Gone… A Loss of Fond Technology

It started a few nights ago. Someone in a music production forum on Facebook posted a synthesizer advertisement from back in the day…a vintage synth. Before long, members of the forum were chiming in about what they remember about those days – things like they used that synth at one point, how it compared to others of its timeframe, etc. Even I pulled out a set of old music production user group magazines and posted a pic of them.

This got me reminiscent of the first computer I was every able to purchase. The backstory (some of you may know) is when I started my professional career out of college, I was a young systems engineer working in a Naval satellite system program office. This office, surprisingly, had a mix of Macs and PCs. It was then, in 1988, when the Mac was only four years old, that my love affair with the platform began. Our business affairs guy was the keeper of the Macs in the office and it was through his enthusiasm and love for the platform that got me interested, not to mention (as I found out shortly thereafter), the magic of Apple. For the next two years, I dreamed of owning a Mac.

In 1990, I was settled into my own apartment (no more roommates) and was making enough to finally afford a brand spanking new Macintosh Classic. I purchased that computer for a whopping $1200 from a small computer shop in Silver Spring, MD. Until then, I was recording the music I was composing to a Tascam 424 multitrack tape recorder. Getting the Mac was way more exciting then most of you could ever imagine – it opened up the world of music sequencing and facilitated greatly how I composed music. It was also the first time I was able to connect to BBSs online via a blazing fast 2400 bps modem (LOL).

Since that Mac, I’ve had many more, some of which I still have in storage, some not, but it was that all in one Mac, the 9-inch B&W, the tiny sequencer, MasterTracks Pro, and a lot of other things during my early journey into using a computer for music production, that leave me with fond memories.

Two nights ago, I pulled it out of storage, set it up, turned it on, and set it in my studio. A little, but well know screensaver called Darkside, was installed. I set it to fade to the “Kitten” screensaver, a little spunky kittne that ran around the screen chasing a ball of yarn. A lot of memories came flooding back, especially those of what I could do with so little hard drive space and processing speed compared to what I have today. Having to load programs via 3.5-in floppy disks, and all the other charming things that only Apple could make you experience.

Last night, when it was appearing everything was fine with it, I decided to move it. I went to shut it down via the shutdown menu, but the mouse froze on the screen, along with the kitten. All I could do them is manually shut the power switch off. When I turned it back on, the video screen essentially malfunctioned. An awful looking pattern was now frozen in place. I repeatedly turned it off and on, trying to see if that issue would fix itself. I followed my a short shake, then firm pounding on both sides, as if I was trying to resuscitate it. All of that…amounted to nothing. It was no more.

Interesting how attached we can become to inanimate objects. While it wasnt necessary the object itself, it was more the memories attached to using it, the things I was able to accomplish during the beginnings of a journey that I’m still on. I admit that I miss it, despite the fact it was sitting in storage for years, despite the fact that the Macs I use for music production now are vastly superior to it. I just miss it…call it tech nostagia.

Today, after some research, I’ve decided to purchase another for posterity. For an original price of $1200 I paid 27 years ago, I’ve seen that computer in flea markets and classified ads selling for as little as $20. On eBay, one in good condition is well over $250. I won’t spend that much, but I’ll continue to research, continue to look around and just maybe, a sort of resurrection of sorts will occur one day in the hopefully near future.

oceans of rhythm…

Fresh!

Calories to NikeFuel Points – An Experiment

Greetings readers,

In my last (longgg) post, I discussed why I have, in 2017, begun using the NikeFuel Band. In all the research I’ve done, I wanted to determine (via some crude experiments), what many have tried before – How many calories burned make up 1 NikeFuel point?

As a recap, the Nike website says this:

“The NikeFuel algorithm was developed at the Nike Digital Sport Science Lab (DSSL), a state-of-the-art performance lab located at Nike WHQ in Portland, OR. The DSSL consists of a team of exercise physiologists and biochemists who are constantly working and reworking the science behind the NikeFuel algorithm. Their goal is not only to perfect the accuracy and consistency of the metric, but also to tune NikeFuel for the performance needs of different athletes.”

About four years ago, there were net postings saying the ratio was 2.79 cals to 1 NP (calculated via experiment by a runner) and “roughly 3 cals to 1 NP” (according to Nike). Since the algorithm was worked over time (says Nike), I decided to conduct some experiments on a normal day of movement (24 Aug 17) and exercising to see what results I’d end up with.

Experiment 1 – Morning Calisthenics
Since I workout every morning by at least do a short calisthenics set, I decided to note the NikeFuel points tracked vs the calories burned with the band and compare them to what the Apple Watch recorded. The following resulted in the amount of calories burned for each NikeFuel point:

Roughly, a 4-to-1 ratio.

Experiment 2 – Normal Daily Moves and Exercise
This time, I decided to take the same approach and apply it to a normal day of activity. Once again, note the results.

Finally, Experiment #3 – Core Training
It takes 30 minutes of exercise in Workout mode to close the exercise ring on the Apple Watch. Since the NikeFuel Band offers a capability called Sessions, I decided to start a session simultaneously with the Apple Watch and record the results as follows:

In all three experiments, with the exception of the outlier of 3.42 cals/NikeFuel point, the results consistently show roughly 4 cals to every one NikeFuel point, or a 4-to-1 ratio.

Crude experiments, yes…but consistent. It’s just something I was curious about, but honestly didn’t expect pretty stable results across the board.

Thanks again for the read….

Best,
Fresh!

Why the Nike FuelBand SE in 2017 – “Band on the run”

So, I’ve found the Apple Watch fitness capabilities a welcome and useful way to track my general fitness activities AND found the entire process it uses to motivate me, especially in the area of consistency. The apps that I use integrate perfectly with the Health app, I’ve had no issue with sharing my Activity data with others, and even with the current Watch OS 3.12, operating everything I need from the watch is a breeze (there a few things I’d like to see changed in future updates but they’re not fitness-related).

That said, it seems like it’s an all-in-one solution for my needs, as I stared using wearable technology to track my fitness data five years before the Apple Watch came along. Why, then, have I developed this fascination for using another unit that once had it’s heyday as a wearable fitness tracker, but met an untimely (some what say timely) death three years ago, one that many lambasted as inaccurate, lacking features that units in co-existence had at the time? Well, it’s simple, it offers and does a few things that the AW ecosystem doesn’t. This fitness tracker is the Nike Fuel Band. I’m going to talk about my personal likes about it and why I enjoy using it in concert with the AW, vice discussing it’s technical drawbacks as a unit and in comparison to where fitness tracking technology has evolved to.

I’m certain that all of you reading this blog post have, at least, heard of the Nike Fuel Band, and probably have an idea what Nike Fuel and the band is.

For those of you that don’t, the Nike website describes the concept of Nike Fuel as follows:

“Nike Fuel is whole integer number that represents your daily activity by calculating your calories burned along with your steps taken, while simultaneously factoring in your age, gender, weight and height. In short order, Nike Fuel is a calculation that allows everyone and anyone to compete regardless of their sex, age and any physical predispositions. Nike worked with some of the world’s top experts in science and sports to engineer NikeFuel algorithms based on oxygen kinetics. Unlike calorie counts — which vary based on someone’s gender and body type — NikeFuel is a normalized score that awards all participants equal scoring for the same activity regardless of their physical makeup. A user can also choose to also receive a calorie count to understand how many calories are burned versus how much NikeFuel is earned. The Nike+ FuelBand SE and first generation FuelBand track activity-based caloric burn (not resting metabolic caloric burn) using an algorithm (a series of mathematical models that link movement patterns to known energy requirements) based on the energy you expend when you move.

The NikeFuel algorithm was developed at the Nike Digital Sport Science Lab (DSSL), a state-of-the-art performance lab located at Nike WHQ in Portland, OR. The DSSL consists of a team of exercise physiologists and biochemists who are constantly working and reworking the science behind the NikeFuel algorithm. Their goal is not only to perfect the accuracy and consistency of the metric, but also to tune NikeFuel for the performance needs of different athletes (Nike says “If you have a body, you’re an athlete”). Our NikeFuel science team has an extensive amount of athlete V02 tests, each consisting of a series of 42 activities that include both lifestyle and traditional sport movements. Our data set grows exponentially every year, and our algorithms get short and more accurate every month.

In addition to the work we do in-house, the DSSL works directly with experts from across the academic and research industries to further perfect the algorithms.”

Popular Mechanics published a 2012 story regarding an inside look of the Nike DSSL, read it here.

The steps and calories are not an exact science but it is a pretty good gauge of how active you have been during the day. It takes into account the amount of movement in a given period of time so assigns a higher “point” value. It also does not take into account heart rate at all. What I like about the Fuel Band is it constitutes itself a motivational tool – you can compare your Fuel score with some celebrity athlete, or to everyday people in your age range, even you know they are more active or less active than you are.

Like many dedicated fitness trackers and mobile phones, motion is key to tracking fitness via use of accelerometers and other motion sensing technologies. Nike+ Fuelband is at its core an accelerometer; it counts the number of steps and calculates the estimated calories consumed. The FuelBand contains a timer, and by taking into account both distance and time, i.e. how vigorous is your motion, the NikeFuel score provides a measure of the aerobic and cardiovascular workout. In addition, Nike Fuel points do not depend on weight as a metric factor (unlike calculating calories burned) and so, again, the score can be directly compared between individuals.

A blog post from Quantified Health states “…Taken together, the Nike Fuel score probably correlates closely with the number of calories burned but it also contains a component that is orthogonal (distinct) to this count relating to the briskness of the exercise. It would be helpful if Nike could provide more information about its Fuel score and how it is calculated to enable a more accurate physiological interpretation.” That said, Nike’s formula for calculating Nike Fuel points is “proprietary”. I’ve read two web references where a runner conducted some experiments to determine that one Nike Fuel point is equal to 2.79 calories burned. You can read the entire post here. Another reference aligns with this in that a user contacted Nike and their reply was the ratio of of calories to Fuel points is “roughly 3-to-1” Yet another user compiled a month’s worth of data to try and determine this, you can read about that here. I’ve started conducting some experiments to see if my findings show. A reader commented to the Quantified Health blog post by saying: “What SHOULD have been used, both by Nike and here in your article discussing it, is how there Nike Fuel points are related to METs which are the universal measurement of activity and caloric expenditure. I suspect Nike Fuel is either based on or directly correlated to METs in some way.” Again, many have been interested in trying to crack the code of Nike’s proprietary formula.

Back to why I use the Fuel Band in a few short reasons:

1. Where Nike Fuel really works for me is as a personal motivation tool. At any point during the day, I can push the button on the band to see where I am in relation to my goal. I don’t need to pull out my cell phone to bring up the app (which obviously has much more functionality in a number of ways), because, for one, mobile phones are prohibited where I work, but the like the Apple Watch (also prohibited), the band is connect via Bluetooth to my phone, so as soon as it reconnects, I can see all the extra data via the app, data which is essentially synced to my Nike+ fitness account online. I’ve never been one to enjoy having a phone strapped to be to measure my physical activity when exercising or otherwise.

My first introduction to trophies (or achievements, as the Apple Watch world calls them), came via the use of Nike Fuel. For a list of all the trophies, go here. For a list of Nike and Nike + Fuel badges, you can view those here. I’ve gotten a number of achievements via use of the Apple Watch fitness tracking, but the Nike Fuel ones seem more…..exciting…for lack of a better word.

2) There’s a certain “cool/wow factor” with this band – the LED lights, the progression of color (red to green) as I reach my goal. it’s definitely an attention-getter if seen in public today. I like that, it’s simple and to the point. While the Apple Watch gives data (currently) on 58 types of exercise activity, Nike designed the band to track 88 different types. A lot, but not near the 200+ types the Polar fitness trackers are designed to measure.

3) It’s any inconspicuous wearable that gives me a different metric of my physical activity.

4) Nike, being the juggernaut of the company it is, got every aspect of advertising and social media dead on for me, everything about it is still attractive (even though the band itself and it’s social media activity is dead and discontinued)

In short, it’s convenient (no phone needed), simple (though the Fuel points concept is unlike most common fitness data tracking methods), it’s cool looking, provides the motivation I need, and they just got me with everything they put in to this now dead platform.

Yes, I have the NRC app on my phone and watch, as well as the NTC app on my phone – both generated Nike Fuel points when used to the Nike Fuel app, but for some odd (I guess) reasons, I like the physical and tactile aspect of wearing the band.

Nike did end up settling a lawsuit regarding misleading advertising about the accuracy of the fitness tracking of the band, resulting in refunding users $15 USD or a Nike gift card, if they purchased the band within a certain time period. They also eventually released their API to the public so developers could integrate the software into other applications.

Why did Nike can the development of the Fuel Band? In short, the company decided it eventually did not want to invest resources in a dedicated fitness tracker, but otherwise license and integrate that technology into mobile devices. At that time, the FitBits and Garmins of the world exceeded the features that the Fuel Band offered.

Well, there you have it. I did an Instragram hashtag search on #nikefuelband and was surprised to see how many people are still using it in 2017. I think that, in itself piqued my interest more, aside from the reasons given above.

Thanks for the read…

Peace…
Fresh!

Fitness with The Apple Watch – 7 weeks later – It’s a “ring thing”

Greetings all…

In our last episode, I gave a brief background on what started my journey of fitness tracking and, furthermore, quantifying the fitness data (and lifestyle I was creating) – starting with the Nike+ Fitness app/Nike Sport Kit on the iPod nano, to the app on the iPhone (Nike Fuel) to the Apple Watch after a long hiatus of running with the app.

It’s been seven weeks (actually in two days it will be) that I’ve had the Apple Watch. I’ve done a lot of research on how it tracks fitness, even down to its sensor and accelerometer technology. Though I haven’t gone as far as comparing it to Fitbit, Garmin, etc, I like it – probably because I’ve been in the Apple ecosystem since 1989, and they’ve always had a certain type of “magic” about how they seamlessly engage the public and the technology of their products.

What I find interesting, is the concept of the Activity rings and how they motivate you to stay activity. Now, everyone’s different and gets motivated differently. For many, the concept of closing rings is just that, a goal to do everyday. For me, because of my goals, I don’t have a concern about weight loss in terms of caloric burns (I’d actually like to put on a few pounds at 180 and 5’10”). For a good explanation of how the Activity rings work, see this article.

Back to the motivation. It’s a simple concept, but effective. Challenges with others don’t really interest me as much as challenging myself to push further. The concept of the Activity rings do this perfectly for me. If anything, in the least, it causes me to get that 30 mins of exercise in everyday, first for the physical benefit, but secondly (of course) to “close that green exercise ring” – LOL. The Move ring always follows close behind. The Stand ring is interesting. While it’s nice to close, I simply see it as a reminder for those who are sedentary (purposely or not) to stand up, and move around for a minute to advance the ring. After achieving 12 stand goals (at least) within 12 hours, the ring closes. Being sedentary is definitely not an issue for me, so…. The choices of workouts (standard and the 50+ others that can be used after you Save Workout) are great. I’ve seen that the Nike Fuel Band has a total of 88 choices of activities it measures and Polar has at least twice that amount.

All and all, I like the fitness motivational aspects that Apple has designed into the watch – they work great for the journey I’m on. While the app doesn’t allow for the same type of multiuser challenges that, say FitBit, is popular for, the upcoming Watch OS4 update will add some very nice fitness features. If you can keep a secret (and I know you can), I’m involved in a software app development project that hopefully will bring the type of social fitness challenges mentioned above, to the Watch such that it can work in a multiplatform environment (Android, Apple, etc).

Thanks for the read. Until tthen…take care.

Mr. Fresh

Fitness Goals – Powered by The Apple Watch

Greetings all….

It’s been quite some time since I’ve posted to this section of my blog, but the reason for doing so is to sing (and bring) the praises of the Apple Watch.

Since it’s inception, and as of a month ago (specifically), I was determined NOT to purchase one, strictly because of it’s price point. I come from the world of Pebble, and have been using that watch (still do) for the past two years of so. Interestingly enough, FitBit in December 2016, purchased the intellectually property of Pebble. Many called it the death of Pebble, however that proved not to be so. My concern is after December 2017, FitBit will no longer maintain the Pebble servers. What that means, in actuality, is that the voice-to-text and native weather features will cease to function. The Pebble community has risen the call to keep Pebble alive, via a group of developers called Rebvle.io . They (at the moment) will continue to develop software on the Android platform to sustain the Pebble ecosystem. That is good news except there has been no such movement on the iOS side – which means that as iOS version upgrades evolve, incompatible with Pebble’s ecosystem will occur. There as already been some small incompatibility hiccups since iOS 10, but nothing major (seems iOS 11 beta is even working fine).

That said, being an Apple fanboy since the late 90s, I started actually using the Nike+ Fitness app on an iPod Touch to track my running. Between 2010 (my first real interested in running) through 2013 or so, it worked well enough to allow me to get a good view of progress over the years. Since then, it has evolved both into the Nike Run Club and Nike Training Club apps. As for the Apple Watch, I knew that tight integration between Watch OS and iOS would never be an issue. This, in itself, caused me to make the purchase decision (in addition to having a zero balance on my Best Buy card LOL). I decided on purchasing the 38 mm Series 1 after a great deal of research. It had everything I needed at the price point I wanted (I take my phone with me everywhere and don’t swim to the point where I need to track swim metrics, so I didn’t need onboard GPS or waterpoof capabilities). I knew very little about the fitness features via the Activity app when I purchased it, but seeing that I’ve been more on the fitness bandwagon than off, throughout life, the fitness features immediately began to appeal to me, the more that I learned about them. The motivation to “close those rings” is a very real thing to many, self included, however I’ve learned that this motivation means different things to different people. For me, I’ve learned that this ring closure concept, along with how the Activity app is integrated with the Health app, has given me a new and greater understanding on how regular and consistent fitness is extremely important. The rings themselves has strangely strengthened my desire to make fitness a routine and part of my daily regimen and that is definitely a good thing.

I will say that I’ve learned a great deal about AW’s main competitor, FitBit. Though I’ve never been part of the community, I’ve learned that there are major differences between that of AW and FB. While I won’t get into that comparison here, I will say that for me, AW (and even the community as it currently is), is right for me in all aspects. Anyway, you slice it, the bottom line is what works best for you as an individual, and in the end, it all boils down to keeping fitness as a routine in your daily life.

Thanks for the reading, I know it was a bit longwinded as a introduction. Subsequent posts will be focused on companion apps I use along the Activity app, the community as it grows and changes, feature improvements, and the like – but generally how I find it useful as a fitness tool. I participate a great deal in the Facebook group Apple Watch Fitness Fans, so if you’re an Apple Watch owner interested in fitness, consider checking it out, it’s a great group and very helpful

Get fit, stay fit.

Thanks,
Doug

Happy 30th Birthday, Macintosh!

Photo Source: Patrick Rhone/Minimal Mac

Yesterday, January 24th, was the 30th anniversary of the Apple Macintosh computer. I wasn’t aware of that until my browser brought up its default page, apple.com. I was pleasantly surprised and greeted with (expectedly) the great advertising that Apple is known for (click here for 30 Years of The Mac).

Seeing this immediately took me back to Apple back in 1988. I was a junior engineer, my first job, in an office that was run by Windows 3.1 machines – one for every employee, others for ancillary functions. Our office business manager, an avid Mac user, insisted we have three Macs in the office to hand the business functions of the program (then Naval satellite communications program) – a Mac Plus with a 20 MB external hard drive, a Mac SE, and a Mac IICi. David, our office manager, was an older gentlemen, well learned, but enjoyed using Macs so much (without trying to sell its merits) that he unknowingly sold me on its merits in the same way (I later found out) that Apple commercials did, but without the sales pitch (so to speak). He continually showed me how the user-centric design of the Mac easily helped him in his daily activities, in and out of the office. For me, already experienced in using the Windows platform, it was like a no-brainer that this platform would be my computing choice on a regular basis.

It wasn’t until two years later that I was able to purchase my first Mac (via our employee discount program) – a Mac Classic. Brand new, It cost me $1200. Specs: 4MB RAM. 40MB HD, running at a whopping 8MHz, running System 7.0 (fondly remembering this as it is sitting to the right of me as I type this post, emitting a very soft hum, Darkside as the screen saver).

The purchase of that Mac began a wonderful journey – word processing, graphics, connecting to the Internet via a 2400 baud external modem, and the beginning of using it for my favorite activity, music production. A small, all-n-one computer with a 9″ black and white screen – so easy to use, so user-centric, yet so beautiful.

Since then I’ve owned (let’s see): A Powerbook 100, 145, 165c, 170, 1400cs, Powerbook G3 Pismo, Powerbook G4 Aluminum, iBook, Blue and White G4 Tower, Silver G4 Tower, original iMac, Mac IIci, Quadra 605, Power Mac 7100 (2), Power Mac G5 (2), Macbook (Black) and Mac Mini Intel Core Duo (I think that covers it). One G5, the Mac Mini, and the Macbook are the core of my music production studio, while the second G5 (the one I am typing this from) is used for podcast production and simple word processing and web surfing. I think the last brand new Mac I purchased was the iBook in the mid-90s. While I am not a Mac guru, I’ve found it so easy to maintain them that I’ve purchased used ever since then.

I’m not sure how Apple did it and continues to do it, be it advertising, perpetuating the Mac *culture* or what, but however they are doing it, it has, and continues to be a fantastic voyage. I am forever, a Mac fanboy.

Happy Birthday, Mac…and many more.

::: oceans of rhythm :::

Fresh.

He makes the jump….to the iPhone 4.

Yes…the time has come for all good men…no, no…ok. Yes, I made the jump to the iPhone 4 today. The purchase experience was great. The same Verizon store salesperson that helped me with both Blackberries over the last 3 years, was there to assist, and everything went smoothly.

For those who are not on AT&T and/or didn’t know, they are offering the iPhone 3GS for free (annual two-year contract required). As I drove past the AT&T store, the line was out of the door and down the street (oooh, am I about to encounter the same at 8:15am?). No, no line. The salesperson told me many people pre-ordered. I’m a kinda basics guy and didnt see the need for the iPhone 4S (and frankly wanted to keep the extra money I would have paid, in my pocket). Basic black, 8GB iPhone 4 for me.

Ok, though I’ve been rockin’ an iPod Touch since 1G, all you iPhone experts out there, school me on your favorite apps for task and contacts management, as well as your fave Twitter app…they’ll be my main interests, as my 160GB iPod Classic is my main music player. Any other tips and tricks are greatly appreciated!

Great to finally be on board, at a great price!

Have a good day…

:::oceans of rhythm:::

Fresh!

Call me a neo-Luddite (old tech wins this round….)

In my recording studio, I have a very old sampler, a Yamaha TX16W. This sampler has a 3.5″ disk drive that reads Yamaha’s proprietary format sample lilbrary. I have at least three cases of sample disks that I’d like to convert before possibly selling them with the sampler. I really didn’t want to fire up the sampler, connect a MIDI keyboard, play the sample, record the audio into my computer, and save it…but…that would seem the only way to do it….UNTIL…I remembered that I could use an old app called Sound Converter to read the sample disk and do the conversion for me. The problem was these disks are ALL 3.5″ DSDD floppy disks. A-ha…no problem – I can buy USB drive 3.5″ floppy disk reader. Drive purchased, disk inserted…no cigar…the drive only reads HD 3.5″ floppies….bummer. Light bulb goes off…pull out ye olde Power Mac 7100, and hook it up….it has an internal CD-ROM drive *and* internal floppy drive that reads 3.5″ DSDD and HD floppy disks….voila! Fortunately, since I started music production on this computer like 10+ years ago, it’s still running Mac OS 9.1, and has Sound Converter installed as well. Cool!

I set it up, hooked up a spare flatscreen monitor, an iOmega Zip drive and again was in business, like the old days! Fortunately, I was able to find the app PC Exchange on an older Mac OS system update disks that had the DOS Compatibility app software on it which allows me to read DOS formatted floppy disks. I popped the first sample disk in, opened the file with Sound Converter, and did the conversion…good to go. Now to do the other gazillion disks!

Definitely paid to keep the old hardware around. Yeah, for those who know, the samples are 12-bit (as opposed to 24-bit today), but I love samples….the bigger my library, the better…they sound pretty decent for a sampler from the 80’s 😉 It’s 3:13am Saturday morning….thankful I can sleep in and late for once! Good night!

peace…

F!

Seems like the perfect combo: A Hackintosh’d Dell Mini 9

For the longest time I’ve been considering a netbook. Why, for the obvious reasons…ultraportable computing and a good cross between a standard size laptop and the smaller Sony Vaio. I’ve had online discussions and tweets with Roddykat and Kenya and still really think about getting another high end Powerbook Aluminum or better yet cheap Macbook Pro (last generation, not unibody) In any event, as some of you know, I am a die-hard Macintosh fan and have been one since 1991 (my first Mac was a Macintosh Classic II).

Imagine my delight when I came across this article from Gizmodo, a Dell Mini 9 running Mac OSX….perfect combination! I think I may have to try and roll with this. The current issue of Wired has a good article about netbooks that I’ll crawl in bed to read….that may help me solidify the decision!