SAN FRANCISCO – Want to turn your Windows 7-powered PC into a killer DVR, one that requires no monthly fees and has potentially limitless storage? Three new products will pipe your high-definition cable TV signals into your PC without even requiring you to open the computer’s case.

When you use your PC to record shows, you’ll have a lot more freedom to do what you want with them. If you want to keep shows forever, you can. If you want to watch them on your phone or tablet, converting them is easy. And with (in most cases) a simple HDMI cable, you can watch them on your big-screen TV.

These three products–the Ceton InfiniTV 4 USB, Hauppauge WinTV-DCR-2650, and SiliconDust HDHomeRun Prime HDHR3-CC–each use a CableCard TV tuner from your cable provider. All are external, and all offer plug-and-play simplicity.

The Ceton and Hauppauge models require only a USB port, while the SiliconDust unit connects to your home router, allowing you to use it with more than one PC. They’re excellent products, one and all, able to supply two, three, or even four digital tuners for your multichannel viewing and recording pleasure. And all support SDV (Switched Digital Video), a bandwidth-saving technology that cable providers increasingly use (and require). Each device will record digital, HD, and premium channels, but not on-demand or pay-per-view programming.

Before you buy, however, call your cable provider and make sure that the company can give you a multistream (aka M-Card) CableCard–the essential requirement for all of these adapters. I ran my tests with a Comcast-supplied M-Card, which worked beautifully with all three.

Likewise, check your PC’s specs. At a bare minimum, your system should have a dual-core processor, 3GB of RAM, and a DVI or HDMI connection to whatever display you wish to use. You also need a graphics card that supports HDCP copy-protected content. Fortunately, the Digital Cable Advisor tool found in Windows Media Center‘s Extras Gallery will tell you in advance if your system has sufficient horsepower for this amazing extension of your HDTV.

SAN FRANCISCO – Planning to buy a new Mac for someone on your holiday shopping list? Such a thoughtful and generous gift is going to make someone very, very happy.

Now comes the hard part: Which Mac should you buy? That’s where we come in. We’ve tested every standard-configuration Mac model currently in Apple’s lineup, and we know each model inside and out. We’re happy to help you make a decision.

This buying guide explains all the Mac models available and how they’ve changed from their predecessors. To read the full review for each Mac, click on the “Read our complete review” links. You can also get more details on how each Mac did in our benchmark tests. And we’ve provided links to help you find the best prices.
MacBook Air
The MacBook Air has become Apple’s marquee laptop. Its thin, lightweight design makes it an ideal portable computer, and you no longer have to accept the features compromises that older MacBook Air models required. As Macworld’s editorial director Jason Snell said in his review of the MacBook Air, “You get the distinct impression that it’s only a matter of time before all Mac laptops look like the Air.”

The 2011 MacBook Air line uses Intel dual-core Core i5 processors, a vast improvement over the Core 2 Duo processors used in previous models. Macworld Lab found that the 2011 MacBook Air models are at least 1.5 times as fast as last year’s 11-inch MacBook Air with a 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo processor. With some older games, however, the current models may suffer a hit in graphics performance.

The 2011 models’ key new feature is the Thunderbolt port. Past MacBook Air models had only USB 2.0 connectivity; Thunderbolt gives the 2011 MacBook Air a high-speed connector, and widens the range of peripherals you can use. You can either get the proper adapters to connect FireWire, eSATA, USB 3.0, or other devices to the Thunderbolt port, or you can get Apple’s Thunderbolt Display, which serves as a connectivity dock for the laptop.
When Apple discontinued the MacBook in July, the company thrust the MacBook Air into a new role. Apple’s lowest-priced laptop is now the 11-inch 1.6GHz Core i5 MacBook Air ( Macworld rated 5 out of 5 mice ) with 64GB of flash storage. (You may be able to find a refurbished MacBook at the online Apple Store, if you really want one.)
Configurations: There are four MacBook Airs: two 11-inch models and two 13-inch models. All come with flash storage and Intel HD Graphics 3000.

The entry-level 11-inch MacBook Air has a 1.6GHz Core i5 processor, 2GB of RAM, and 64GB of flash storage for $999. (Get best current price.) The other 11-inch MacBook Air has the same processor, 4GB of RAM, and 128GB of flash storage for $1199. (Get best current price.) Both 11-inch models feature a high-resolution LED backlit glossy display with a 1366-by-768-native resolution.
The only difference between the two 13-inch MacBook Air models is the amount of flash storage. Both 13-inch models feature a 1.7GHz Core i5 processor, but the $1299 13-inch MacBook Air (get best current price) has 128GB of flash storage, while the $1599 13-inch MacBook Air (get best current price) has 256GB.
Performance: The MacBook Air is quite capable of handling everyday tasks, such as emailing, Web browsing, using office applications, and more. You can even use it for editing short videos, and working with JPEGs from your iPhone or point-and-shoot camera.

The 11-inch MacBook Air is the slowest Mac in Apple’s lineup, but it’s no slouch. It’s much faster than last year’s 13-inch MacBook Air. Also, the 11-inch MacBook Air, thanks to its flash storage, is about as fast overall as the $1199 13-inch MacBook Pro with a dual-core 2.4GHz Core i5 processor and a 5400-rpm 500GB hard drive. The 2011 13-inch MacBook Air is about 28 percent faster overall than the last year’s 13-inch MacBook Air.

Macworld’s buying advice: Previous MacBook Air generations were thought of as niche laptops. But now, the 2011 MacBook Air is the ideal laptop for most Mac users. It’s a great combination of performance and portability.

Read our complete review of the 11-inch and 13-inch MacBook Air models (mid-2011)
MacBook Pro
The MacBook Pro was actually updated twice in 2011. The first update was in February, and the most recent MacBook Pro line was released in October. The MacBook Pro continues to sport the aluminum unibody design that was introduced in 2008, but it has more features and processing power than the MacBook Air. Consider the MacBook Pro a possible replacement for an older desktop Mac.
The current models feature Core i5 and Core i7 processors that are slightly faster than the models released in February. The speed differences are bigger if you compare the current MacBook Pro line to the models released in 2010; most notably, the 2010 13-inch MacBook Pros used slower Core 2 Duo processors. The new 13-inch MacBook Pros still use only an integrated graphics processor, the Intel HD Graphics 3000. The 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros have both the integrated Intel HD Graphics 3000 and a discrete graphics chip.

Configurations: There are five standard configurations of the MacBook Pro.

The entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro, with a dual-core 2.4GHz Core i5 processor, 4GB of RAM, and a 500GB hard drive, costs $1199. (Get best current price.) The 13-inch MacBook Pro with a dual-core 2.8GHz Core i7 processor, 4GB of RAM, and a 750GB hard drive costs $1499. (Get best current price.)
There are two 15-inch models. For $1799, you get a quad-core 2.2GHz Core i7 processor, a 500GB hard drive, and a 512MB AMD Radeon HD 6750M discrete graphics chip along with the integrated Intel graphics. (Get best current price.) The next model up (at $1999) has a quad-core 2.4GHz Core i7 processor, a 750GB hard drive, and a 1GB AMD Radeon HD 6770M discrete graphics chip along with the integrated Intel graphics.
The 17-inch MacBook Pro is the same as the $1999 15-inch model but with a larger screen. It has a quad-core 2.4GHz Core i7 processor, a 750GB hard drive, a 1GB AMD Radeon HD 6770M discrete graphics chip, and the integrated Intel graphics. It costs $2499. (Get best current price.)
The 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros are the only laptops in Apple’s lineup that offer a high-resolution antiglare screen option. It costs an extra $150 for the 15-inch MacBook Pro, and an extra $50 for the 17-inch MacBook Pro.

Performance: The $1999 15-inch MacBook Pro 2.4GHz Core i7 was the fastest laptop in our Speedmark 7 testing. The $1199, 13-inch 2.4GHz Core i5 MacBook Pro offers performance that’s similar to that of the $999 11-inch MacBook Air with a 1.6GHz Core i5 processor and 64GB of flash storage, but the MacBook Pro has features the MacBook Air lacks, including FireWire 800 and a bigger screen.
Macworld’s buying advice: The MacBook Pro combines the performance of a desktop computer with the portability of a laptop. If you want the fastest MacBook Pro, the 15-inch 2.4GHz Core i7 MacBook Pro is the one to get. If you primarily want a device for travel and are trying to decide between a MacBook Air and a 13-inch MacBook Pro, go for the MacBook Air, unless you really need the processing power for heavy-duty tasks or you want a computer with FireWire built in.

Read our complete review of the 13-, 15-, and 17-inch MacBook Pros (late-2011)
Mac mini
Designwise, the 2011 Mac mini hasn’t changed much compared with its predecessor. It’s still a small aluminum square that sits modestly on your desk.

The change that does stand out—and may influence your buying decision—is that the Mac mini no longer has a SuperDrive. If you want to burn music CDs or DVDs, or read data from an optical disc, you need to get an external optical burner, which costs $60 to $100. If you absolutely want an internal SuperDrive in your Mac, opt for a laptop or an iMac.

The 2011 Mac mini has a Thunderbolt port, which replaces the Mini DisplayPort in the older model. The Mac mini also has an HDMI port, a FireWire 800 port, four USB 2.0 ports, a gigabit ethernet port, an SDXC Card slot, and analog/optical-digital audio input and output minijacks. Wi-Fi and Bluetooth are built-in.

Configurations: The $599 Mac mini has a dual-core 2.3GHz Core i5 processor, 2GB of RAM, a 500GB hard drive, and Intel HD Graphics 3000 integrated graphics. (Get best current price.) The $799 Mac mini has a dual-core 2.5GHz Core i5 processor, 4GB of RAM, a 500GB hard drive, and AMD Radeon HD 6630M discrete graphics. (Get best current price.) You supply your own keyboard, mouse, and display.
Performance: In 2010, Apple released only one nonserver Mac mini model, which had a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, a 320GB hard drive, and Nvidia GeForce 320M integrated graphics. The 2011 Mac minis are significantly faster than the older model: The $599 Mac mini is 32 percent faster, and the $799 Mac mini is 61 percent faster.

The Mac minis still lag signifcantly behind the iMacs, but for general-purpose use and editing of moderate-size videos, the Mac mini will do fine.

Macworld’s buying advice: The Mac mini continues to be a nice, affordable computer for new Mac users and shoppers on a budget. It has enough power for everyone except professionals who demand top performance. Be sure to shop around for an external disc burner if you really need an optical drive.

Read our complete review of the $599 and $799 Mac minis (mid-2011)

iMac
Apple hasn’t changed the design of its aluminum all-in-one desktop computer for a few years now, because it’s a design that works. It elegantly fits the components and display into an iconic form.

The company updated the line in May with new processors and graphics chips. The iMacs are available with 21.5- and 27-inch widescreen 16:9 displays.

Macworld’s buying advice: The Mac Pro is ideal for the most demanding user, one who uses high-end applications and wants hardware expandability. Yes, the machines are expensive, but they’re well worth it for professionals, and they’ll still be very usable four or five years from now. If you don’t need expandability but still need speed, consider a 27-inch iMac with a quad-core 3.1GHz Core i5 processor.

SAN FRANCISCO – Smartphones and tablets are becoming the PCs of our time, and there are two major players in the game. Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android dominate smartphones, with RIM and Microsoft being niche players.

It all feels very familiar, harking back to the Mac vs. PC battle–and analyst Jack Brown suggests the outcome will be the same, with Android dominating by 2014. What can you learn from the past when choosing, using, and managing mobile platforms in the workplace?
Mac vs. PC

In the early days of personal computers in the 1980s, Apple developed the Mac, which allowed the average person to use a computer. It was easy to use, and much better for graphics work than anything else available, so software companies wrote for it, and publishers and graphic artists used it exclusively.

Microsoft released Windows not long after Apple’s introduction of the Mac, and as it improved, more software became available for the PC. Until there was parity, you could get most of the popular software on either Mac or PC. Since there was more competition in the PC market due to Windows being available through multiple hardware vendors, prices dropped, and sales grew.

Today, Microsoft owns the personal computer market, with Apple dominating only a few niches that tend to focus on creative arts like publishing, music and video. Finding your favorite software on the Mac is a challenge since coding for both platforms can be expensive, and most businesses release their software on the more dominant Windows platform.

iOS vs. Android

Many consider Apple’s iPhone, released in 2007, to be the first real smartphone, making it easy for the average person to have the power of a computer in their pocket. As the slogan suggests, “There’s an app for that,” meaning you could do almost anything with these elegant and easy-to-use devices. People flocked to the iPhone, developers wrote apps for iOS, and the competition took note.

Then Google released Android in 2008, and as hardware became available and units started selling, developers started releasing apps for it. Android could be licensed by any manufacturer, so many adopted it, and the variety of Android hardware spanned all price points. The Android Market matured and is on pace to overtake Apple’s App Store within months. And Android hardware outsells Apple‘s by a 2-to-1 margin, according to a recent Nielsen report.
Innovator vs. Mainstream Player

The two stories are similar, pitting the innovator Apple against a mainstream player–either Microsoft or Google–and a single-vendor system against a multi-vendor one. The innovative, single-vendor system sets the tone and gets early adopters, but the mainstream player with multiple vendors wins in the end due to lower costs and greater variety of options. In the tablet market, Apple currently dominates, with Android’s slow start to enter, yet analysts are predicting that in two to three years time, Apple will be the second-place contender.

The Lesson

So how does all of this affect small businesses using these platforms? In the past, many businesses started with Macs, supported a mixed environment of Macs and PCs for a while, and eventually went all-PC. The extra costs involved in managing two platforms on top of compatibility issues and software availability made the migration inevitable.
The same considerations apply now to businesses that must deal with mobile devices. Smartphones can do many tasks, but tablets are more capable for most business needs and are likely to play a part in most business strategies. Should you build your IT plan around iPads since they currently dominate the market? Or, do you wait a bit longer and design your plan around Android tablets, knowing they’re more likely to be the long-term platform in the end?

With today’s virtualization, remote access options, and cloud computing, compatibility is less of an issue, but managing hardware still is. In the end, waiting for Android tablets is the safe bet. The overall tablet market will be more mature, app and hardware availability will be better, and managing and integrating the devices in a business environment will be easier. It’s for these reasons that Android will become the standard for business, just like Windows did. What’s your take?

SAN FRANCISCO – Desktops don’t have to be big and bulky power-hungry monsters. This PC build guide will show you how to put together a slim, energy-efficient desktop PC perfect for your living room or small office.

What Do You Want in Your Slim PC?

Each member of my family has their own PC. My wife has one supplied by her work, I have multiple machines in the basement lab (plus an iPad and a laptop), and my daughter has a gaming-capable desktop PC. Even with all of those systems, we still share a computer that lives in the main living area of our home (which combines a dining room and living room into one large-ish room). This shared living-area computer is a great convenience when we just need to quickly fire up a browser and check something on the Web or respond to an email.

For years, our shared system has been an aging Gateway laptop with a 17-inch screen. However, the keyboard has become gummy and disgusting, the display has dimmed, and the hard drive is small and slow, so we’re more than due for a replacement. I could have just gotten another laptop, but I wanted a PC with a little more flexibility.

Naturally, I don’t want to spend a lot of money on this replacement. We don’t need it for gaming, I won’t be using any advanced networking features to connect to a network in a big corporate environment, and we don’t need a particularly large display. The replacement does need to have a decent keyboard and mouse–preferably wireless and compact.

Of course, this kind of PC is perfect for a small-office environment, too.

Picking the Right Components for a Slim PC

Since I don’t need this machine to be a powerhouse, I can save a few bucks with some strategic skimping.

I don’t need the computer to play perfect HD video, so I don’t need to shell out for a beefy graphics card (and with the right low-end Sandy Bridge processor, the PC probably could handle HD video playback in a pinch anyway).
Since I have no plans to connect to a corporate network, I can also go easy on the operating system side by using Windows 7 Home Premium rather than the more robust Windows 7 Professional or Ultimate editions. However, if you do plan on using this system in an office environment that would connect to a domain name server, you need Windows 7 Pro, which costs about $40 more than Home Premium.

Ideally, I’d be able to skip the Windows fee entirely by installing Ubuntu or another user-friendly Linux distro. However, the other family members would probably throw several small objects at me if I tried to foist Linux on them. But other households might be different, so a good Linux distro like Ubuntu could be a good fit.

Overall, I need this PC to be more responsive than the old laptop (with a faster storage system, more RAM, Windows 7, and a better CPU), but with relatively low power consumption. Admittedly, a desktop system with a separate display will likely consume more power than the 90W maximum power consumption of the old Gateway laptop, but I still want to keep it as low as possible. Also, I’ll need it to wake from sleep/hibernation very quickly, since I won’t want to shut this PC down very often. I’ll also need Wi-Fi (since there aren’t many ethernet ports in my living room) and a good wireless keyboard/mouse combo with long battery life.

With these thoughts in mind, let’s take a look at the component list.

The Parts I Used

Since I’m building a compact system using integrated graphics, the parts list isn’t very long. However, this isn’t necessarily a cheap system build. I wasn’t shooting for a budget target, but for functionality. Using laptop-class parts, for example, pushes the price up a bit, as does using special, low-voltage DRAM.

Component

Cost

Intel Core i3 2100T

$135

Intel DH67CF

$120

Antec ISK 300-150

$80

4GB Kingston LoVo DDR3

$90

Lite-On Slot Load DVD

$49

Western Digital Scorpio Black 750GB

$100

Windows 7 Home Premium

$99

Subtotal

$673

Logitech MK520

$40

Asus USB-N13

$23

Total cost w/accessories

$736

As you can see, the system costs a little under $700 before adding the last two items–the keyboard mouse/combo and the Wi-Fi dongle. This cost doesn’t include a display, however. We’ll discuss that in a bit.

While I wanted to go small, I didn’t want to go as tiny as you can get with some Atom-based systems. So I began with the CPU–an Intel Core i3 2100T. This CPU has a TDP (thermal design power) of just 35W, so it’s very low power. Despite the low power consumption, it runs at 2.5GHz, which is perfectly fine for our uses, but there’s no Turbo Boost on this CPU, so you can’t push it any faster than that. On the other hand, it’s a dual-core CPU that supports four threads via hyperthreading.

The CPU also supports hardware virtualization, which can be useful in an office environment. However, the 2100T doesn’t have Intel vPro or Trusted Execution, so it might not be suitable for larger enterprise setups that use a lot of remote management.

The motherboard is an Intel DH67CF, which is a mini-ITX board with two memory sockets. It does have a PCI Express x16 slot which could support a graphics card, but we’re not going to use it in this build. It’s got lots of ports, including a DisplayPort connection, which is what I plan on using to connect to the monitor. The only real oddity with this board is the CMOS battery. It’s on the end of a wire, connected to the motherboard via a pair of pins. You can see the battery just behind the DVI port block.

Intel recommends that CPUs used in this board don’t exceed 65W, but that’s mostly because the company anticipates the board being built into small enclosures. You could drop in a Core i7-2600K CPU, but only if you’re sure you won’t cook it inside a low-airflow case.

Since the plan is to keep power consumption and physical size down, we needed to find a suitable mini-ITX case and power supply. The Antec ISK 300-150 fits the bill nicely, with it’s understated black bezel and 150W PSU (power-supply unit). Note that Antec makes a similar case with a 65W PSU, which would probably have worked fine, but having a little headroom is never a bad thing. At idle, power consumption is still likely to be pretty low.

On the DRAM side, we used a pair of Kingston HyperX LoVo (low voltage) DDR3 modules in our quest to build a low-power-consumption system. However, it’s worth noting that the Kingston LoVo DDR3 costs about twice as much as standard DDR3, so you could cut the cost by $45 or so if you’re willing to deal with the increased power usage.

For this build, we’re using a laptop hard drive and an optical drive. The hard drive is Western Digital’s 7200-rpm Scorpio Black 750GB model–I was at first interested in dropping in a 120GB SSD, but that would have pushed the cost even higher, and I was already approaching $700.

The optical drive is a $45 Lite-On DC-8A2SH, which is a slot-loading DVD rewritable drive. The slot-load feature is nice to have in a crowded, small-desk environment.

The final item, not shown, is an Asus USB-N13 USB Wi-Fi dongle. It’s just $23 to $25, and many similar Wi-Fi dongles exist.

Just Add Accessories: Keyboard, Mouse, Monitor

The price of the system–with Windows, but sans keyboard, mouse, and display–came in at $673. If you add a monitor and input devices, the price would increase to about $800. However, I already had several small Dell P2210 displays on hand. These small, 21.5-inch diagonal displays offer full 1080p resolution in a fairly compact package. You can still buy the P2210 for about $240, but even more cost-effective small monitors are likely available.

I still lacked a keyboard and mouse, so I grabbed a Logitech Wireless MK520 combo. It’s a nearly full-size keyboard with a wireless mouse, and the combo, according to Logitech, has a battery life approaching one year. That kind of lifetime is one thing I wanted in these accessories, and this Logitech set also turns out to be not a bad keyboard and mouse–though it would have been nice to have a back button under the thumb.

The last accessory is an Asus USB-N13 Wi-Fi adapter. It’s a little, thumb-drive-size 802.11n adapter you can find for 25 bucks, and should handle the Wi-Fi chores nicely. Right now, the system is attached via a CAT5e cable, but the computer desk will be moving shortly, and the Wi-Fi dongle will come in very handy.

Building the System

As with any compact system, building into a small case can be tricky. A major reason for using laptop storage in the Antec case is that I wanted to use smaller, lower-power parts. That allowed me to pick the Antec case, because it accepts only laptop storage. But this illustrates a key point:

Make sure your components all play well together.

Over the years, I’ve been bitten a number of times because some component won’t work well with another. I’ve had graphics cards that wouldn’t work with particular motherboards because they were long and blocked access to SATA ports. I’ve built compact, micro-ATX systems that weren’t deep enough to accept high-performance graphics cards. And I’ve had power supplies that were just a little too long to fit inside a case and would block access to hard drive connectors. Doing a little research ahead of time to ensure all your components fit well is critical.

Since the Antec NSK 300 uses laptop storage, it needs to support them properly. Antec thought of this, and included a laptop-style SATA power connector, which is smaller than the SATA power connection used in desktop drives.

In such tight quarters, issues like the CPU cooler can create issues, too. However, Intel’s Core i3-2100T ships with the lowest profile CPU cooler I’ve ever seen.

The Intel cooler won’t win any awards for cooling an overclocked CPU–but that’s not what it’s designed to do. Rather, it’s designed to keep a 35W CPU sufficiently cool to work in a small case. And it seems to do that well enough; idle temperatures were around 40 to 45 degrees Centigrade. Once I assembled everything, the Windows install went smoothly.

The Antec case ships with a bracket that allows you to stand the case on its side, so it takes up less desk space. And because the keyboard and mouse are wireless, I can keep them on top of the case when I’m not using them. The system attaches to the monitor via a single, short DisplayPort cable, so it has only two wires: the monitor cable and power line.

You could build a lower-cost system with just a few tweaks to what I’ve outlined here. Using a slightly larger case, for example, would have allowed me to use desktop storage, which would cut the price a bit. But overall, it’s a solid little system that will do well in my living room–or your small office.

SAN FRANCISCO – Everyone assumes that consumers want to stream Internet programs and media to the big high-def screen in the living room. Heck, these days the market is filled with set-top boxes dedicated to funneling Internet media to HDTVs. But what if you want to do the opposite, and stream live television to a smaller screen–the one connected to your computer?

After all, just about every live TV event loses its luster once it’s over. Sporting events, concerts, awards shows, and the latest episode of Bones are all reasons people sit down in front of the big magic box and tune in. But some of us would rather work while watching the game. (That’s why you bought an extra monitor, right?)
For some reason, accomplishing this is not quite as simple as going the other way (probably because cable companies aren’t ready to let go). Nevertheless, we found a few easy ways to stream live TV to your PC.

Websites…Just Websites

Hulu Plus, Netflix, and other subscription streaming services are perhaps the easiest way to get TV on your PC–but not live TV. Such services feature only previously aired episodes of TV shows (Netflix has only already-aired, already-on-DVD episodes). Although that certainly is nice–and the lack of commercials is always welcome–some live-TV events aren’t quite as attractive after the fact.

Fortunately, you can still feed live TV to your PC in a supersimple way that requires no downloads, software, or hardware-tinkering: Just try some streaming Websites. Of course, these sites can be volatile–often they’re put up and taken down faster than Japanese convenience stores–and your channel selection is usually limited.

Streaming Sports

Sports are one of the biggest reasons for streaming live TV on your computer. Sporting events are really exciting only when you watch them as they happen, and Hulu and Netflix aren’t inclined toward uploading every NCAA Division 3 women’s golf match just to satisfy your love of the links.

Luckily, programming providers realize that day-old sporting events do not make for good Internet media, and some of them offer easy ways to stream sports to your PC.

ESPN, the old standby for sports programming, has a live streaming broadband channel called ESPN3. The channel streams live sporting events such as college football games, UEFA Champions League soccer, The Masters, and the Australian Open. Unfortunately, ESPN3 is available only to customers of select broadband Internet companies. The good news is that if you’re using ESPN3 from a college campus or a military base located in the United States, access is free.
If you’re a college basketball fan, listen up: Every year since 2006, CBS and the NCAA have offered March Madness On Demand, live coverage of the March Madness basketball games. The coverage doesn’t start until March, of course; but when it does begin, the streams will be located on the NCAA site.
As for other large sporting events (such as the Winter Olympics and the FIFA World Cup), usually you can find live streaming from major networks, such as NBC, BBC Sport, and CBC Sports.
Looking for local games that you can’t find on your broadcast channels? Try signing up for Ivi.tv, a $5-per-month Web streaming service that lets you stream broadcast stations from a handful of areas (currently it covers major stations in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and Seattle) so you’ll have a better chance at finding the game you want to watch. Of course, Ivi.tv isn’t just for sports fans–if you have a hankering for local Los Angeles TV news, you can use it to scratch that itch, too.
Other Programming

Not fond of football (American or otherwise)? Don’t worry; you can find plenty of Websites for watching live non-sports TV.

For newshounds, CNN Live features round-the-clock live streaming (though in the middle of the night it’s just round-the-clock live weather forecasting). Fox News has a live stream that you can view in a browser window or in the downloadable Fox News Live Desktop Player. You can also try the ABC News Now stream.
Ustream.tv is a lifecasting and live streaming Website. That means you’ll get your fair share of “lifecasters” (people who enjoy having you watch them on camera 24/7) as well as a large number of live events (notable past events include the 2008 presidential election). Channels to check out include CBS Breaking News, PBS News Hour, and Oscars Live.
Justin.tv, similar to Ustream, also has some channels worth taking a look at. For instance, you might like The Office 720p, which streams episodes of NBC’s The Office. (After all, at least part of the appeal of TV watching is not having to pick each episode.)
ChannelSurfing.net has a selection of live streams, though they’re not necessarily the live streams you’re looking for. However, most of ChannelSurfing’s links appear to be working (unlike a lot of streaming-TV Websites), and if you’re into Australian ABC, the Home Shopping Network, or NCAA men’s soccer, this is the site for you.
TV-Tuner Cards

If you’re willing to pay for the cable–but not for the TV–then you can stream live TV to your PC using a TV-tuner card. A TV tuner will allow your computer to pick up TV signals (including free, over-the-air digital channels), and you can plug it into your cable service.
TV-tuner cards come in two forms: USB and PCI. If you have a laptop, or if you’re not particularly keen on poking around inside your desktop, a USB TV-tuner card plugs easily into one of your computer’s USB 2.0 ports. You can find USB TV-tuner cards for as low as $30 (the Sabrent TV-USBHD Digital and Analog USB TV Tuner from Tiger Direct, for example).
If you’re slightly more tech-savvy (or if you just don’t like extra USB clutter), a PCI tuner card is the way to go. Plus, it’s one of the easiest installations to perform–a great way for newbies to cut their teeth (without, you know, destroying the computer). Here’s how to do it.
1. Pick up a PCI/PCIe TV-tuner card. You can buy one for any amount from $30 (Sabrent TV-PCIDG Hybrid AT SC/NT SC PCI TV Tuner from Tiger Direct) to $140 (Hauppauge 1213 WinTV-HVR2250 PCIe Dual TV Tuner from Tiger Direct). Yes, the more expensive models have more features–the Hauppage product, for example, has two tuners so you can watch one program and record another.
2. Unplug your PC and open the case. Depending on how old your PC is, you may have to use a screwdriver to open the chassis (newer models will likely have thumbscrews or be screwless).

3. Ground yourself! Before touching any of the computer’s internal components, make sure that you’re not giving off an electrostatic discharge. You can ground yourself in a few ways, including wearing an antistatic wrist strap or touching an unpainted metal object (such as the computer case, so long as no components are on the metal).

4. Locate the PCI or PCI Express slot, and remove the corresponding metal plate from the back of the PC case (so that your tuner card’s ports will be accessible from the back of your computer).

5. Make sure the TV-tuner card’s ports are facing the back of the computer, and line up the card with the PCI/PCI Express slot. Gently insert the TV-tuner card into the slot. Secure the card with a screw.

6. You should have read the included instructions before starting the installation, of course, but check them again just to make sure everything is correct. Some TV-tuner cards require that you install them in a certain PCI slot, or that you connect them to your sound card.

7. If everything looks good, close up the PC and plug everything back in. Install the appropriate drivers for your TV-tuner card (from a disc or the Web), and you’re good to go.

Whether you found a Web service that works well or you decided to buy a TV tuner, you should now have live streaming TV on your PC–at a fraction of the cost of a new HDTV.

LONDON – Just under one in five (19.8 percent) respondents to a PC Advisor poll stated that Apple Macs are “superior” to Windows PCs.
The survey asked the question ‘Mac versus PC: where do you stand?’.

The most popular answer, with 27.4 percent, was ‘I prefer PCs because Macs cost too much’, closely followed by ’100 percent Windows PC. I would never buy an Apple Mac’ (26.8 percent).

“I’ve noticed that anyone who owns a Mac immediately feels the need to justify this by extolling its virtues, and rubbishing Windows PCs,” commented forum member Pineman100. “I have yet to see any convincing evidence that Macs are any more reliable than PCs.”

AL47 added: “Same things as usual: Macs are more expensive and less tinkerable. That’s it for me to be honest. Won’t ever have a Mac.”

A further 16.1 percent admitted that they ‘prefer PCs because I’ve never used a Mac’.

But a surprisingly high 19.8 percent of respondents ticked the option ‘I prefer Macs – they’re superior to PCs’.

“I’ve used both systems and find my iMac to be more reliable, better built, a stranger to the BSOD [blue screen of death] and more user-friendly than a windows PC,” wrote Brumas. “What’s more, there is no cumbersome, bulky, space-hogging tower, as everything is contained in the monitor. I won’t go on!”

The voting was completed by 6.1 percent plumping for ‘Neither – I’m a Linux man (or woman)’, and 3.7 percent ticking ‘Don’t know/other’.