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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So where are we heading?

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

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

The star of this new world will be the cell phone — or, more accurately, the device formerly known as the cell phone. Already, some high-end phones, like Palm’s Treo, are essentially mini computers, complete with keyboards and expandable memory. They do many of the things for which people formerly required laptops.
These so-called smart phones can surf the Web, and send and receive e-mail and instant messages, at broadband speeds. They can take, display and edit photos and movies; download and play music, videos and TV shows; play ever more sophisticated games; and even view and edit Microsoft Office documents.

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

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

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

Music services

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

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

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

Music players

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Each approach has its strengths as well as weaknesses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

WHY VISTA?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HOW WILL YOU BUY IT?

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

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

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

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

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

WHAT HARDWARE WILL YOU NEED?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How do Macs compare in quality with Windows PCs?

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

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

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

Do Macs run Windows and Windows software?

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

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

How does Mac software compare with Windows?

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

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

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

Are Macs more secure than Windows PCs?

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

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

Are Mac files compatible with Windows files?

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

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

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

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

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

Is there anyone who shouldn’t consider a Mac?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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