Are mobile phones safe?

Are mobile phones safe?. More than 27 million people in Britain and more than 300 million worldwide own one. The total number of users in the world is expected to reach one billion by 2005.

But are mobile phones really safe? The Government has announced a multi million pound research programme looking into the possible health hazards of mobile phones. Here we look at the risks.

Fact File

History The first mobile phones cost around £2,700, but prices plummeted as technology advanced and many companies now offer handsets for free in special deals to attract new customers.

The risks Mobile phones emit microwaves similar to those used in microwave ovens, but at a much lower power level. They have generated a multitude of scare stories, including suggestions that they cause cancer and memory loss, but the industry insists there is no evidence they have any harmful effects. The main health effect noticed by researchers is the fact that drivers are at more risk of crashes while talking into the handsets.

Research Research into mobiles includes a study at the University Neurology Clinic in Freiburg, Germany, which claimed they can increase blood pressure - the rise was small, but could be harmful to people with high blood pressure, said researchers.

Dr Kjell-Hansson Mild, at the National Institute of Working Life in Umea, Sweden, conducted tests on 11,000 mobile users which suggested regular use could lead to fatigue, headaches, and skin irritation.

A University of Bristol team, led by Dr Alan Preece, found no evidence of mobile phone users suffering impairment of memory, spatial awareness or attention span.

Stress and cancer Research at the University of Washington, Seattle, USA, suggested that microwaves can induce stress. Swedish cancer specialist Dr Lennart Hardell has claimed to have found a correlation between which side of the head mobile users hold their handset and the location of tumours. ( dailymail.co.uk )

READ MORE - Are mobile phones safe?

Seeking. You can't stop doing it

Seeking. How the brain hard-wires us to love Google, Twitter, and texting. And why that's dangerous. Seeking. You can't stop doing it. Sometimes it feels as if the basic drives for food, sex, and sleep have been overridden by a new need for endless nuggets of electronic information.
We are so insatiably curious that we gather data even if it gets us in trouble. Google searches are becoming a cause of mistrials as jurors, after hearing testimony, ignore judges' instructions and go look up facts for themselves. We search for information we don't even care about.

Nina Shen Rastogi confessed in Double X, "My boyfriend has threatened to break up with me if I keep whipping out my iPhone to look up random facts about celebrities when we're out to dinner." We reach the point that we wonder about our sanity. Virginia Heffernan in the New York Times said she became so obsessed with Twitter posts about the Henry Louis Gates Jr. arrest that she spent days "refreshing my search like a drugged monkey."

We actually resemble nothing so much as those legendary lab rats that endlessly pressed a lever to give themselves a little electrical jolt to the brain. While we tap, tap away at our search engines, it appears we are stimulating the same system in our brains that scientists accidentally discovered more than 50 years ago when probing rat skulls.

In 1954, psychologist James Olds and his team were working in a laboratory at McGill University, studying how rats learned. They would stick an electrode in a rat's brain and, whenever the rat went to a particular corner of its cage, would give it a small shock and note the reaction. One day they unknowingly inserted the probe in the wrong place, and when Olds tested the rat, it kept returning over and over to the corner where it received the shock. He eventually discovered that if the probe was put in the brain's lateral hypothalamus and the rats were allowed to press a lever and stimulate their own electrodes, they would press until they collapsed.

Olds, and everyone else, assumed he'd found the brain's pleasure center (some scientists still think so). Later experiments done on humans confirmed that people will neglect almost everything—their personal hygiene, their family commitments—in order to keep getting that buzz.

But to Washington State University neuroscientist Jaak Panksepp, this supposed pleasure center didn't look very much like it was producing pleasure. Those self-stimulating rats, and later those humans, did not exhibit the euphoric satisfaction of creatures eating Double Stuf Oreos or repeatedly having orgasms. The animals, he writes in Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions, were "excessively excited, even crazed." The rats were in a constant state of sniffing and foraging. Some of the human subjects described feeling sexually aroused but didn't experience climax. Mammals stimulating the lateral hypothalamus seem to be caught in a loop, Panksepp writes, "where each stimulation evoked a reinvigorated search strategy" (and Panksepp wasn't referring to Bing).

It is an emotional state Panksepp tried many names for: curiosity, interest, foraging, anticipation, craving, expectancy. He finally settled on seeking. Panksepp has spent decades mapping the emotional systems of the brain he believes are shared by all mammals, and he says, "Seeking is the granddaddy of the systems." It is the mammalian motivational engine that each day gets us out of the bed, or den, or hole to venture forth into the world. It's why, as animal scientist Temple Grandin writes in Animals Make Us Human, experiments show that animals in captivity would prefer to have to search for their food than to have it delivered to them.

For humans, this desire to search is not just about fulfilling our physical needs. Panksepp says that humans can get just as excited about abstract rewards as tangible ones. He says that when we get thrilled about the world of ideas, about making intellectual connections, about divining meaning, it is the seeking circuits that are firing.

The juice that fuels the seeking system is the neurotransmitter dopamine. The dopamine circuits "promote states of eagerness and directed purpose," Panksepp writes. It's a state humans love to be in. So good does it feel that we seek out activities, or substances, that keep this system aroused—cocaine and amphetamines, drugs of stimulation, are particularly effective at stirring it.

Ever find yourself sitting down at the computer just for a second to find out what other movie you saw that actress in, only to look up and realize the search has led to an hour of Googling? Thank dopamine. Our internal sense of time is believed to be controlled by the dopamine system. People with hyperactivity disorder have a shortage of dopamine in their brains, which a recent study suggests may be at the root of the problem. For them even small stretches of time seem to drag. An article by Nicholas Carr in the Atlantic last year, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" speculates that our constant Internet scrolling is remodeling our brains to make it nearly impossible for us to give sustained attention to a long piece of writing. Like the lab rats, we keep hitting "enter" to get our next fix.

University of Michigan professor of psychology Kent Berridge has spent more than two decades figuring out how the brain experiences pleasure. Like Panksepp, he, too, has come to the conclusion that what James Olds' rats were stimulating was not their reward center. In a series of experiments, he and other researchers have been able to tease apart that the mammalian brain has separate systems for what Berridge calls wanting and liking.

Wanting is Berridge's equivalent for Panksepp's seeking system. It is the liking system that Berridge believes is the brain's reward center. When we experience pleasure, it is our own opioid system, rather than our dopamine system, that is being stimulated. This is why the opiate drugs induce a kind of blissful stupor so different from the animating effect of cocaine and amphetamines. Wanting and liking are complementary. The former catalyzes us to action; the latter brings us to a satisfied pause. Seeking needs to be turned off, if even for a little while, so that the system does not run in an endless loop. When we get the object of our desire (be it a Twinkie or a sexual partner), we engage in consummatory acts that Panksepp says reduce arousal in the brain and temporarily, at least, inhibit our urge to seek.

But our brains are designed to more easily be stimulated than satisfied. "The brain seems to be more stingy with mechanisms for pleasure than for desire," Berridge has said. This makes evolutionary sense. Creatures that lack motivation, that find it easy to slip into oblivious rapture, are likely to lead short (if happy) lives. So nature imbued us with an unquenchable drive to discover, to explore. Stanford University neuroscientist Brian Knutson has been putting people in MRI scanners and looking inside their brains as they play an investing game. He has consistently found that the pictures inside our skulls show that the possibility of a payoff is much more stimulating than actually getting one.

Just how powerful (and separate) wanting is from liking is illustrated in animal experiments. Berridge writes that studies have shown that rats whose dopamine neurons have been destroyed retain the ability to walk, chew, and swallow but will starve to death even if food is right under their noses because they have lost the will to go get it. Conversely, Berridge discovered that rats with a mutation that floods their brains with dopamine learned more quickly than normal rats how to negotiate a runway to reach the food. But once they got it, they didn't find the food more pleasurable than the nonenhanced rats. (No, the rats didn't provide a Zagat rating; scientists measure rats' facial reactions to food.)

That study has implications for drug addiction and other compulsive behaviors. Berridge has proposed that in some addictions the brain becomes sensitized to the wanting cycle of a particular reward. So addicts become obsessively driven to seek the reward, even as the reward itself becomes progressively less rewarding once obtained. "The dopamine system does not have satiety built into it," Berridge explains. "And under certain conditions it can lead us to irrational wants, excessive wants we'd be better off without." So we find ourselves letting one Google search lead to another, while often feeling the information is not vital and knowing we should stop. "As long as you sit there, the consumption renews the appetite," he explains.

Actually all our electronic communication devices—e-mail, Facebook feeds, texts, Twitter—are feeding the same drive as our searches. Since we're restless, easily bored creatures, our gadgets give us in abundance qualities the seeking/wanting system finds particularly exciting. Novelty is one. Panksepp says the dopamine system is activated by finding something unexpected or by the anticipation of something new. If the rewards come unpredictably—as e-mail, texts, updates do—we get even more carried away. No wonder we call it a "CrackBerry."

The system is also activated by particular types of cues that a reward is coming. In order to have the maximum effect, the cues should be small, discrete, specific—like the bell Pavlov rang for his dogs. Panksepp says a way to drive animals into a frenzy is to give them only tiny bits of food: This simultaneously stimulating and unsatisfying tease sends the seeking system into hyperactivity. Berridge says the "ding" announcing a new e-mail or the vibration that signals the arrival of a text message serves as a reward cue for us. And when we respond, we get a little piece of news (Twitter, anyone?), making us want more. These information nuggets may be as uniquely potent for humans as a Froot Loop to a rat. When you give a rat a minuscule dose of sugar, it engenders "a panting appetite," Berridge says—a powerful and not necessarily pleasant state.

If humans are seeking machines, we've now created the perfect machines to allow us to seek endlessly. This perhaps should make us cautious. In Animals in Translation, Temple Grandin writes of driving two indoor cats crazy by flicking a laser pointer around the room. They wouldn't stop stalking and pouncing on this ungraspable dot of light—their dopamine system pumping. She writes that no wild cat would indulge in such useless behavior: "A cat wants to catch the mouse, not chase it in circles forever." She says "mindless chasing" makes an animal less likely to meet its real needs "because it short-circuits intelligent stalking behavior." As we chase after flickering bits of information, it's a salutary warning. ( slate.com )

READ MORE - Seeking. You can't stop doing it

Cyber warfare 'now a reality' with United States and Russia armed

Cyber warfare 'now a reality' with United States and Russia armed. Cyber warfare is now a reality with at least five nations including the United States and Russia already armed with virtual weapons, according to a report.

A wave of politically-motivated cyber offensives this year – such as attacks on the White House and the US Department of Homeland Security – show that the international arms race is now moving online, a study claims.

A new study reports that the international arms race is now moving online

The report warns that cyber strikes could have a "devastating" impact on national infrastructure with power grids, water supplies and financial markets all at risk.

While the potential of online warfare has long been talked up, the Virtual Criminology Report released by the web security firm McAfee claims that it is now moving from science fiction to fact.

France, Israel and China are among the countries known to have cyber weapon programmes, according to Paul Kurtz, the former White House adviser who complied the study based on interviews with more than 20 experts.

“McAfee began to warn of the global cyber arms race more than two years ago, but now we’re seeing increasing evidence that it’s become real,” said Dave Dealt, president of McAfee.

“Now several nations around the world are actively engaged in cyber warlike preparations and attacks. Today, the weapons are not nuclear, but virtual, and everyone must adapt to these threats.”

The infrastructure of most developed nations is connected to the internet and vulnerable to hackers because of insufficient security controls, the report warns.

Companies will also be caught in the crossfire of future cyber wars between governments because so many essential services are privately run, it advises.

Last month a congressional advisory panel in the US warned that China appears to be using the growing technical abilities to collect US intelligence through a sophisticated and long-term computer attack campaign.

Georgia also accused Russian hackers linked to the government of forcing Georgian websites offline during the real-world conflict between the two nations in 2008. ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Cyber warfare 'now a reality' with United States and Russia armed

Facebook's 'Unfriend' verb is voted ' Word of the Year'

Facebook's 'Unfriend' verb is voted ' Word of the Year'. The Facebook term,‘unfriend’ has topped the New Oxford Amercian Dictionary’s ‘Word of the Year’ list.

The verb, which is used across several social networking sites, has been defined by the dictionary as: "To remove someone as a 'friend' on a social networking site such as Facebook."

The New Oxford American Dictionary's 'Word of the Year' list was heavily populated with tech-related terms.

This year’s list of new words was heavily populated by tech-related words, such as ‘hashtag’ – referring to the way Twitter users tag their material and ‘sexting’ – which is the sending of sexual texts by mobile phone.

Speaking about the verb ‘unfriend’, Christine Lindberg, a language researcher for Oxford's U.S. dictionary, said: “In the online social networking context, its meaning is understood, so its adoption as a modern verb form makes this an interesting choice for Word of the Year."

There has been some debate across blogs and Twitter, about whether ‘defriend’ is the more commonly used term, especially when referencing Facebook. However, Oxford spokesman Christian Purdy said researchers found that ‘unfriend’ was more commonly used.

Other tech-related words which made the short list were: ‘paywall’ – which is a way of blocking content online unless a user has paid for access and ‘intexticated’ – which describes people who are distracted by texting while driving. ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Facebook's 'Unfriend' verb is voted ' Word of the Year'

Powers to disconnect pirates in Digital Economy Bill

Powers to disconnect pirates in Digital Economy Bill. Illegal file-sharers could have their internet connections cut off under measures included in The Digital Economy Bill.

Initially the Government will try to educate those caught downloading music or films illegally, sending them letters warning them of the consequences of their actions. If this proves insufficient, they could be prevented from going online by their intenet service provider.

MPs can pay their wives, if they like - out of their own pockets Photo: Marina Imperi

Other elements of the Bill – which aims to make communications infrastructure “fit for the digital age” - includes plans to make the digital radio switchover possible by 2015.

Age ratings will also be made compulsory for all video games designed for those aged 12 or above.

There was little in the bill on how the Government will improve the country's broadband infrastructure - and no mention of the plan for a 50p 'broadband tax' on landline phone lines - but according to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), there will be more details when the bill is published on Friday.

The Government's target that everyone in the country will have access to a basic broadband service of at least 2Mb a second by 2012 was also not mentioned in the Bill, because it does not require legislation, acording to a BIS spokeswoman.

The music industry, who has lobbied the Government hard to tackle illegal downloading, has welcomed the Bill. Geoff Taylor, chief executive of the BPI, said: "It is good news for fans of British music" adding: "The creative sector in the UK needs new measures implemented urgently that address this problem for now and the future if the UK is to lead Europe in giving consumers innovative and high quality digital entertainment."

However internet service providers (ISPs) have been critical of the proposals, and BT claims that forcing ISPs to police piracy could cost the industry £1m a day.

Charles Dunstone, chief executive of Carphone Warehouse, said TalkTalk, the UK's biggest broadband supplier, would "resist any attempts to make it impose technical measures on its customers".

Consumer organisations have warned that plan to cut off subscribers infringes the rights of internet users. ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Powers to disconnect pirates in Digital Economy Bill

Facebook 'fails to protect children'

Facebook 'fails to protect children. Facebook and MySpace, the social networking sites, were criticised last night for failing to do enough to protect children using the internet by a senior police officer responsible for protecting children online.

Jim Gamble, head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) Centre, said Facebook and MySpace could do more to keep youngsters safe.

He said he was disappointed the two internet giants have not adopted a panic button for children who fear they are at risk.

His comments came after their competitor Bebo, now owned by AOL, adopted the ''Ceop report'' button.

The button enables users to report online abuse, bullying and illegal activity as well as offering advice about hacking and viruses.

It was launched just a day after charity Beatbullying pinpointed Bebo and Microsoft's instant messaging service as hotspots for bullying.

The charity polled 2,094 young people across England and found nearly a third (30%) of 11 to 16-year-olds who had been ''cyberbullied'' had been targeted on Bebo.

Mr Gamble said there is ''no legitimate reason'' for refusing to put the button on a website.

He said: ''I do not want my criticism to be taken as a swipe at the online industry. The vast majority of players are doing a good job and doing their best to make the environment safe.

''This is aimed specifically at social networking sites. They are creating a public space that attracts young people, children and adults, so they can make money through advertising.

''We applaud that but do not forget while you do that there is a responsibility, a duty of care, to the young and the vulnerable.

''We are here to help at a low cost, in fact, this is free, we are giving away this service. What cost can you put on child protection? I have seen the horrible aftermath of it.''

Mr Gamble said some sites claimed technical issues block the button while others suggest companies do not want to lose a potentially-lucrative advertising space.

He added: ''It is tiny and does not take up any significant real estate. The bottom line is there is no legitimate reason for not taking it and placing it on a site.''

The Ceop report button allows computer users to report fears directly to the Ceop Centre in central London.

There are also links to 10 other sources of help including Childline and charity Beatbullying.

Up to 10,000 people are already pressing the button every month through other online services.

But there appeared to be some teething problems on Bebo today, with users pressing the Ceop report button receiving a security warning.

The automatic reply said the button connected to an invalid link probably set by fraudsters attempting to steal personal details.

Sir Hugh Orde, president of Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), joined the call for other websites to adopt the button.

He said: ''I think this is a very responsible approach by Bebo and I commend them for it.

''This is an ideal opportunity to keep young people who use social networking sites as safe as possible while they are online.

''I can see no reason why other sites would not consider adopting the same approach and would encourage them to embed the Ceop report button for the benefit of all users.''

A spokesman for Facebook said: "The safety of Facebook users is the top priority for the company, which is why we have invested in the most robust reporting system to support our 300million users.

"We also work closely with police forces in the UK and around the world to create a safe environment. Our teams are manned by trained staff in 2 continents giving 24 hour support in 70 languages.

"We are constantly looking to strengthen our procedures further and are in dialogue with CEOP on this and a range of other issues." ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Facebook 'fails to protect children'

Government unveils new laws to tackle illegal internet downloads

Government unveils new laws to tackle illegal internet downloads. The Government in unveiling new legislation which could see people who illegally download music and films having their internet connection slowed down or cut off altogether.

The new Digital Economy Bill aims to ensure the UK is at the ''leading edge'' of global online industries, the Government says.

Those illegally downloading music and films could have their internet cut off Photo: GETTY

Under the proposed legislation, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) would be required to notify users accused of online piracy.

They would also have to record how many times each subscriber receives one of these notifications.

This would allow the copyright holders to apply for a court order to get the name and address of serious repeat offenders so they can take legal action against them.

But the Bill, announced in the Queen's Speech on Wednesday and published on Friday, also makes provision for the Secretary of State to direct communications regulator Ofcom to develop tough sanctions for illegal file-sharers.

These could include bandwidth capping - where the user's internet connection is slowed down - or temporary suspension of their online account.

The Bill would give the Secretary of State power to require ISPs to impose these technical measures.

Anyone who feels they have been unfairly penalised could complain through a ''clear and effective appeals mechanism''.

The Bill also includes a power to amend copyright legislation to deal with any new technologies that emerge in the future.

Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, said: ''Better protecting our creative communities from the threat of online infringement will ensure existing and emerging talent is rewarded, and will bring new choices for online consumers.'' ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Government unveils new laws to tackle illegal internet downloads

Crackdown on illegal filesharers confirmed

Digital Economy Bill: crackdown on illegal filesharers confirmed. Illegal filesharers will face having their internet connections turned off under proposed legislation in the finalised Digital Economy Bill published today, however the Government stopped short of making it a criminal offence.

The bill, which aims to realise most of the commitments set out in the Digital Britain White Paper published in June, has laid out its plans to curb online piracy. The first step towards reducing online piracy by 70 per cent will be ensuring Internet Service Providers (ISPs), such as Sky or Virgin, send out warning letters to those caught file-sharing on their networks.

The Government's proposals regarding illegal filesharers, who repeatedly pirate material from artists such as Lady Gaga, have been confirmed in the Digital Economy Bill - published today

The rights holder, who has had material pirated, such as a music label like Universal Music, will pay a fixed fee, set by media regulator Ofcom, to cover the ISP’s costs of sending the letter. Stephen Timms, Minister for Digital Britain expressed his confidence that this method would be successful in ending the majority of the problem.

However, if Ofcom discovers that at least 70 per cent of illegal filesharing has not stopped, Lord Mandelson, the Secretary of State, has the power to apply to Parliament for secondary legislation to force the ISPs to impose technical measures such as the suspension of internet connections. Mr Timms said that Ofcom would be measuring the level of illegal downloading across the UK from “today onwards” but could not give a date by which the government would expect to have achieved a 70 per cent reduction in online piracy.

Mr Timms stressed that such technical measures were “very much the last resort”. “We hope to encourage rights holders and ISPs to work together to find new business models,” he added, referring to examples such as Sky – which has already launched its own subscription music service called Sky Songs.

Other technical measures include: bandwidth capping and imposing a daily download limit.

He also gave his assurance that there would be no criminal penalties imposed by the Government against illegal downloaders. However, rights holders can press charges.

The music industry, which has lobbied the Government hard to tackle illegal downloading, has welcomed the bill. Geoff Taylor, the chief executive of the British Phonographic Industry, said: “The introduction of the Digital Economy Bill is an important milestone towards a sustainable future for British music in the digital age. While the focus has been on measures to tackle illegal P2P, it is significant that the Government has recognised the need for a mechanism to deal with other forms of illegal downloading.”

Feargal Sharkey, chief executive of UK Music – the commercial music industry body – added: ““Our focus is not to disconnect, but to reconnect. To reaffirm and recognise the value of creative works, both to individuals and to the UK economy.

“However, for this market to evolve and flourish there must be breathing space to allow all sides to adapt. Government intervention can provide that impetus.

“In this wider context, our industry continues to develop and partner with emerging digital services. ISPs and tech companies must work with us, and it is imperative that we reach out together to genuine fans of music.”

However, the proposed legislation has been met with opposition too. TalkTalk, the second largest internet service provider in the UK(with more than four million customers), has publicly spoken out against the second stage of the plans which could force ISPs to disconnect illegal filersharers – saying it constituted an infringement on people’s human rights. Last month it launched a campaign against the technical measure called Don’t Disconnect Us – which had 1,819 signatures at the time of publishing and threatened legal action.

Fellow ISP BT has also voiced its concerns about the proposed measures - voicing a preference for court fines for repeat offenders. John Petter, Managing Director of BT Consumer explained: "We believe abuse of copyright is wrong. However, we have real concerns about the government’s plans and the lack of legal protections for accused individuals. We believe that technical measures are not the way forward and that a system of court fines for repeat infringers is preferable. Such an approach would not only protect innocent people, it could also create a fund that could be used to support the UK’s creative industries.”

Andrew Robinson, the leader of the Pirate Party UK – which works to legalise non-commercial internet file-sharing – spoke out against the proposals. “This is a major attack on free speech and human rights. All the benefits of filesharing have been ignored for the benefit of the record labels. Not only is it free advertising for the artist, but it is good for the cultural wealth of the country. No one is excluded from culture if it’s freely available.”

Separately there was no mention in the bill of the proposal to introduce a 50p levy per month on fixed telephone lines to pay for the national roll out of faster web access. This is because the introduction of a new tax, which Mr Timms pledged his commitment to, needs to be included in the Finance bill, which is due next year, before the general election. He estimated that the tax would generate £1 billion by 2017 which would ensure 90 per cent of the UK had next generation broadband. ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Crackdown on illegal filesharers confirmed

This really is a browser

Google Chrome OS: What the tech blogs say. The internet's major technology blogs have been poring over Google's Chrome OS since it was unveiled yesterday. Here are some of their reactions.

“This really is a browser with an OS attached rather than vice versa. You get your tab-based navigation up top, and the focus is of course on the internet, with minimal option buttons on the far right and app launchers at the top left. Unfortunately, in order to access the more interesting apps, one requires a Google.com login which we do not have, so we were stuck gazing at only the Gmail and Calendar applications.” Engadget

“To be honest, everything looks quite similar to Google’s Chrome browser, but there are a few key differences. Note the battery life indicator and options menu in the far upper right. Also try playing around with the ‘New Window’ functions — you’ll find that it’s difficult (if not impossible) to navigate between multiple windows. And be wary of the Bookmarks manager. As far as I can tell, there’s no easy way to get out of it — you’ll have to manually create a new bookmark, which will kick you back into the browser mode once you click it. Oh, and good luck finding the ’shut down’ button, because we sure can’t.” TechCrunch

“Google's not asking much of its users in terms of changing how they do stuff; they're trying to change the way the operating system lets you do those things, transparently. Think of it this way: now, the buttons in your taskbar or dock are now tabs; your email client now runs within your browser, but stores stuff offline just like Mail or Outlook; your documents will still open with a few clicks, but they'll be stored remotely (and locally only if you choose). It's all the same stuff, given to you in a different way.” Gizmodo

“Google cares deeply about speed, and Chrome OS is a shining example. They took out anything they deemed “unnecessary” to speed up the boot-up. You can be browsing the web “in seconds.” In fact, they’re so obsessed with it that they’re asking the hardware manufacturers to use specific metals that make Chrome OS faster.” Mashable

“In theory, at least, Chrome OS is the most secure computing platform in the world. Since nothing is stored locally, there’s nowhere for a virus to hide. We’re sure that’ll be put to the test once Chrome OS goes mainstream, but at first glance it seems Google has side-stepped one of Windows’ biggest weaknesses completely.” Electricpig.co.uk

( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - This really is a browser

Are clouds the future of computing?

Are clouds the future of computing?. This time next year, disk drives will be a thing of the past; instead, computer users will be pulling in emails, documents, music and photos from the web, and computers will need just a few gigabytes of storage.

At least, that’s Google’s vision. This week the search giant gave the world a first look at its new computer operating system, Chrome OS, which it believes could revolutionise computing.

Based on Google’s web browser, also named Chrome, the operating system effectively acts as a gateway to the web. Rather than storing files and documents on the computer’s hard drive, Chrome OS instead relies on data stored on remote servers, pulling these files, on demand, to any internet-connected computer. Users access their emails, documents or social networking sites by clicking on application tabs in the browser-like interface and use panels at the bottom of the desktop to send an instant message or view a video.

Google says the benefit of this “cloud computing” approach is that computers can boot up faster – indeed, in the demonstration this week, Chrome OS was up and running and connecting to the web in just seven seconds, substantially faster than most other computers lumber into life. By the time the first Chrome computers hit shops, Google wants that time to be reduced to around two seconds.

“We want Chrome to be blazingly fast,” said Sundar Pichai, Google’s vice president of product management. “We want it to be like a TV – turn it on and it’s booted up.”

In a world where 90pc of computers run Microsoft’s Windows operating system, Chrome represents a step-change. Chrome will run only on computers that use flash memory solid state drives instead of conventional hard drives. It’s a bold approach. Google is taking a leaf out of Apple’s book to design an end-to-end user experience where the hardware is built specifically to support the software.

Google says that the time is right to move away from traditional desktop computing. With more and more services now in “the cloud” – such as Flickr, the photo-sharing website, and many music-streaming and video services – and consumers snapping up cheap, ultra-portable “netbook” computers, the conditions are in place to launch a new platform that exploits these advances to provide a completely new way of using a computer.

“Over the past few years, people have been spending more and more of their time online doing more and more powerful things, and we wanted to build a fundamentally different computing experience built for the way we use the web today,” says Pichai. “With Google Chrome OS, we’ve made computing faster, easier and safer than ever before.”

But some experts say Google could find it difficult to persuade consumers. Users will not be able to install their own software or applications on Chrome OS devices – so that means no iTunes, no Skype and no Tweetdeck.

“There’s no doubt that Chrome OS looks fast, but it’s fairly limited in terms of its functionality,” says Annette Jump, an analyst with Gartner. “A lot of work needs to be done to convince consumers that this operating system will be useful to them.”

And that’s not the only stumbling block Chrome OS faces – its reliance on always-on web connectivity might be possible in large cities, with good mobile phone network coverage and plenty of Wi-Fi hotspots, but in rural areas, or on a flight, Chrome will be hobbled.

“I think Chrome is initially going to appeal to a small subset of the general consumer population,” says Ray Valdes, another analyst with Gartner. “The question is, can Google build on that and expand that over time?”

This week’s demonstration was designed to drum up interest in the platform. Google released the code to the operating system in the hope that developers would build new products, services and applications, in much the same way as they build apps for the iPhone, or Google’s mobile phone operating system, Android.

By offering more tools and apps for Chrome OS, Google will hope to win over consumers who may be unsure about what the platform offers. While Chrome OS has potential, it will need to add some compelling new features if it is going to top Christmas lists next year. ( telegraph.co.uk)

READ MORE - Are clouds the future of computing?