Some of the most interesting news I've read lately is that Intel may start making good on its Vanderpool project, which was supposed to provide hardware support for running multiple OSs, concurrently.

While I always thought that it was a cool option, there was a rather obvious hitch that I didn't pick up on. At that time, Apple's OS X just wasn't built to run on PC hardware, meaning there would be lacking driver support, chipset support, etc.

When Apple chose Intel chips however, old options became new again, and there's a distinct probability of a multiple OS Apple computer. We're not talking dual booting, because restarting is for sissies. We're talking full on OS switching. Boot OS X and Win XP simultaneously, switch between them at will.

We've got the processing. Modern dual core chips make for more available number crunching. Send one OS to a competant core and the other the other remaining core.

The feasibility here is fascinating. Because windows XP will run on almost any chipset, and drivers are available for myriad hardware devices, it will be hard to stop XP installs on Apple PCs. Apple isn't going to limit it, as they said during the ADC. This leaves Microsoft incapable of stopping this. Theoretically, they shouldn't mind either, as long as the people buy their XP versions.

If this comes to fruition, my future computer? Apple. The only drawback is that they don't allow me to build it myself.

Okay not for home consumption unless you're a fussy (appropriately so) graphics professional.

NEC SpectraView 2180WG-LED

Behold! Clearly, this monitor will knock the socks off anyone who ever thought an LCD monitor looked sexy. Not only does it have the hood (removeable) but it also is about 18 inches thick. (Rough estimation based on the photos presented).

The whole point of it though is to be accurate at color representation, a long held grudge against the LCD. So finally, you with the 21 inch CRT that weighs about 350 pounds can switch to something lighter and better looking. Do it, you know you want to. Who cares if you have to pull the 6,000 dollars out of the office supplies fund? You never needed paperclips and staples anyways. After all, your boss already stole your stapler.

As you may have noticed, there are currently on the left hand side of your screen advertisements, placed through Yahoo!'s publishing services.

So far I really like Yahoo!'s ads. Though still in beta, they have all the functionality I need. The pros are a good backend, with a simple login and good statistical analyses. The ads are also color customizeable to match to the theme of your site, if you so wish. The only con I've really noticed of yet (they haven't been there very long) is that I can't get a custom width that I'd like. Rather than have to center them, I would like to make them ~220 pixels wide to fill the sidebar, but alas, I cannot do that.

That con is very nitpicky by the way.

All in all I'm very pleased with the ads. They're only as obtrusive as I want them to be. And Yahoo! has been splendid to work with in getting them up. I prefer Yahoo!'s text based ads to Google's text based ads, hands down. Though a lot of that comes down to a personal bias.

Over at wired.com they're running an article about a new game called A Force More Powerful. In the game, you're a revolutionary, but the game is not a first person shooter. Instead you simply want to overtake the government peacefully. And to think I said "simply." Apparently the game offers you all kinds of options as far as whether or not you want to set up your movement as a heirarchy or as cells, who you put in front of the media and other unique options.

This sounds like the type of game that has potential. Not that FPS aren't fun, but there's only so much blasting away you can do before it gets tired. And since developers seem too busy making things look pretty than to bother with making decent AI, the FPS is indeed growing weary.

The survivability and success of the game will lie not in its idea (beacuse the idea is dynamite), but instead in its execution. What I worry is that if the game does not succeed (do to interface or playability problems) that it will inadvertantly stifle diversity in the game industry. After all, industry execs aren't interested in making interesting games if they don't improve the bottom line.

Political blogger Glenn Reynolds writes just about everywhere now. Beyond Instapundit.com he's written articles for MSNBC/GlennReynolds.com, and TechCentralStation. Now he's writing for one of my favorite magazines - Popular Mechanics.

His article focuses on Hollywood's fear of not just piracy, but backyard productions from independent filmmakers. He has a point. While not fit for public consumption, I wrote, directed, starred in and edited a video for a roast, using only a Hi-8 camcorder with firewire and Windows Movie Maker. Feature length and quality? No, not really. But hysterical? Absolutely.

With the popularity of the podcast, how far off are vidcasts? Since there's an iPod with video, I would venture a guess to say not far. Some have already started, and run pod and vidcasts concurrently (Diggnation for example).

Just as an example of some quality and talent available on the Internet, you can always check out Jeskid's Shades of Gray, which he made available for free and has some funny moments.

Google seems to have its billion dollar eyes on everything information. Their search engine has more or less conquered the Internet (I've heard rumors of them having the entire Internet in RAM), and now they're onto expanding into other forms of media. Google Scholar, Google University search, Google SMS, Froogle, Google Talk name only a few of their many ventures.

With all the effort they're putting into information supply and access, I'm left wondering if it wouldn't be worth their while to pick up Wikipedia. Wikipedia's become the ubiquitous encyclopedia of the Internet, and it's even user-friendly which matches well with Google's easy theme.

Of course, there remain questions regarding how much Wikipedia would actually be worth, and whether or not Google could afford it, but it's possible. The Googlepedia.

It's hard to keep my blog fresh when there's no real news that strikes that my fancy.

Since the video iPod there hasn't been any big news or fun developments, which has put a cramp on my blogging. Ah well.

What can I say about the video iPod except, "I want one."

They're damned sexy, and I find it rare that I'd say that about an electrical device.

The black one is the hotness. I venture that you'll see more black sneaking into Apple's production line.

If you're reading this and have money, send me one. Please?

At long last, there is a video iPod! Even I predicted that one. There's a whole lot more, so I put it all in poem form for you guys:

Video iPod,
Video iTunes,
built in iSight in iMac,
and yes, iPods come in black

Read about all the news here. It's a handy roundup.

The Internet becomes more and more user-oriented every day, but there is one leap I'd like to see in the coming versions of the Internet.

I want to see a drag-and-drop web.

People are working on a drag-and-drop web via interface and software, but I would like to see every computer as its own little Internet node. Imagine being able to drop a picture on a website somewhere, without using a third party like photobucket or imageshack or the litany of others. You'd never have to FTP/SSH it. The ISPs would probably hate the drain on their bandwidth, and not to mention the possible security holes that would exist from serving your own pictures, but that kind of convenience would he be hard to overlook.

Big news today was Weblogs Inc (home of Engadget, Autoblog, TUAW, etc) being bought out by AOL.

I'm sure you're wondering what my cut was. I'm afraid the nondisclosure agreement I signed with AOL prohibits me from telling you I earned zero dollars from the transaction.

Damn.

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols at Linux-Watch wrote an article suggesting that there are far too many Linux distros out there, and I'm inclined to agree with him. If everyone is working in different directions, some great features are bound to come of it, but they're going to be so spread out that it doesn't do anything to further Linux on the whole. Whereas if all of the developers worked together on one project, as happens with firefox, then Linux may one day present an easy to use, easy to install, easy to run and aesthetically pleasing operating system, capable of standing up beside Windows and outperforming it in ways other than security.

You can't have confusion in an operating system. You need simplicity. Windows XP is there, Mac OS X is there. That's how they're designed. Linux still lags behind and will continue to do so until the community conglomerates for one project.

Apple to fat people: "You are not so nano, so don't use our nano."

Money quote:

"...this issue has affected less than 1/10 of 1 percent of the total iPod nano units that we've shipped. It is not a design issue. It has more to do with obese Americans in tight pants putting the nano in their front jeans pocket, and then sitting for extended periods of time."