save specific playlists, as well as lists of search results, by holding down a preset while listening to a song or station in that category. For example, while listening to music from Walt’s iMac, we held down the number six button, and a new label was placed on that button, smartly titled “All songs on Walt’s iMac.”

If the Radio is in standby mode, the time, or the time and full date, can be displayed. Pressing any of the preset buttons will turn on the device and start playing music saved under that preset. Another button brings the Source menu to the screen, but Roku didn’t think to add a select button to the Radio, so we couldn’t navigate far enough to listen to music from the Katie’s Music or Walt’s iMac libraries.

Overall, the Roku SoundBridge Radio is a smart device that needs a little tweaking. If the company really wants to market it as an alarm, it has to understand that users will want to play all of its available music, including computer libraries, without a remote. And navigating with the remote itself needs to be improved so that users don’t feel like they can’t back up out of a menu.

But by designing this receiver with built-in speakers, Roku made it less confusing for average users — a move that might encourage more people to step away from their computers, while still enjoying great music.

• Email: MossbergSolution@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 mixing Macs and Windows computers on the same wireless network, setting up video-conferencing and switching email addresses.

If you have a question, send it to me at mossberg@wsj.com, and I may select it to be answered here in Mossberg’s Mailbox.

We have two Windows PCs on a wireless network controlled by a Netgear router. We are thinking of buying an Apple Mac laptop. Can the Mac connect to this wireless PC network?

Yes, you can easily mix Macs and Windows computers on the same wireless network, even if the router isn’t made by Apple, and even if the router maker says it doesn’t “support” Macs — which merely means the maker won’t help you connect them. Apple uses the same Wi-Fi wireless standard the Windows guys do, so it can recognize and connect to any standard wireless router, right alongside your Windows machines. In fact, connections are generally easier to establish on the Mac, which had Wi-Fi before Windows computers did.

You can also do this in reverse. You can add a Windows PC to a mostly Mac wireless network being run off an Apple router. I have done it both ways. In my home, I have a mixture of Windows and Mac computers running on a Belkin wireless router. In my office, I have an Apple router that is mainly used with Windows machines that visitors bring in. No special knowledge, special equipment, or special software is required for such mixed networks.

I want to be able to see and hear my grandchildren on my computer. What equipment do I need to accomplish this?

Assuming both you and your grandchildren have Windows computers, you would need to buy and install Web cameras on each. I recommend Logitech cameras, which are decent and inexpensive. Then, you would have to join an instant-messaging service that has video, like AOL, Yahoo or MSN. Then, you just initiate a video session with the grandchildren, and you’re in business. (If you have trouble doing any of this, the grandchildren can probably set it up for you on their next visit.)

Another interesting video-conferencing service for Windows users is Paltalk, at paltalk.com. Skype, at skype.com, also now has a video-conferencing service, for Windows users. If you and your grandchildren have the latest Macintosh desktop computers, both the cameras and the video service are built in, and the video experience is vastly better than with AOL or Yahoo or MSN.

I want to quit AOL, where I’ve been for years, but I need an easy way to move over my address book, forward my email for awhile, and notify everyone of my new address. Does such a thing exist?

Yes. To notify everyone of your new address, move over your address book, and generally to help with the switch, try a service called TrueSwitch, at trueswitch.com. It costs $20, unless you’re switching to MSN, AT&T or SBC/Yahoo, in which case it is free. TrueSwitch will even copy your saved emails, Web bookmarks and calendar entries. I have tested it, and it works, though only with Windows computers.

* * *

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