Google Translator vs. Bing Translator
I’m a big fan of online translators, not only because I’m interested in languages in general, but also because they make my work easier every day. Google Translator has been sitting on my Bookmarks Toolbar for a long time, as it is the translating service I use more often. However I recently found out that Microsoft’s Bing has launched its own translating tool, so I decided to give it a go. You have to try things before judging them, don’t you?

The first obvious difference between Google and Bing is precisely their translating powers: while the first supports more than 50 different languages, the latter features only 20. But the truth is that when Google Translator was launched it didn’t support that many languages either, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bing Translator adding more languages in the future.
One thing I love about Google Translator is its ability to detect source language automatically, so I don’t have to select it every time I use it. Luckily Bing Translator offers the same functionality. Also, besides direct translations, both Google and Bing offer some extra tools, such as a widget to offer a translated version of your website (both), a special utility to perform translated searches (Google only) or a translating bot to assist you in multi-language chats (Bing only).

Now, what about translations themselves? Honestly, I didn’t find much differences between them in my tests. I tried several language combinations with Spanish, English, German and Italian, using different texts and swapping the source and target languages in order to test the translating engines. The results were surprisingly similar, in both ways: when Google Translator obtains a good translation, so does Bing; and when Bing produces a completely absurd text, Google doesn’t succeed either.
Oddly enough, both seem to be better at translating into English: as soon as you pick another target language, results are a bit distorted. Both are also equally fast: you hardly have to wait for more than 5 seconds to have your text translated. The only difference I noticed, if any, is that Bing seems to be slightly better at certain expressions, providing you with the correct translation instead of a meaningless word-by-word equivalent.
Generally speaking though, both Google and Bing feature similarly powerful translating engines. So if you work with different languages on a daily basis and need to do frequent translations, I’d suggest you take advantage of both of them!

Apple’s App Store for iPhone has revolutionized software distribution for mobile devices. Combining ease of use for end users and simple monetization options for software developers, the App Store has proved to be a great success. But the store has also been criticized by many because of the way it forces iPhone owners into using one place to find all their apps, as well as the fact that Apple has blocked applications which might compete with its own software.





Although Twitter clients rarely get “complicated”, Bluebird is ideal for the power user who wants maximum control over how their client looks and fees. It is built on a combination of a XHTML, CSS and Javascript base so it doesn’t benefit from the Cocoa that makes Pwitter so sleek. However, what it lacks in gloss it certainly makes up for in features including the ability to filter tweets, search them and change the theme in a click. There are 3 themes to choose from (including an iChat look) which is a bit limited but better than nothing. If you’ve got a bit of HTML and CSS knowledge however, you can create your own themes which means Bluebird can at least look anyway you want it to. Changing the default themes simply requires going into preferences and using the Themes selector tab.
iPhone users have today been buzzing about the prospect of making free calls, following the release (at long, last) of Skype on the Apple device. The client allows users to make free Skype-to-Skype calls over WiFi, and SkypeOut calls to anyone around the World over 3G. It marks a significant breakthrough for Skype, a company, perhaps quite rightly, feared by mobile network operators for the damage it could do to their cushy business models.

If you were to fix up the heavyweight P2P TV battle of the World and then watch them smash each other’s brains out, then you’d surely have to go for 

Working as software reviewer means that you have to install at least twenty new apps every week and uninstall them again as soon as you’re done with your analysis. However we all know how unhealthy this habit is for Windows, so using a virtual environment is almost compulsory. Virtual operating systems provide you with a safe sandbox where you can test as many programs without affecting the host system. What’s more, they usually feature an easy way to rid of a slow, app-ridden Windows and get a fresh, brand-new installation in a couple of clicks.
Both VMware Player and VirtualBox are free apps, which is always a good point for a start. However VMware Player is more limited, because it doesn’t allow you to create new images (i.e. virtual operating systems) while VirtualBox does. If you want to create new images for VMware Player, you’ll have to upgrade to the more pricey Workstation version.
Regarding usability, both programs have their own pros and cons. On the one hand, VMware Player supports shared folders and also lets you directly drag and drop files between both the guest and host systems, while VirtualBox only works with shared folders that you need to configure before running the program. Keyboard and mouse swapping between the guest and host machines is generally more intuitive in VMware Player, whereas VirtualBox requires you to press a hotkey. Also, copying and pasting between the two operating systems works for VMware Player, but not for VirtualBox. On the other hand, VirtualBox enables you to create the so called snapshots, which let you restore the system to a previous state at any time. This comes in really handy when the image is not working properly and you can’t bother to create a new one: simply restore it to a previous fully working snapshot and you’re done.
First up, Tomato Torrent. On start up this client doesn’t look like your usual BitTorrent client, as it shows a starting point window, where you get to choose different actions depending on whether you’re downloading or serving torrents. Even after you’ve launched a torrent you’ll have to get accustomed to it, as Tomato Torrent only displays the selected torrent with its own options and status.
If you’re a
However, the big downside of twhirl is that it requires installation of Adobe Air. In my opinion, it’s worth doing this although if you’re working a low spec machine, then it may be wise to avoid it. If this is your case, then you’d be much better seeking a lightweight solution in the form of
Picnik
Even though up till now all my pictures have been stored in iPhoto, I’ve gotten to a point where I can’t stand working with the application anymore. I find it too slow and too limited in terms of editing. I’m also not satisfied with the way you can organize and store your photos. The easiest solution would simply be to switch to Adobe Lightroom or Apple Aperture, but I’m waiting for a new Mac to do that. This is why I’ve gotten around to using Adobe Bridge, until I choose a more advanced solution. Now Adobe Bridge is never meant to replace any of the previously mentioned photo management apps. It doesn’t store pictures, but only displays them in multiple ways. As the name mentions, it also works as a bridge with all other Adobe applications, and you can quickly access specific functions in them, like merging to HDR in Adobe Photoshop.
As