Maximize Your IT Investment

If you are responsible for the IT planning and purchasing of your company, how many times have you asked yourself:

• How much should we spend on information technology?
• What issues should be considered while the budget develops?
• How can each and every dollar be maximized?
• What are other companies doing to stretch their IT dollars?
• How do we demonstrate a solid return-on-investment (ROI) number?

At TSI Tech Support, we've looked at several strategies to make the most of every IT dollar, such as:

• Reducing the IT Budget
• Phone Services
• Hosting Costs
• Preventative Maintenance to reduce down dime If any
• A Full Year's Budget and Recommendation

  Call us at 800.214-1874 or visit us on the web at www.tsitechsupport.com

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

If you're one of the more than 25 million Comcast subscribers, the bill you get next month may be for a service called Xfinity.

Beginning February 12, Comcast will begin rebranding its cable, Internet, and digital voice services in 11 markets under the Xfinity name, which it first debuted in December when the company began the process of acquiring NBC Universal.

At the time, Comcast CEO Brian Roberts told investors, "We basically are creating two Comcasts."

Today, we found out more of what that entails.

In the company's earnings call for today Roberts said, "We are not only repositioning the company technically, we are repositioning the company with consumers." So Comcast the parent company will remain, but Xfinity will be the name the customers see, divorcing the stigmatized Comcast brand from the service.

The Xfinity advertising push is expected to begin during the 2010 Winter Olympics for subscribers in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, Hartford, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington D.C., Chattanooga, and Augusta.

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

True Story: When I was a freshman in college in the late 90's, my roommate and I had an NES in our dorm room that people would come over and play with. Though we had just reached the 64-bit era of consoles at that point, people loved to come play games from our formative years and socialize.

Everything was fine and fun until somebody gave us a Tetris cartridge.

From that point onward, people stopped coming and going from our room, and sort of just came and stayed. During most hours of the day, there was someone who wasn't me sitting on my bed playing Tetris...and It got old pretty quickly.

One morning after I had spent all night doing something (let's just pretend it was studying) a kid came knocking on the door asking to play Tetris.

"No, man, it's 8 A.M. and I'm trying to sleep," I said, and started to close the door.

The kid put his foot in the crack between door and the jamb, and said "Come on, don't be a dick."

This story ends after a heated exchange of words which culminated in me smashing the Tetris cartridge against a cinderblock wall and then cramming it down a heating duct. While it brought an end to everyone's Tetris fun, it more importantly brought me to the point of this little article: all the odd places we've crammed Tetris.

Not in the frenzied flying-off-the-sleep-deprived-handle sense like I did, but the novel sense like today's announcement from Dish Network, Oberon Media, and the Tetris Company. The three partners today announced that there will finally be a Tetris Channel.

Yes, now with Tetris TV, Dish Network subscribers will have access to an online version of two different versions of Tetris for $2.99 per month. It's the first instance I've come across of "Subscription-based Tetris on TV," and it should fit right in the annals of Tetris history along with some of these other oddities from the long 25-year history of Alexy Pajitnov's greatest invention:

Tetris on a Chip & PIN terminal:

Tetris on the TI-83 Calculator:

"Scopetris" on an oscilloscope (by engineer Lars Pontoppidan):

Tetris coded in the .NET Micro framework (by Pavel Bánský):

Still others:

Though only 23 games were made for Nintendo's ill-fated, seizure-inducing Virtual boy, two of them were versions of Tetris.

Proving that the game has appeal beyond the sense of sight, there was reportedly a version of Tetris hidden in Braillenote terminals, accessible only by entering the code "playtime" during startup.

Nintendo started handheld gaming way before the Game Boy with its LCD Game & Watch games. Later on, it continued its LCD gaming history with devices like this Tetris watch. The one pictured below belongs to professional skateboarder and MTV reality show star Rob Dyrdek. The diamond embellishments weren't a standard option back when this watch was new, I'm afraid.

And this, of course, which needs little explanation.

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Buffalo Technology's LinkStation Mini dual-drive network storage solution has been looked upon quite favorably. Om Malik called it "almost perfect", and its startlingly tiny profile (only 1.6" x 3.2" x 5.3") and quiet operation earned it high marks across the board.

Besides the somewhat high price of the unit, the only complaint users and reviewers seemed to have with the LinkStation was its rather unwieldy Web-based user interface.

Today, Buffalo announced it has a new "enhanced" version of LinkStation Mini, which has mostly the same specs as its predecessor: It's tiny, supports RAID 0 and RAID 1, is DLNA certified, and is iTunes and Time Machine-compatible, but it's gotten a performance upgrade and a new user interface.

The prices have also come down quite a bit since the NAS device debuted in late 2008. Now instead of $699, the 1 TB model now costs $329.99 and with the 500 GB model costs $229.99.

We'll see if we can't get some hands-on time with the updated versions to see if Buffalo Technology has cranked up its tiny storage device from "almost perfect" to "perfect" in just under two years.

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

One of the key objections Mozilla and its supporters have had to the use of H.264 codecs for HTML5 video -- the built-in decoding system being developed for the next edition of HTML -- is that it's proprietary technology. As such, there are no guarantees against the rights holders to that technology staking claims to it, and charging money for it...and there may not be much protection against others who believe they have claims on it, to test their theories in a full-scale patent infringement trial.

Up to now, the MPEG Licensing Authority (MPEG LA) has not been charging royalties to anyone, including streamers and the viewers of streamed content, for the use of H.264 encoding and decoding for the specific purpose of delivering free streams. That way, for example, the participants in YouTube's and Vimeo's current tests of H.264 in HTML5 -- Web browser-based video without any plug-ins -- can proceed without incurring charges.

But discussion about that fact prompted a reader of the Linux news service LWN.net to ask MPEG LA whether that meant H.264 users must still obtain some type of license. As part of its response late yesterday, MPEG LA delivered a statement to multiple sources, including Betanews, announcing that the rights management firm will extend the period for which it will refrain from collecting royalties for use of H.264 in free streaming video, until the last day of 2016. The term of that royalty-free agreement was due to expire at the end of this year.

"Products and services other than Internet Broadcast AVC Video," reads MPEG LA's statement to Betanews, "continue to be royalty-bearing, and royalties to apply during the next term will be announced before the end of 2010." Internet Broadcast AVC Video is the name of the patent portfolio to which H.264 belongs, when used in the context of streaming.

But in a direct, personal response to the LWN.net reader that was shared with other members, MPEG LA global licensing director Allen Harkness explained that the fact it doesn't charge end users (viewers) royalties for downloading H.264 streams, doesn't mean they should not be licensed to do so. Effectively, someone has to be licensed to produce the videos, and that license does incur a fee. But that license is then effectively passed downstream to the end user.

"While our Licenses are not concluded by End Users, anyone in the product chain has liability if an end product is unlicensed," wrote Harkness. "Therefore, a royalty paid for an end product by the end product supplier would render the product licensed in the hands of the End User, but where a royalty has not been paid, such a product remains unlicensed and any downstream users/distributors would have liability. Therefore, we suggest that all End Users deal with products only from licensed suppliers."

The implied danger here is that a producer of video who did not use a licensed codec (whether or not he owed anything for it) could be exposing the viewer of that video to liability. Or as Mozilla contributor Robert O'Callahan described it in a blog post last Friday, "In other words, if you're an end user in a country where software patents (or method patents) are enforceable, and you're using software that encodes or decodes H.264 and the vendor is not on the list of licensees, the MPEG LA reserves the right to sue you, the end user, as well as the software vendor or distributor."

The AVC codecs used to encode video for streaming or other distribution, often carries a fee regardless of how the videos themselves will be used. Some software makers, including UK-based Magix AG, opt to enable H.264 encoders to be purchased separately, to ensure not only that users are properly licensed but also that users who have no plans to actually encode using H.264, don't end up spending extra money for the license.

Under the terms of the current royalty rates due to expire on December 31, makers of software products including the codec are charged 20¢ per unit after the first 100,000 units sold per year, and 10¢ per unit after the 5,000,000th unit sold that year. Royalties for this year are capped at $5 million. Subscription video streaming services also incur royalties, at a rate starting at 2¢ per subscribed title plus about 10¢ per subscriber per year. Those rates, and their associated caps, are likely to change next year, and MPEG LA may be announcing changes soon.

By Nate Mook, Betanews

Centercode is accepting applications for a new online game and world beta test. Inspired by a successful film franchise, and based on the timeless art of kung fu, the game is designed for the whole family. This new MMO includes character customization and the ability to battle others. Centercode notes that it is "an engaging and exciting environment with beautiful music, excellent scenery and fun yet challenging games."

The next testing stage of this project will be conducted on: Wednesday February 3, 2010 - 3PM and 6PM PST (6PM to 9PM EST), however testing will continue over the next few weeks and even if you do not get into todays event, there will be many more opportunities to participate.

The testing will be conducted during set times and you should be available to participate between the stated hours. Centercode will provide login credentials for people just prior to launching the load test. Once connected, you will have three hours to have fun and play the game.

Once on the project, testers will be able to have an exclusive opportunity to be a part of future releases, including more load tests and eventually the full beta test. The company also develops many other games and this can lead to more game test opportunities with Centercode.

Click here for more details and to sign up for the beta test.

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

This morning, Google began deploying an over-the-air software update for its Nexus One phones, including the addition of true pinch-to-zoom multitouch and synchronization features for Google Maps, as well as a purported fix for poor 3G connectivity for at least one version of the phone's firmware. In the early minutes after deployment, there appeared to be some hope as some users of Google's support forums reported improved signal strength.

But that was in the early going. As the hours passed, customers were correcting their existing reports, and others were adding new reports, of only marginally improved 3G speeds at best. Connectivity appears to have improved for some -- getting at least some 3G where there was none before -- but that's not a complete solution for them yet. What's more, troubles with 3G signals being completely dropped when the phone is touched by human hands -- a problem reported by a minority of users, but still a sizable number -- seemed to continue.

"Initial thoughts: still on the edge of the world," reported a Google forum contributor whose handle is WorLord. "Still lose 3g in the house and back yard. No flip-flopping,,though, and one more bar of whatever I'm on than previously. Net connections no longer time out like they did before; maps and pages actually resolve in their own time as opposed to never. As predicted, new baseband and build versions. Overall I'm pleased... the phone is aactually useable in most conditions where I don't have a wireless connection to jump on."

Based on reports we've read, cases where customers with no troubles prior to applying the OTA fix, who then reported zero 3G connectivity after the fix (in order to add multitouch and improve Maps), may have actually been experiencing installation procedure issues. There's no conclusive evidence yet of the fix actually causing new troubles where there was none before.

As Nexus One customer idogadget reported: "My EDGE strength was at 63dBm [decibel milliwatts], and after the update is -51dBm. My 3G before the update when laying on the counter without touching was -103dBm, and went to zero when picked up. Now 3G is at -97dBm on the counter, -103dBm to zero when in hand depend on how you hold it...So I guess the question still remains unanswered: Is this a software or hardware problem? The update did help, but how much software tinkering can improve 3G if indeed [Nexus One] has a faulty antenna or antenna related problem?"

One customer who apparently has been experiencing fewer problems than most advised others in Google's Nexus One forum that one reason they may be seeing such rapid signal fluctuations as this one is because N1 is simply a faster phone. A slower phone would give the appearance of steadier 3G and EDGE signals, while fluctuations are actually the order of the day all the time. Another customer advised that 3G signals are not properly measured in "bars" anyway, and that flutters in the signal strength meter are indicative of total signal strength, not just 3G.

But users who've experienced little to no improvement after applying the fix are now complaining that the amount of time Google, HTC, and T-Mobile spent addressing the fix extended over their 15-day grace period for refunded returns. Now their only recourse is to trade their current units in for replacement Nexus One units, and their faith in the product's merchantability has been diminished along with its 3G signal.

"If I were to cancel service now, I will have to pay $350 to Google, $200 to T-Mobile, plus the $180 I paid for the phone and $100 ETF I paid to AT&T -- that is over $800," writes customer Bleeky. "I was fine with AT&T and my iPhone 3G S, and if it turns out that I am stuck with terrible service for the next two years, who's to blame? Are you saying that I shouldn't be upset for being duped into thinking a 'software bug' was the reason I had s****y T-Mobile service? I stayed faithful and hopeful that this 'update' was going to fix the problem, but it didn't. Now that my two weeks has passed, I have no recourse!"

Commenters in T-Mobile's support forums have not reported trouble with the OTA update; in fact, they've reported smoother operations, faster responsiveness from the Android OS, and generally positive results from multitouch. Early problems with the Google Voice application force-closing itself appeared to have been eradicated later in the day, and are now being blamed on the Web service, not the phone. However, traffic in T-Mobile's threads concerning 3G troubles appeared to have gathered around Google last week.

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Somebody at Microsoft should be fired for laying off Don Dodge. The list of reasons why his layoff was stupid gets longer by the day. Yesterday's Dodge blog post, "From MSFT evangelist to Mac enthusiast -- the other side of the road," adds another reason. This Silicon Valley insider, who for five years evangelized Microsoft, has taken on the true tone of conversion -- a man filled with new Apple and Google religion. His conversion to the new faith is nothing short of tech evangelism disaster for Microsoft.

In my late-December post, "10 things Microsoft did wrong in 2009," "laid off Don Dodge" ranked No. 3. What seemed bad for Microsoft then is suddenly much worse.

"The move from Microsoft gave me the opportunity to try lots of new things," Dodge writes. "The move from Microsoft was complete. From Windows to Mac, from Outlook to Gmail, from Explorer to Google Chrome browser, from Office to Google Apps, from Windows Mobile phone to Android, from Zune to iPod." Whoa. "But this post is all about the move to Mac." The statement insinuates that Dodge will in the future share more about his other moves.

Dodge may be the most high-profile Mac switcher ever. His previous role as Microsoft evangelist, now Google evangelist, and geek status among the tech community makes him a formidable and believable preacher. Besides, people love turncoats. Reformers. Perhaps even the converted. Dodge's status as former Microsoft true believer makes his conversion to a new faith all the more delicious reading.

Most importantly, Dodge makes astute observations about the differences between the Microsoft religion and that of Apple or Google. All companies operate by a worldview. In December, I contrasted the Google and Microsoft worldviews. Dodge somewhat contrasts the Apple and Microsoft worldviews. He writes:

The most obvious distinction between Microsoft and Apple is design. Apple is quite simply the best hardware/software design company in the world...My Windows machine was a Lenovo X301 with Windows Vista. It was light and small for travel, but I don't think anyone would classify it as beautiful. You see the design ethic in everything Apple does.

Dodge concedes that Apple's design and functionality advantages derive from end-to-end control over software and hardware. As such, the Apple experience is "just easier and more elegant." He delights in the MacBook experience: "The first things I noticed about my Mac were: the touchpad, keyboard (backlit), the screen, battery life, start-up/shut down, power cord and appearance."

Among the Mac vs Windows PC debates I often see a common trend: Mac bashers complain that Apple's offers less features for more money. But what matters is getting features that matter to the buyer. Design is one, and Dodge extols another:

The first time I used the MacBook at night I was delighted to discover the backlit keyboard. I had no idea it was there. I guess it comes on when it detects low light conditions. The light shines through all the keys so you can type in the dark. OK, you can laugh at my backward ways, but I never had a PC with that feature. Working in low light or dark conditions is now simple. I love it.

Dodge's conversion and anti-Microsoft evangelism hits where it hurts Microsoft the most. He also astutely observes the ongoing shift from the PC platform to cloud platform:

Ten or 20 years ago users had to deal with the operating system to do anything on a PC. Today most people spend their time in the browser. From my perspective the underlying OS doesn't matter much. All my applications run in the browser. Web browsing, email, documents, spreadsheets, music, photos…everything is in the browser.

"The OS doesn't matter much?" This from someone who worked for Microsoft, which business was built on Windows -- a product still fiercely important to the company? Ouch, a statement like that has got to hurt. I've been saying that the operating system doesn't much matter for years. But I was never a high-profile Microsoft employee. Statement like this hurts Microsoft more because of who Dodge is -- emotionally for his former colleagues and logistically as anti-evangelism.

Dodge concedes that human beings are creatures of habit, that he might not have gotten this new religion if not for the layoff.  "Leaving Microsoft and joining Google gave me the perfect opportunity to change everything," he writes. Over at TechFlash, Todd Bishop rightly put this in context of Microsoft's insular culture -- that it shouldn't take going to another company to try new products. Microsofties should do that now, regularly.

In the Biblical account of early Christian evangelism, Paul was a true believer against the followers of Jesus Christ. They were enemies that should be killed. Later, after converting to Christianity, Paul turned out to be a more earnest evangelist than the men who lived with and followed Christ. A true believer can convert many, as Paul did throughout the Roman Empire. The so-called Mac Faithful are known for their passion and obsession with all things Apple. Will Don Dodge be a great crusader among them? Or among Googlers?

By Nate Mook, Betanews

iPadBeta.com is a new free service that connects iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch developers with beta testers for their Apps, offering the tools and help needed to easily run a great beta test. The aim is to help developers create Apps with less bugs, better reviews, and higher sales.

App developers are each given their own private projects, which include bug and feature tracking, custom surveys, discussion forums, custom wikis, build distribution, tester participation monitoring, reporting, and other features. iPadBeta.com will also recruit App testers matching the developer's market; or they can invite their own friends and customers.

Developers will have access to market research materials on the App market, as well as the ability to request custom research. These services are all offered at no cost, with no ads.

App users are given the opportunity to try new iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad Apps before anyone else. They can provide their feedback and bugs while participating in discussion forums and wikis with other Testers.

iPadBeta.com is accepting both App testers and developers. Signing up is free and requires only a few minutes to complete your profile. The service was developed by Centercode, a long-time beta test management software and services company.

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Though it seems like streaming TV services are getting more diverse and robust by the week, Parks Associates today said the number of people who consider them a viable replacement to their cable or satellite subscriptions is actually shrinking.

According to the consumer research firm's "All Eyes on Video" study, the percentage of broadband-connected homes that would consider canceling their pay TV subscriptions in favor of online video has steadily declined for the last two years.

In 2008, 11% of U.S. broadband-connected households said they would consider dropping cable/satellite to get their video content only from online sources. By early 2009, that number dropped to 10%; and now in the beginning of 2010, it's dropped down to only 8%.

Even then, Parks suggests, online video won't cover the needs of these users.

This is because that small percentage of broadband-connected homes amounts to about 5.5 million households who Parks says are the most die-hard media consumers. These households watch far more online video, and rent far more DVDs than the national average. As a result, these homes will have to pull content from multiple sources, Parks says.

"Nobody is going to rely on online video alone," John Barrett, director of research at Parks Associates said in a statement today. "Households likely to cancel their TV services are going to use a mixture of online video, free-to-air broadcasts, and DVDs, including rental services such as Netflix and Redbox."

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Microsoft shouldn't let Google set the Internet Explorer 6-ending agenda. Google services will stop supporting the browser, starting on March 1. It's Microsoft 's browser and responsibility for putting this antiquated technology -- and all Internet users subsequently affected by malicious and criminal activity -- out of misery. Save the Web! Stop Internet Explorer 6 now!

If security really is Microsoft's top priority -- and I say that it's not --  IE6 shouldn't be used by anyone anywhere. Microsoft bears the blame for the IE6 scourge. High IE6 usage is more than a situation of users clinging to older technology. Microsoft created this problem by:

1) Integrating Internet Explorer into Windows.

2) Pushing a closed and arguably flawed plug-in architecture (e.g., ActiveX).

3) After releasing IE6, essentially ending new browser development until Mozilla released Firefox in late 2004.

4) Blocking so-called non-genuine copies of Windows from receiving new updates, including IE version upgrades.

Microsoft should seek out and destroy IE6 wherever it's used. The browser is too much of a security risk. Since Microsoft isn't doing enough, I suggest five ways by which the company can decisively and quite aggressively take charge of this situation. A combination of the five, but necessarily all, would be necessary to eradicate IE6.

1. Take the lead away from Google, by disabling IE6 across Microsoft Websites -- and encourage other Web properties to do the same. According to Net Applications, IE6 usage share was just over 20 percent in January, making this antiquated browser second-most used. It's not rocket science to identify a browser version, block site access and to provide notice that IE6 is no longer supported. The notice could provide links to download IE8, and, if Microsoft is PR savvy enough, links to competing browsers, too.

Microsoft worries too much about breaking existing applications or Websites. The majority of safe sites should already support modern Web standards. Businesses that must have legacy support can run IE6 behind the firewall. Presumably, the majority of remaining IE6-supporting Websites would be the dangerous ones hosting malware. These are exactly the sites Microsoft should want to keep its customers away from.

2. Use a bot to identify all Websites supporting IE6, then request that site operators simply stop support. Microsoft could even offer incentives, like free software or support services, to Websites that quickly respond. For years, IE6 peculiarities compelled Website designers to put in special tags supporting Microsoft's browser. Surely they can be easily enough removed and replaced with redirects to pages explaining IE6 isn't supported and offering links to download more modern browsers.

3. For business that simply must have IE6, aggressively promote a virtualized alternative. The idea would be to quarantine IE6. If it must run -- say, to support legacy ActiveX controls -- do so in a sandbox separate from the operating system and other applications.

4. Forcibly upgrade non-genuine Windows users to Internet Explorer 7 or 8. This one is politically and logistically difficult, which are problems of Microsoft's creation. Microsoft long ago prohibited pirated, or presumed pirated, Windows versions from receiving critical applications and operating systems updates, such as Service Packs. Years ago, when working as analyst, I strongly and repeatedly discouraged Microsoft product managers from withholding updates. I expressed mixed feelings about withholding IE upgrades.

From a Microsoft political perspective, the withholding approach was about getting more people to pay for Windows. Product managers would never admit this, with the party line being something about rewarding so-called genuine users. Instead, Microsoft punished non-genuine users and tangentially genuine users assaulted by malware infesting non-genuine Windows copies. I argued that from a security perspective, it made more sense to update everyone with everything important. Anything bundled with Windows is important enough. By withholding critical system updates, including bundled IE, Microsoft puts every non-genuine Windows version at risk of being infected with malware.

Logistically, the solution is difficult because:

• Non-genuine Windows copies wouldn't have the supporting system updates or Service Packs necessary to upgrade the browser to IE7 or IE8.
• Malware might be in place that has disabled Windows Update or otherwise would prevent downloading Service Packs or newer IE version.
• Even  if possible, end users might not have the bandwidth or the patience to accept the updates necessary to replace IE6 with a newer browser version.

An alternative option would be political suicide within Microsoft's corporate culture: Disable non-genuine Windows copies that can't be upgraded to IE6 or IE7 after three attempts. I contend that Microsoft should disable non-genuine Windows copies without warning. Why should it have to, if the software is pirated? Yes, a small number of legitimate customers will be affected. But the greater security good would be served, and Microsoft could individually resolve problems with customers whose legitimate Windows copy was disabled by the action.

5. Immediately offer a mobile Internet Explorer alternative, even if it's a competing browser. IE6 isn't just a scourge of the past, it's ready to corrupt another platform's future. IE6 is the basis for Microsoft's mobile browser. That has got to stop now. Yes, some Betanews commenters will rightly argue that based on IE6 isn't the same as IE6. My retort: Why should the mobile browser be based on IE6, when newer, presumably safer versions are available? Microsoft owes it to mobile customers -- the majority of them business users -- to provide the safest browser possible. If IE8 is so much better, which Microsoft claims, shouldn't it be the foundation for mobile Internet Explorer?

Do you have a better or different suggestion about how Microsoft can purge the IE6 plague? Please pipe up in comments.

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Since well before Motorola released even its first Android device, a render of a seafoam green and silver slider phone called "Calgary" was floating around the Android blogs. It wasn't until today that Motorola officially announced this phone. Now known as Devour, the new Android device will be available on Verizon Wireless in March.

Looking like the slightly smaller cousin of the popular Droid, Devour is Verizon's third Android phone, and first that carries Motorola's trademark MotoBLUR interface (built upon Android 1.6). In many respects, Devour looks quite a bit like the Droid, except with specs a little lighter to encourage affordability. The display, for example, is a 3.1" HVGA capacitive touchscreen with 320 x 480 resolution instead of 3.7" (480 x 854); and the camera is 3 megapixels instead of 5.

The main differences from the Droid are in the MotoBLUR interface, the chiclet-style keyboard instead of membrane style, and the touch-sensitive navigation pad instead of a D-pad.

Verizon has not yet announced the subsidized price of Devour, nor has Motorola announced an MSRP.

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

This week marked Google's first release of a development build browser called Chrome 5, which contains some not-yet-fully-implemented features including the browser's first personalized security settings. In recent months, Chrome's dev build has been the standard-setter for performance in Windows, with scores in Betanews tests that rise by as much as one point -- one relative quantum of IE7/Vista horsepower -- per month.

Now that extensions are a formal part of Google's stable Chrome 4 browser, that trend is changing. And although it's not what anyone can call a complete Web browser (to do that, you really should avoid crashing randomly), the latest build of Opera's "pre-alpha" of version 10.5 continues to send signals that it will keep the afterburners fired up while it puts together a real contender. Despite the fact that you wouldn't want to use it yet as an everyday browser, the latest Opera 10.5 pre-alpha actually increased its lead over the latest Chrome dev build -- now just over two points -- in the latest Betanews tests on Windows 7.

Meanwhile, the latest Apple Safari test build with the development version of the WebKit engine remains neck-and-neck against the latest stable Chrome 4, slipping just behind it in today's count. The lower numbers for both browsers do indicate that both slowed down a hair, but also -- in all fairness -- that Internet Explorer 7 in Vista SP2 sped up, as a result of several security patches that appear to have restored much of IE7's lost performance.

Although it's not the latest Microsoft browser, IE7 is important to our tests because it helps us establish a benchmark against which browser performance can be judged, that's independent of the hardware. When we give Chrome 4 a 19.99 score, that means we believe that on any computer you choose to test, Chrome 4 on Windows 7 runs about twenty times faster and more productive than IE7 on Vista on the same machine. And by making use of that IE8 score of 1.38, you can easily come to this conclusion: Chrome 4 on Windows 7 should run 14.49 times faster and more productive (loading more text, calculating more formulas) than IE8 on Windows 7.

But with a score of 24.43 in our latest Windows 7 tests, the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha renders, crunches, and expedites content 17.7 times faster than IE8. We expect that number to decline a bit as Opera Software fixes this browser to at least "alpha" quality. Yet with a two-point gap over Chrome 5, Opera can actually afford to take it down a notch -- something we never thought we'd be saying just four months ago.

Strengths and weaknesses: The code bases for Google Chrome 4 and Chrome 5 should not differ all that much at this point. Indeed, their CSS rendering scores (10.81 and 10.82, respectively) indicate they may not differ at all. But in certain algorithms, Chrome 5 is clearly superior: for instance, in using the MD5 cryptographic hash algorithm, and in executing the "Genetic Salesman" problem -- finding the best highway route between randomly-generated points on a map. Chrome 5's SunSpider score is also vastly superior to Chrome 4's, and 5's handling of CSS selectors is improved as well.

Opera 10.5 also posts a high SunSpider score, but not as high as Chrome 5 -- its computational skills are competitive, but not superior yet. CSS rendering capability for 10.5 is improved, but not up to Chrome quite yet. It's in handling old-style Web pages that Opera blows the doors off of the competition, scoring an 11.15 in typical page rendering versus 6.93 for Chrome 5, 3.99 for Chrome 4, and 5.82 for the latest Safari 4 + WebKit nightly build. Stable Opera builds are also strong in this department, but the 10.5 preview tips the scales, and then pulls them down.

And in graphics rendering, the 10.5 preview is posting obscene numbers in the Canvas object test. Safari should be the leader here, with the preview build scoring 33.40 and the stable build posting 29.18 -- this compared to 29.11 for Chrome 4 and 26.34 for Chrome 5. Opera's score here is a mind-blowing 66.45; and this is a test that is so above-board that there's really no way to cheat. It's that fast.

Mozilla Firefox scores continue to improve, with the latest 3.7 Alpha daily build holding on to a 13.25 overall Windows 7 score -- roughly equivalent to its score from last December, but in the face of a faster relative IE7.