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.

And like the technologies themselves, digital jargon changes and expands all the time. Just when you thought you’d mastered stuff like RAM (computer memory) and GSM (the cellphone technology invented in Europe), new terms pop up like weeds on your lawn.

So here’s a quick and dirty glossary designed to make holiday shopping for the latest tech products feel less like taking the SATs.

Computers
Some of the newest terminology to know when you’re shopping for a computer, whether it be a Windows PC or an Apple Macintosh, involves the processor, the chip that’s the brain of the box. Until recently, most consumer computers had a single processor. Now it’s common to find them with so-called dual cores, which in effect means two processors packaged into one chip. Two cores won’t make your word processing or email go any faster, but they do potentially give you more horsepower for such heavy-duty tasks as gaming or video editing. I say “potentially,” because to make the most of a dual-core processor, you need software that sends some work to each core, and most programs are not yet designed to do that.

The labeling of these new processors is also confusing. Intel called its first consumer laptop dual-core chip the “Core Duo”; now there’s a second generation known as the “Core 2 Duo.” (In techland, apparently, the “2 Duo” moniker is assumed to be crystal clear.) And there are still some single-core Intel processors, dubbed “Core Solo.”

For laptops in general, one of the latest terms you’ll encounter is “ExpressCard,” which refers to the new version of that slot on the side of the machine into which you can pop a wireless receiver or some other add-on. For years these slots have adhered to a standard called “PC Card,” but the latest laptops are showing up with slots that follow the new ExpressCard standard. Worse yet for confused consumers, it comes in two flavors: a narrower one called ExpressCard/34, and a wider one called ExpressCard/54. And naturally, neither can accept cards designed for the older, PC Card standard.

Cellphones
One hardly knows where to begin when talking about cellphone jargon. But an obvious source of confusion is the baffling nomenclature being given to the various new high-speed cellphone networks that can transmit a wide assortment of material — music, video clips and web sites — to phones at speeds rivaling home broadband.

If you’re shopping for a phone at Verizon or Sprint, the high-speed capability is called “EVDO” or “EV-DO” (which stands for Evolution Data Only or Evolution Data Optimized). At Cingular, it’s known as “HSDPA” (for High-Speed Downlink Packet Access).

Since T-Mobile doesn’t have a network in this speed class, salespeople there will brag instead about “EDGE” (Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution), which, despite its aspirational name, is a much slower technology.

TV
Buying a television used to be simple. No more. There’s a whole new vocabulary for digital TV shopping. It’s too expansive to cover completely in this space, but here are a few select terms.

In addition to the familiar plasma and LCD (liquid crystal display) sets, which have an expensive digital panel at the front, there’s now a third type of screen, called a “microdisplay.” This is actually a rear-projection television, although much skinnier than the old behemoths. There are three main microdisplay types. Each uses a different sort of very small digital circuit in the rear of the set to generate the picture, which is then projected onto the large screen at the front. And naturally, each has its own jargony name. The first, called “DLP” (digital light processing), uses a special chip loaded with minuscule mirrors. The second, confusingly called “LCD,” uses a tiny LCD chip. The third, “LCoS” (liquid crystal on silicon), is sort of a hybrid of the other two, in that it uses both liquid crystals and mirrors.

And don’t forget the digital video recorder — the now almost mandatory add-on used to record and save programs on hard disks inside cable and satellite receivers or inside a stand-alone unit — which unfortunately goes by two names. Sometimes it’s called a “DVR” (digital video recorder) and sometimes a “PVR” (personal video recorder), but really, they’re the same thing. You might even hear the technology referred to as “TiVo,” which is actually the best-known brand of digital video recorder. Think of TiVo as the Kleenex of DVRs — its name is sometimes used as a generic term for the whole category.

Wireless
Wi-Fi wireless networks are now pretty familiar. Many people even know they come in two main speeds, designated by letters. The “b” variety, which was the first version to gain public acceptance, was succeeded by the “g” variety, which is faster and backwards-compatible with “b.”

Nice and simple, right? Not for long. Chaos has come to the Wi-Fi world in the form of a new standard,”n,” which is supposedly even faster than “g” and, more important, offers longer range. The problem is, the engineering committee that sets such standards has been taking forever to certify “n,” so companies have begun selling Wi-Fi gear that purports to use the “n” standard in some form but may not be compatible with it when it finally emerges. Last year there were “pre-n” products, which used some parts of the emerging standard; this year there are “draft-n” products, based on a draft of the proposed “n” standard. Stay tuned for the real thing.

But the most important Wi-Fi term of the moment is “MIMO,” short for multiple-input multiple-output. This is a technique that can greatly improve range and speed by capturing formerly stray parts of a wireless signal and merging them. It is expected to be a key component of the “n” standard, but is already in some “g” products, as well as in the “pre-n” and “draft-n” products.

Broadband
There are two main types of high-speed Internet service: DSL (digital subscriber line) is sold by phone companies, while cable modem service is sold by cable companies. Most people know these terms.

But now there’s a third type, called “fiber optic,” being sold in some parts of the country. This technology uses glass fibers, lit up by a laser and connected directly to your home. (Some other systems use fiber under the street, but not running right up to the house.) The best-known brand of fiber-to-the-home broadband service is Verizon’s “FiOS,” which can deliver TV channels as well as the Internet.

All broadband service providers boast about their speed, and they tend to do so in techie jargon. Slower broadband is measured in kilobits per second, abbreviated as “kbps.” Faster speeds are clocked as megabits per second, or “mbps.” (Note that these terms end in bit, not byte. The latter ending is normally used as a measure of storage capacity, not speed.) One megabit equals 1,000 kilobits. So a DSL line that tops out at 768 kilobits per second, for example, isn’t nearly as fast as one that registers three megabits per second.

Music
Almost everybody knows that MP3 (MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3) is the most common format for digital music files. But what is AAC? And how about WMA?

All of the above are compressed formats, meaning they take a song that would occupy lots of space on a disk and squeeze it down to a fraction of its original size while trying to preserve the sound. AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) is an industry-standard music-compression format favored by Apple, while WMA (Windows Media Audio) is a proprietary music-compression format that is owned and used by Microsoft. Which of the three you prefer depends on your taste.

Both AAC and WMA are available in two versions. One is an “open” version, which gets created when consumers convert their CDs into these digital formats, and imposes no restrictions on usage. The second is an encrypted, or copy-protected, version, which includes code that restricts how often and under what circumstances the song can be played or copied. Songs sold at Apple’s iTunes Music Store are in the encrypted version of AAC, while songs sold by music services that use Microsoft software are sold in the encrypted version of WMA, meaning there are limits to what you can do with these files.

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.

Starting in January, six months earlier than promised, Apple began switching the Mac to the very latest Intel processors-allowing higher speeds at lower temperatures compared with the previous IBM chips. Apple’s sleek, slim computers can run faster without bulking up for extra fans or heat-dispersion space.

That change, in turn, enabled Apple to stun the world in April when it announced a free utility that permits the Intel-based Macs to run Windows as a complement to the Mac operating system. With this new software, called Boot Camp, a Mac user can start up the computer either as a Mac or as a Windows machine. That means people who resisted switching to the Mac because they need to run one or two programs available only in Windows can now convert without hesitation.

America’s slimmest brand-name desktop, the dazzling white iMac, now runs faster with Intel chips yet retains its slender form. So does the thin, aluminum-clad 15-inch MacBook Pro laptop, a renamed version of the PowerBook. Like its Mac siblings, the tiny Mac Mini desktop now includes an Intel processor that incorporates two “cores,” the equivalent of two processors in one.

These Intel models are Macs through and through because they still run Apple’s Mac OS X operating system, Tiger — which is so far ahead of Windows that it already contains the key features Microsoft is promising for its much-delayed new version of Windows, Vista, due in January.

But now Macs can run Windows as well. Apple’s other models should be converted to Intel by late 2006. They include the 17-inch-screen version of the MacBook Pro laptop, the thinnest and lightest portable available; the entry-level MacBook laptop, formerly called the iBook; and the top-of-the-line PowerMac towers.

The new Mac lineup doesn’t include some categories of computers offered by the likes of Dell and HP. For instance, Apple lacks an ultralight laptop like the 2.5- to 3.5-pound Windows models from Sony and Toshiba. It doesn’t offer gaming-specific desktop towers or big laptops, like those from Alienware and Dell. And it doesn’t offer models with built-in TV tuners and TiVo-like digital video recorders, like those available from most PC makers.

Also, while Macs now use standard ports and connectors, which can accommodate most any printer or scanner, they omit a couple of common features found on many Windows machines. They’re not equipped with readers for camera memory cards, and the laptops don’t have built-in receivers for the new, high-speed cell phone data networks. You can add both of these features as external add-ons, at extra cost.

On the other hand, Macs running the OS X operating system aren’t susceptible to the many thousands of viruses and spyware programs that plague Windows computers; most Mac users don’t bother to run antivirus and antispyware software.

Then there’s price. Years ago Macs cost much more than Windows PCs. That’s no longer true. The iMac is priced comparably to identically equipped Windows machines, though no similar Windows desktop is as slim. Mac laptops can run a few hundred dollars more than Windows models, though comparable Windows laptops tend to be thicker and heavier, with lower-quality screens.

But Apple has no offerings cheaper than its $599 base Mac Mini, which lacks a keyboard, monitor and mouse. It doesn’t play in the market’s bargain-basement segment, where Dell, HP and others have stripped-down models that sell for under $400.

Here’s a quick guide to the fresh Mac models, and to their new ability to run Windows.

DESKTOPS

The iMac. This is Apple’s flagship product, its main consumer desktop and, in my view, the best available consumer desktop. At first glance, it looks like just a sexy, white, flat-panel monitor. But there’s a powerful computer packed behind the screen, which can also run Windows. The iMac also has a built-in video and still camera, plus a special operating mode called Front Row that allows you to play music, videos, DVDs and photo slide shows from across a room, using an included remote control. The iMac starts at $1,299, complete with a built-in flat-panel screen.

The Mac Mini. The smallest desktop computer I’ve ever tested, at 6.5 inches square and 2 inches high. Yet it’s a full-fledged Mac, complete with the latest Intel chips, that can also run Windows. Starting at $599, the Mini includes Front Row with remote control and is often bought for connecting to a TV as a media hub.

The Power Mac. This is a heavy-duty tower, favored by graphic artists, musical composers, video producers and scientists. It has yet to be upgraded to Intel processors, but currently can be ordered with as many as four IBM G5 cores. For most consumers, it’s overkill. It starts at $1,999, without a monitor.

LAPTOPS

The MacBook Pro. Apple’s top laptop, a renamed, reengineered version of its famous PowerBook that looks and works pretty much the same-only faster. Though currently available only with a 15-inch screen, for $1,999, a 17-inch model may roll out. It’s not clear if the 12-inch PowerBook, which remains on sale at $1,499, will also be replaced.

The main difference between MacBook Pros and PowerBooks? The former use the new Intel processors, have built-in video cameras, and feature Front Row and the remote control. Oh, and they can run Windows. The MacBook.This is the rumored name for a new entry-level Intel-based laptop that will soon replace the iBook. It should be much faster and also be able to run Windows. Meanwhile, the iBook remains on sale, starting at $999. It uses the older IBM G4 processor.

WINDOWS ON A MAC

The new Intel-based Macs can run Windows via Boot Camp, a free Apple utility that overcomes some subtle hardware differences between the Intel-based Macs and standard Windows computers.

After you run Boot Camp, you simply buy a copy of Windows XP (Apple won’t sell or support Windows) and install it as you would on any regular Windows computer. You must use a full, nonupgrade copy of Windows that includes the update Microsoft calls “SP2.” These versions of Windows cost $200 to $300.

Once Windows is installed on a Mac, each time you start up you can choose whether to run the Mac OS or Windows. Only one operating system can be used at a time, and each controls its own walled-off section of the Mac’s hard disk.

In my tests, an Intel iMac running Windows performed like a fast, normal Windows computer and ran every Windows program and hardware device I threw at it.

Apple isn’t abandoning its operating system or switching to Windows. It’s making it easy to run Windows on a Mac in hopes of tempting potential switchers who would use the Mac OS most of the time, but need to shift to Windows periodically to run programs that don’t have Mac equivalents.

Macs aren’t for everyone. But they are superior computers, and with the new Intel chips and Windows capability, they are more attractive than ever.

Over the past few years, however, those extremes have begun to merge. Because of the spread of broadband Internet connections and improvements in cameras, software and computer processors, consumer videoconferencing has begun to look much better. It’s still not as good as expensive corporate linkups, but it’s finally usable.

As this affordable video technology has spread, online services offering video chatting have proliferated. Yahoo, AOL, MSN and Apple all offer videoconferencing. So do a host of less-well-known services, such as Paltalk, IVE and Skype. All are free or have free entry-level plans, but they still cost money to use. For one thing, you’ll need a broadband connection — on both sides of the conversation — to get the most out of them. And, of course, you’ll need a decent camera, with either a built-in or separate microphone.

I expect built-in cameras to become common in all but budget PCs in the next few years, but for now, they’re relatively rare — Sony has been building them into a few models for years, Apple included built-in cameras in its new iMac desktop and MacBook Pro laptop models, and some Hewlett-Packard laptops feature them as well. But most users will have to buy a camera. The biggest brand in add-ons is Logitech, and the best Logitech model I’ve seen is the Quickam Fusion, which sells for around $85 and works only on Windows PCs. The best bet for Mac users is an even better but costlier camera, the $150 iSight from Apple.

Both cameras attach to the top edge of your screen and deliver up to 30 frames of video a second, which is full motion to the human eye. Both include decent built-in mikes. And both also function as still cameras for snapshots. The Logitech has a higher resolution, 1.3 megapixels, while the Apple takes still pictures of under 1 megapixel.

One advantage of the Apple iSight, not surprisingly, is that it’s better integrated into the computer. No software need be installed; you just mount it atop the screen with an included clip or magnetic base, plug it into a FireWire port, and voil?†. In fact, it automatically launches Apple’s built-in videoconferencing program, iChat AV.

Like most Windows peripherals, the Logitech camera is a little trickier to hook up, but not by much. It does require a software installation. The camera plugs into any open USB port, though it needs a newer USB 2.0 connection for full frame rate.

Both cameras have a lens-blocking privacy mode, which allows you to avoid being seen during a video call or conference. Only your voice will be heard. But Logitech goes further — it includes an amusing software feature called Video Effects that permits you to disguise your appearance. You can add animated glasses, mustache, nose, hat and other features to your face. Or you can replace your image entirely with animated avatars of cartoon people and animals, including a dinosaur, a space alien, a cat, a dog or a unicorn. And while these visual effects aren’t exactly Hollywood quality, they do move with you as you speak, mimicking some of your visual expressions, like winking or raised eyebrows, and no special software or video service is needed at the other end of the conversation for your friends to see the special effects.

Once you have your camera/mike combination in place, you’re ready to roll. All you need do is pick your service, find some friends with a camera and mike, and you can start videoconferencing.

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.