Canada sees double, Chinese sweep

Canada's Charles Hamelin (C) displays his two gold medals together with his relay team mates Olivier Jean (L), Francois Hamelin (R, front), and Francois-Louis Tremblay after the men's 5000 metres relay short track speed skating final at the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics February 26, 2010. Charles Hamelin won the gold in the men's 5000 metres relay and the men's 500 metres competitions.

Credit: Reuters/Jerry Lampen

VANCOUVER (Reuters) - Canada's short track men triggered wild party scenes among home fans with two Olympic gold medals in half an hour on Friday and China completed a clean sweep of the women's titles.

Sports

Charles Hamelin avoided a last-corner collision caused by 2006 champion Apolo Anton Ohno to win the 500 meters before helping his team survive a crowded 5,000 relay final to make up for losing the title on the last lap to South Korea in 2006.
"They will be going crazy in Quebec, they will be going crazy in Montreal, party all night," Hamelin told reporters. "I got two gold medals in 30 minutes and it's incredible."
China's Wang Meng won her third gold of the Vancouver Games, adding the 1,000 meter title to her 500 and relay golds. Zhou Yang had triumphed in the 1,500 meters.
"I don't feel these three gold medals belong to me. What is important is that the Chinese short track team has won four (gold) medals," the ginger-haired Wang told reporters.
Hamelin had endured a frustrating Games but made up for it by taking the 500 crown from American Ohno, who was disqualified for knocking over South Korea's Sung Si-bak and Canadian Francois-Louis Tremblay just before the finish.
KISS GIRLFRIEND
While Hamelin kissed girlfriend Marianne St Gelais, who won silver in the women's 500, without waiting for the official result, Ohno sensed he would be disqualified as he circled the ice with an air of resignation despite crossing the line second.
The referee watched the replay and Ohno's suspicions were confirmed when Sung was awarded silver and Tremblay bronze.
"There was no space ... I had so much speed, I put my hand up so as not to run into the Canadian but it was out of my control," Ohno said.
Hamelin returned to the ice half an hour later to steer Canada to the relay title in a race featuring 20 skaters on the ice at the same time, making a normally hectic event chaotic. France had been advanced to make it five teams instead of four.
Hamelin, roared on every time he was pushed into the race, almost lost it for Canada with five laps to go as he slipped on the ice and almost tripped over but he regained his balance.
The Koreans took the silver and raised eyebrows with their unconventional celebrations. They unfurled a large Korean flag on the center of the rink and all knelt down and bowed their heads in unison.
The non-Koreans in the stands whistled the gesture, perhaps believing the Asian powerhouse, who had won the other two men's titles, were trying to steal Canada's moment of glory.
"We bowed in the direction of our coaches as we wanted to show them our thanks," Kwak Yoon-gy told a news conference.
The United States grabbed the bronze to hand Ohno his third medal of the Games and eighth in three Olympics.
None of Ohno's medals were gold this time but China's Wang completed a hat-trick of top prizes in Vancouver.
She survived a near collision with South Korea's Park Seung-hi and American Katherine Reutter on a bend with three laps to go in the 1,000 final but kept her nose in front to cross the line first. Reutter took silver and Park bronze.

MIDEAST: How to Check Both Iran and Israel

Analysis by Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler

TEL AVIV, Feb 27, 2010 (IPS) - The U.S. is raising the stakes in its bid to halt Iran's nuclear programme, putting the issue on a "pressure track", says top U.S. general David Petraeus. The U.S. and other world powers are drumming up support for a fourth round of UN sanctions against Iran for its refusal to comply with repeated ultimatums to suspend uranium enrichment and to agree to a deal involving UN-backed nuclear fuel.

Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central command, said the Obama administration intends to "send the kind of signal to Iran about the very serious concerns that the countries in the region and, indeed, the entire world have about Iran's activities in the nuclear programme."

In parallel, his commander, Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff who just returned from the Middle East, made a point of warning that any military strike against Iran would not be "decisive" in countering Tehran's nuclear programme.

The top U.S. military commanders were speaking on the eve of talks in Washington with Israel's Defence Minister Ehud Barak.

For now, both Barak and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have lined up solidly behind the U.S.-led attempt to gain Security Council approval for sanctions against Tehran. However, in Netanyahu's description this week, the sanctions must be "crippling".

The Israeli leaders have been careful not to express publicly any doubts about the U.S. strategy. But there remain residual misgivings here whether sanctions will indeed go through at the UN. And, whether they will work.

That was what lay behind Mullen's pointed recent visit to Tel Aviv.

The motive for the U.S. admiral's visit was unexpectedly transparent - his purpose not only to coordinate policy with Israel, but to restrain Israel from independent action.

Although re-emphasising that President Obama has made his policy abundantly clear - "Iran cannot have nuclear weapons," Mullen addressed the persistent speculation that Israel has not abandoned its ongoing preparations for a possible pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.

If a regional confrontation were to break out following a strike on Iran, the U.S. military chief said bluntly, "it would be a big, big, big problem for all of us. I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences of a strike."

To underline this concern, Mullen took the almost unprecedented step of convening a short news conference at the U.S. embassy here before entering meetings with Barak and Israel's military command.

He even agreed to be interviewed by the three main Israeli television stations, using the opportunity again to caution that Israel should exercise complete restraint and do nothing to disturb U.S. coordination of the international sanctions drive.

Mullen's strictures were an echo of the last time he was in Israel 18 months ago when he was dispatched by the Bush Administration to deliver a similar message that Israel should not think of going it alone in trying to neutralise the perceived threat from Iran.

Mullen did, however, reiterate the U.S. assessments that unless the Iranian nuclear programme is halted, Tehran could make a nuclear bomb "within one to three years."

The Israeli prime minister seems to have absorbed the message.

When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned that Iran would side with Syria and Lebanon if attacked by Israel, Netanyahu made the point of stating categorically that Israel "was not planning any wars", blasting the Iranian president for trying to "manipulate the situation" in a bid to head off the sanctions drive.

So, where does all this leave Israeli concerns about Iran?

The answer may be in another candid interview - with Israel's UN ambassador, Gabriella Shalev. Asked by Israeli reporters in Washington, "Why is Israel recently so calm regarding Iran?" she responded, "We are very anxious. But...if the Security Council will not impose on Iran what Secretary Clinton called 'crippling sanctions,' we'll end up just having the individual states working together on this issue."

Shalev expressed concern that the Security Council "can be paralysed" because of the veto power of the five permanent members. "It took some time for the new U.S. administration to figure out that the UN is not what they hoped for. Now they realise the complexities," she added quite undiplomatically.

Pressed on the possibility of the Israeli pre-emptive strike, she said frankly, "It's one of the options and all options are on the table. It's one of the bad options, though we don't think it's as bad as Iran having nuclear weapon. For us it's an existential threat."

Pressed further whether the U.S. and Israel were still on the same page, the Israeli ambassador said, "I'm sure yes we are. The U.S. fully understands the threat. There are two very bad possibilities: That Iran will go forward and end up with a bomb - just imagine that terrorist groups on our border will have this terrible weapon; and, the second is war. We hope neither of these possibilities occurs."

If, back in Jerusalem official Israel is being particularly careful not to express such public doubts about whether sanctions will eventually be effective, this is not true of some informed experts.

Emily Landau, a senior research associate at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, and an expert on arms control and regional security, writes in Haaretz: "If we assume that ultimately there will be sanctions, so what? The involvement with sanctions, who's for and who's against, when, why and to what extent, deflects from the primary problem - the absence of an American strategy for tough negotiations with Iran."

At this stage, the problem is not so much whether Israel will disrupt the U.S. sanctions strategy, but a still deep-rooted conviction held by many in Israel that the Obama Administration might be beginning, in Landau's phrase, "to resign itself not only to the fact that Iran will continue to enrich uranium, but also to recognition that the Islamic republic could ultimately build a nuclear bomb."

Which is why, unless sanctions prove to be working and Tehran is really made to shift its determined stance that it has the right to develop a nuclear capability as it itself sees fit, the potential for open confrontation will keep haunting the region. And, will keep bedeviling the diplomatic attempts to defuse global tensions on several fronts.

Iran bank wins case against UK sanctions

A Bank Mellat building

Iran's Bank Mellat has reportedly won a preliminary court case against British sanctions at the High Court of Justice in London.

The British Treasury moved in October to forbid any financial company within the UK to do business with Bank Mellat over its alleged connections with Tehran's nuclear program and missile development.

In recent months, the Iranian bank has been fighting to overturn the Treasury ruling and finally made a breakthrough on Thursday when High Court Justice John Mitting ruled against the imposition of British penalties on the bank.

According to the High Court, under the European Convention on Human Rights, Bank Mellat is entitled to information about allegations against it.

The Judge said the Treasury ruling directly impinges "on the bank's civil rights and obligations" and that any restriction on the bank's activity resulting in the loss of shareholders' capital, “is illegal and in breach of human rights.”

He explained that the British Treasury would have a hard time finding compelling evidence to substantiate its accusations against Bank Mellat.

To pressure Tehran over its nuclear program, Western powers, particularly Britain and the UK, have imposed unilateral sanctions on a number of Iranian-owned banks, namely Melli, Saderat, and Sepah, and have demanded that world financial institutions follow suit

Dance, drums and dope in Pakistan's festival of happiness

FOR THOSE who think Pakistan is all hardliners, all the time, three activities at an annual festival here may come as a surprise.  Thousands of Muslim worshippers paid tribute to the patron saint of the eastern city of Lahore this month by dancing, drumming and smoking pot.  It is not an image one ordinarily associates with Pakistan, a country whose tormented western border region dominates the news. But it is an important part of how Islam is practised here, a tradition that goes back a thousand years to Islam's roots in South Asia.  It is Sufism, a mystical form of Islam brought into South Asia by wandering thinkers who spread the religion east from the Arabian peninsula. They carried a message of equality that was deeply appealing to indigenous societies riven by caste and poverty. To this day, Sufi shrines stand out in Islam for allowing women free access.  In modern times, Pakistan's Sufis have been challenged by a stricter form of Islam that dominates in Saudi Arabia. That orthodox, often political, Islam was encouraged in Pakistan in the 1980s by the American-supported dictator, Muhammad Zia ul-Haq.  Since then, the fundamentalists' aggressive stance has tended to eclipse that of their moderate kin, whose shrines and processions have become targets.  But if last week's stomping, twirling, singing, drumming kaleidoscope of a crowd is any indication, Sufism still has a powerful appeal.  ''There are bomb blasts all around, but people don't stay away,'' said a 36-year-old bank teller, Najibullah. ''When the celebration comes, people have to dance.''  Worshippers came from all over Pakistan to commemorate the death of the saint Ali bin Usman al-Hajveri, an 11th-century mystic.  Known today as Data Ganj Baksh, or Giver of Treasures, the Persian-speaking mystic journeyed to Lahore with Central Asian invaders, according to Raza Ahmed Rumi, a Pakistani writer and expert on Sufism. He settled outside the city, a stopover on the trade route to Delhi, started a meditation centre and wrote a manual on Sufi practices, Rumi said.  The joyful dancing and drumming last week was part of a natural rhythm of life that after nearly 10 centuries is as much about culture as it is about faith.  ''It's a festival of happiness!'' shouted a cook, Muhamed Nadim, over the din, when asked what was being celebrated. ''People feel comfort here.''  Vast crowds of men walked barefoot, pushing past police barricades and vendors selling fabrics and sweets.  Brightly lit bookstores remained open, their owners gazing out at the crowds. One of those owners, Naeem Ashraf Rizvi, settled easily into a conversation with a foreigner about life in Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of Pakistanis are Sufi, he said, and despise violence inflicted by some of the more hardline Deobandis, the school of thought that was supported by General Zia.  Last year was Pakistan's worst for militant attacks since 2001, with the death toll more than triple what it was in 2006.  ''Sufis have not spread terrorism,'' Mr Rizvi said, his small daughter on his lap. ''We are its victims.'' The violence, he said, has damaged not only Pakistan, but also the reputation of Muslims, who he said ''are seen with suspicious gazes everywhere in the world''.  ''We are condemning the violence, but no one is listening to us.''  Worse than the violence, Mr Rizvi said, was the weakness of the government, which seemed unable to accomplish much of anything.  Nor was a military takeover the answer. The only solution, he said, was a revolution by the people, such as the one in Iran in 1979.  But in Pakistan, where illiteracy is rampant and leaders are more focused on jockeying for power than fulfilling a political vision, that is a distant wish.  ''Everyone is quiet,'' he said. ''They are not listening yet. They are sleeping.''

XP SP2 and Vista RTM Bow Out, Upgrade to Windows 7

Time is near for older editions of Windows that have run their course to bow out and leave the stage to the latest versions of the platform, Windows 7. It is the natural evolution course for all Microsoft software products, outlined in detail on in the company’s Support Lifecycle Policy. Next to go will be the release of Windows XP which established the operating system’s dominance on the OS market for the vast majority of the past decade, and the Windows Vista version which contributed to enabling XP’s dominance to endure. Both Windows variants will reach the End of Support milestone.

Windows Vista RTM was ostracized long ago, a process started even before the operating system was launched, but which only found additional fuel after the January 2007 General Availability deadline. Few will be those shedding a tear for the successor of XP, which was extensively criticized for being inferior to the OS it was designed to replace, especially in terms of device driver support, software compatibility and performance. April 13th, 2010, will bring with it the End of Support for Windows Vista RTM, namely the original release of the OS with no service packs installed.

But parting ways with Windows XP Service Pack 2 is a whole different matter altogether. SP2 took Windows XP to a stage in the operating system’s evolution which many, including Microsoft’s own, saw as equivalent to the release of a new Windows client. Light years away from XP RTM or XP SP1, SP2 made XP the ubiquitous OS that it still is today. On July 13th, 2010, Windows XP SP2 will also reach the End of Support milestone. XP will be accompanied by Windows 2000.

“All editions of Windows 2000 will reach the end of the Extended Support phase on July 13, 2010. This will be the end of support for Windows 2000,” revealed Jared Proudfoot, Group program manager, Microsoft Support Lifecycle. “Windows Server 2003 will also undergo a support transition later this year. On July 13, 2010 all editions of Windows Server 2003 will be moving from the Mainstream Support phase to the Extended Support phase.”
What does End of Support mean?

What is critical to underline is the fact that all unsupported version of Windows are no longer served software updates via Windows Update. The highest impact is associated with the lack of security updates. Microsoft, as do all members of the software industry, constantly update their products with fixes designed to resolve security vulnerabilities. Without security updates, Windows operating systems become exposed to exploits targeting security flaws, which will allow attackers to potentially gain control of an affected system and to execute code remotely. In addition, Microsoft also uses Windows Update in order to deliver the latest software updates for reliability, stability, performance, application compatibility, hardware drivers support, etc. End of Support means that Windows will be effectively stuck in the same place, and will no longer evolve in the least.

“As you may recall, at the end of the Extended Support phase, Business & Developer products are no longer publicly supported, although Self-Help Online support (such as Microsoft online Knowledge Base articles, FAQs, troubleshooting tools, and other resources) will be available for a minimum of 12 months after the product reaches the end of its support. This means that there is no more paid support, no support assistance and no further security updates. Due to this, customers are highly encouraged to move to a supported product as soon as possible,” Proudfoot stated.

End of Support is not equivalent with the death of Windows, for either XP or Vista. Both operating systems will continue to run under normal parameters for as long as the customer desires. Still, XP and Vista users that will decide to stick with their current versions of the platforms will no longer be protected against new exploits/attacks released, and in addition, will find that in the future they won’t be able to install and run new versions of software or the latest hardware products made available, as developers and manufacturers will also no longer support XP SP2 and Vista RTM.

“Keeping your PC up to date and as safe as possible is something that people need to think about beyond just being on the latest service pack. I want to remind everyone of the benefits of keeping Windows Update turned on. Through Windows Update, not only are you provided with the latest security updates and service packs for Windows at no cost, but also the latest updates to products such as Internet Explorer 8 and Microsoft Security Essentials,” said Brandon LeBlanc, Windows Communications manager on the Windows Client Communications Team.

The solution? Upgrade!

Windows XP SP2 & Windows 2000 - It’s not recommended, even in the least, for XP SP2 customers to continue running their current operating system. The obvious solution involves upgrading to Windows 7, as the latest iteration of Windows offers a superior user experience. However, in the context in which jumping to Windows 7 is not possible, for various reasons, customers should at least upgrade to XP SP3. As is the case for all Microsoft service packs, XP SP3 is available for download free of charge. The same is valid for Windows 2000 users, who also need to make the jump at least to XP SP3, although Windows 7 is the best choice. Windows XP SP3 will be supported until 2014.

Windows Vista RTM – Users of this particular version of Vista have the least amount of time available to upgrade. While SP1 continues to be a valid choice, customers need to consider upgrading to SP2 instead. Particularly since deploying SP2 actually requires deploying SP1 beforehand. Of course, as is the case for XP SP2 and Windows 2000, users might find that the best solution would be to embrace Windows 7. For both XP and Vista customers, Microsoft is offering the Upgrade Advisor, a piece of software designed to assess computers for their readiness in terms of accommodating Windows 7.

Windows 2000 – “Those enterprise customers who are unable to complete their migration to a supported product before July 13, 2010 may also want to consider the Custom Support program. Custom Support provides customers with the opportunity to receive support on legacy versions of some Microsoft products and service packs that have reached the end of support. This program may help fill the gap for customers who are actively migrating, but will not be able to finish prior to the end of support deadline. For additional details on Custom Support, please contact your local Microsoft representative or Technical Account Manager,” Proudfoot stated.

Yahoo! and the future of search

YoelleMaarek says the search deal with Microsoft will allow Yahoo! to focus on front-end search innovations  Photo: Yahoo! 

Yahoo! and Microsoft’s multi-million pound search deal was given the green light last week by both the US and European regulators. The arrangement, which will see Microsoft’s search technology power Yahoo!’s search engine for the next decade, will probably go totally unnoticed by users of both services, as it is no more than back-end tweaking.
But what does the union really mean for the future of Yahoo!’s search offering, ambitions and the overall search market? To some, Yahoo!'s decision to "outsource" its search operation (in exchange for managing the search advertising business of both companies) is a sign that it has ducked out of the search war that's raging between Google and its competitors, including Microsoft's own Bing platform.
 indeed, even Sergey Brin, Google’s co-founder, said it was a "shame" that Yahoo! was apparently exiting the market, as it had some interesting ideas. “I think Yahoo! had a number of innovations there, and I wish they would continue to innovate in search,” he told delegates at the Web 2.0 conference in San Francisco last year. However, according to Yoelle Maarek, senior director of Yahoo! Research, nothing could be further from the truth. The deal, she explains, should be seen as liberating Yahoo! to focus on front-end search innovations, rather than spending time and money on ensuring the back-end technology is working well. If anything, says Maarek, the Microsoft deal has freed the company up to start fighting the search war in the most important area – the bit the consumer can see. Yahoo!’s search teams are planning to launch several new initiatives in this area over the coming months, to try and steal share from search Goliath Google, and also, somewhat confusingly, from Bing, the search platform of Microsoft, its new partner.
It’s useful to contextualise Yahoo!’s current search performance. In January 2010, its search engine recorded eight million unique users in the UK, versus Bing’s seven million and Google’s whopping 31.8 million, according to Nielsen Online’s latest figures. It’s current share of the UK search market is joint with Bing at four per cent, while Google accounts for 86 per cent. However, the picture differs slightly in the US, with Yahoo! accounting for 14 per cent of the search market during January 2010, Bing (combined with its traffic from Windows Live and MSN) coming in with 11 per cent and Google out in front with a proportionately smaller 66 per cent.
Maarek, a former Google engineering director at its Haifa Engineering Center, which she founded in 2006, believes that Yahoo! has always been quicker and better than its rivals at innovating in search – but has never got the credit.
“When I worked at Google – my team launched ‘Google Suggest’ [a tool which offers users similar searches while they are typing]. But this was a year after Yahoo! launched essentially same tool, ‘Yahoo! Assist. It’s just no one took enough notice and we need to get better at publicising our products.”
Over the coming months, Maarek says Yahoo! is focusing on three core search areas. Firstly the company is investing in lots of research and “data crunching” to understand how its search engine can better anticipate a person’s "intent" when they enter a search term – for instance, how it can discern whether a person is looking for business news, the record label or the fruit if they enter the search term 'apple'.
Secondly there are new tools being built upon and promoted to make searching via Yahoo! easier and help the company “establish a dialogue” with its users, according to Maarek. ‘Search Pad’ is one of these initiatives. It is a note-taking application which automatically assists a user in saving the addresses of the websites they are visiting on a virtual pad. It helps users collect, edit, organise, save, print and email their notes for immediate or future use. However, unless a user is logged into a Yahoo! account, it will not save or send a user the URLs after the browser window is shut down.
Thirdly, Yahoo! is trying to build upon is ‘web of things’ concept – the idea that the web should be seen as an entity built up of ‘objects’ rather than documents. This should be reflected in the way search results are presented. For instance, if a user searched for Lady Gaga, then instead of receiving a list of blue links, the search results will be presented like a mini newspaper – with a variety of types of result including, images, ticket offers, videos (presented as videos and not just links) and news articles.
But despite these innovations, which cynics would predict will go largely unnoticed while Google reigns supreme, why does Yahoo! still bother trying to up its search game when the market share figures stay pretty consistently in the same order: Google top, everyone else bottom. Maarek smiles and says: “Yahoo! has always been about content and its verticals. Google has never been about content. We started life as a directory with search – that tried to intelligently curate the internet – which is what everyone else is attempting to do now. When you have content – you have to have an excellent search function to reap the full benefits.
“When people come to Yahoo!, which they might do through Google or Bing, they start with one given need – for example to read about France – which then changes into another need – such as booking a flight to France. We have to give them the tools to search for those needs as they change while they are with us – and it needs to be the best service possible. Our aim is not to compete with Google head-on just in search – we are an internet media company trying to provide a holistic service which caters for a users’ entire set of web needs.”
Yahoo! Mail and its portal figures are very healthy and compare well against Google and Microsoft – especially in the US. It has also just announced an interesting partnership with Twitter which will see tweets added to its search results – giving its users a more ‘real-time’ experience – as well becoming a Twitter client that enables people to send tweets while using Yahoo!’s products.
However, despite Maarek’s optimism that web users are not loyal and could change from using Google search to Yahoo!’s service if they found it to be better, many people don’t seem to want to change their search habits. The goalposts are moving all the time, too: Google is also innovating at a fierce pace, and is pretty good at publicising it.
The most compelling argument, however, that Yahoo! presents for its reason to keep fighting the search war is to ensure there is a rival to the major player. That forces everyone to keep on innovating, and that's good news for users. Yahoo! and Microsoft’s deal will take a good year to bed in, but if it does help facilitate better innovation and healthier competition in the search market, then it could be worth the wait.

Tablet PC News Dell vs Apple, and then some

Tablets Wars begin, just the mention of the word tablet and Apple’s iPad comes to mind. But with that much Buzz on a product there will be challanges, other companies are busy building their own version of a touch-enabled, multimedia-sporting, slab of portable computing goodness. Microsoft, Dell, Apple and many more are now in a tablet pc war.

First off – a quick definition of a tablet computing device. It falls between the smart phone and the netbook in terms of computing power, size and portability, and is keyboardless, using touch input instead, similar to the iPhone.

While the iPad will run on a version of the iPhone operating system designed for ultra-mobile devices, several others, including the HP Slate, are designed to work on a scaled-down version of the Windows 7 operating system.

The HP Slate is easily the biggest competitor to Apple’s iPad right now. It was unveiled at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in January of this year by no less than Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer who demonstrated how well it will work with Windows 7 as well its ability to double as an e-book reader by running the PC version of Amazon’s Kindle software.

This alone is challenging Apple’s notion of revolutionising the publishing industry and, as Ballmer said, it is “almost as powerful as a PC”, but crucially Apple has the App Store and the iPhone’s legacy of a huge back catalogue of transferable apps at its fingertips.

Remember Asus, the company that kick-started the netbook phenomenon with the EEE PC? Unsurprisingly, these guys also have their own tablet device – in concept form – that runs on the Android operating system, so like the Streak it has the advantage of an open developer community, lacking the App Store restrictions that can slow down third-party developers working the iPhone.

The 10-inch Adam tablet device from Indian start-up Notion Ink is probably one of the most tangible of devices on the market right now. It is set to come to market in the second quarter of 2010 – around the same time as the iPad – and will have a price tag anywhere between $300 and $800 but one of the sexiest-looking tablets has got to be the Vega from Innovative Converged Devices: this has a whooping 15.6-inch screen and will be on sale in the UK before the end of the year.

Lenovo has revamped its line of ThinkPad tablets and laptops to take advantage of the latest technology from both Intel and Microsoft. These new PCs are not only designed for enterprise users, but also for small businesses that need solid computing technology despite a tighter budget. The most noteworthy of these PCs is the ThinkPad X201 tablet. Lenovo decided against a slate-style tablet in order to create a convertible tablet that addresses business needs.

Dell’s first effort at a tablet will be the Mini 5 (a name that is still in beta) — a slice of plastic and glass with a 5-inch capacitive touchscreen that according to Michael Dell will debut “in a couple of months.”

The Mini 5 will sport a 5-megapixel camera on the back, a separate front-facing camera that can be used for video conferencing, a standard 3.5-mm headphone jack, Wi-Fi and 3G connectivity and a Qualcomm Snapdragon 1-GHz processor.

The 5-inch screen also means it will be be closer to the Sony PSP in its form factor than the longer legal notepad design of the iPad.

The Mini 5 will run the latest version of Google’s Android operating system, version 2.0 or higher. And instead of the 4:3 aspect ratio of the iPad, Dell’s tablets will support the 16:9 ratio. Widescreen films anyone?

“It’s a device optimized for media consumption,” Neeraj Choubey, general manager of the tablets division at Dell told Wired.com. “It will offer the full Web-browsing experience so you have something that you are holding in your hand that replaces everything the smartphone does and takes on quite a bit of the features of a laptop.”

The Dell 5 Mini will also just be the first in a series.

“We are going to have a family of tablets,” says Choubey. “The first one is a 5-inch screen but we want to scale that up to a variety of screen sizes.”

That means future versions of the Mini 5 could have larger screens that will be closer in size to the iPad.

Dell wouldn’t comment on pricing, beyond saying it will be “competitive,” or when it will launch this year. Apple’s iPad ranges from $500 to $830.

With the launch of iPad in January, the tablet PCs are going through a renaissance.

Though PC makers have offered slates and convertible notebooks for nearly a decade, consumers haven’t bought them in droves. With its 9.7-inch display, sleek design and Apple’s relentless hype, the iPad could alter the way we experience mobile computing. And Dell knows this.

Three years ago, Dell started expanding its product line to include mobile products. Dell smartphones are now sold in Brazil and China and it hopes to bring a version to North America. Meanwhile, the company set up a tablet division, and three weeks ago Choubey joined Dell from venture capital firm Venrock.

As he sees it, the Mini 5 will offer the apps that are available on smartphones, a set of specialized tools and programs for business users, a strong movies-and-music experience and Web surfing — Flash and all included. Take that, iPad.

Along with the apps on the Mini 5, users will have quick access to e-mail, YouTube, Amazon’s MP3 store for music, as well as spreadsheet, presentation maker and documents. It will also support voice recognition.

And these are characteristics that will be common to all tablets from Dell.

Still it will be a hard sell to consumers, says Van Baker, an analyst with research firm Gartner.

“If all you are bringing to the market is another media-playing or handheld-gaming device, then it’s not going to work,” he says. “It’s all about the services you have behind the device.”

And that’s where the iPad scores, with its strong developer ecosystem and 100,000 apps, along with iTunes and iBooks, says Baker.

Dell is betting it can offer that and add a compelling value proposition for business users: a promise that its tablet won’t just be a coffee-table device but instead a powerful productivity tool.

“There’s no reason why you can’t use the tablet to take notes in class,” he says.

Dell will also offer services such as syncing that will allow users to move music, documents and other data between their PC and tablet easily.

“At a very basic level, you would have a service that will share content across the devices seamlessly and have it in the cloud,” says Choubey.

Dell also hopes to draw on the Android ecosystem by offering developers the opportunity to port their Android apps to the Mini 5 and its successors.

For the Mini 5, though, its PlayStation Portable-like form factor could be a big drawback, says Baker. The Dell Mini 5 is closer in its looks to gadgets better known as mobile internet devices or MIDs, a category that has been languishing despite products from companies such as Lenovo and Archos.

“If the Dell Mini 5 is this small and it is pocketable, then why isn’t it a phone?” asks Baker. “If I am going to carry a second device, it better have something that’s a significant advantage over what I can do with my phone. With the iPad, the value proposition is a much larger display.”

But Choubey says the innovation is not just in the form factor but also in the business model. Dell will work with carriers to bundle inexpensive data plans for the Mini 5 and other tablets.

“That type of model — the way iPad was able to do with AT& T — will become more prevalent with these tablet devices,” he says. “It allows the carrier to increase number of devices per user.”

Apple introduced a $15 for 250 MB, or an unlimited $30 a month, no-contract data plan for use with the iPad.

Apple admits using child labour in China

Apple has admitted that child labour was used at the Chinese factories that build its computers, iPods and mobile phones. 

Apple has been repeatedly criticised for using factories that abuse workers and where conditions are poor 

 

At least eleven 15-year-old children were discovered to be working last year in three factories which supply Apple.
The company did not name the offending factories, or say where they were based, but the majority of its goods are assembled in China.
Apple also has factories working for it in Taiwan, Singapore, the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, the Czech Republic and the United States.
Apple said the child workers are now no longer being used, or are no longer underage. "In each of the three facilities, we required a review of all employment records for the year as well as a complete analysis of the hiring process to clarify how underage people had been able to gain employment," Apple said, in an annual report on its suppliers.
Apple has been repeatedly criticised for using factories that abuse workers and where conditions are poor. Last week, it emerged that 62 workers at a factory that manufactures products for Apple and Nokia had been poisoned by n-hexane, a toxic chemical that can cause muscular degeneration and blur eyesight. Apple has not commented on the problems at the plant, which is run by Wintek, in the Chinese city of Suzhou.
A spokesman for Wintek said that "almost all" of the affected workers were back at work, but that some remained in hospital. Wintek said n-hexane was commonly used in the technology industry, and that problems had arisen because some areas of the factory were not ventilated properly.
Last year, an employee at Foxconn, the Taiwanese company that is one of Apple's biggest suppliers, committed suicide after being accused of stealing a prototype for the iPhone.
Sun Danyong, 25, was a university graduate working in the logistics department when the prototype went missing. An investigation revealed that the factory's security staff had beaten him, and he subsequently jumped to his death from the 12th floor of his apartment building.
Foxconn runs a number of super-factories in the south of China, some of which employ as many as 300,000 workers and form self-contained cities, complete with banks, post offices and basketball courts.
It has been accused, however, of treating its employees extremely harshly. China Labor Watch, a New York-based NGO, accused Foxconn of having an "inhumane and militant" management, which neglects basic human rights. Foxconn's management were not available for comment.
In its report, Apple revealed the sweatshop conditions inside the factories it uses. Apple admitted that at least 55 of the 102 factories that produce its goods were ignoring Apple's rule that staff cannot work more than 60 hours a week.
The technology company's own guidelines are already in breach of China's widely-ignored labour law, which sets out a maximum 49-hour week for workers.
Apple also said that one of its factories had repeatedly falsified its records in order to conceal the fact that it was using child labour and working its staff endlessly.
"When we investigated, we uncovered records and conducted worker interviews that revealed excessive working hours and seven days of continuous work," Apple said, adding that it had terminated all contracts with the factory.
Only 65 per cent of the factories were paying their staff the correct wages and benefits, and Apple found 24 factories where workers had not even been paid China's minimum wage of around 800 yuan (Pounds76) a month.
Meanwhile, only 61 per cent of Apple's suppliers were following regulations to prevent injuries in the workplace and a mere 57 per cent had the correct environmental permits to operate.
The high environmental cost of Apple's products was revealed when three factories were discovered to be shipping hazardous waste to unqualified disposal companies.
Apple said it had required the factories to "perform immediate inspections of their wastewater discharge systems" and hire an independent environmental consultant to prevent future violations.
However, Apple has not stopped using the factories.
In 2008, Apple found that a total of 25 child workers had been employed to build iPods, iPhones and its range of computers.

Microsoft beats up Google over antitrust affairs

A Microsoft senior lawyer launched an astonishing attack on Google late yesterday.

What's astonishing about it is that Microsoft is a convicted monopolist but has turned itself into a whited sepulchre and put itself on the side of the underdog.

Dave Heiner, in a bog posting, said that complaints in competition law cases usually come from competitors. When Eric Schmidt, now CEO at Google, was CEO of Novell that company didn't hesitate to complain about Microsoft, he said. And Google "hasn't been shy about raising antitrust concerns about Microsoft in the last few years".

In its own conversations with regulatory authorities, Microsoft had been asked about Google. Google, said Heiner, controlled search and online advertising. Google's business practices "lock in publishers and advertisers" and make it harder for Microsoft to gain search volume".

Heiner said that Microsoft was also concerned about Googles book search plan. And, he said, the European Commission is investigating Google for "retaliation, exclusivity and manipulation of search results to disadvantage rivals".

That would be the three Microsoft affiliates that made the complaints, Mr Heiner, right?

Twitter to go Google way

Till the other day we were confident that Google is a globally acclaimed American public corporation and also highly reputed internet search giant but now it is evident that Google Inc. is influencing the world of business also.

How can we be so sure? Well, if we rely upon the latest version of All Things D, Twitter, internationally renowned free social networking and micro-blogging service, is desperate to copy Google’s money-spinning search ads and the first and foremost intention is to make money from its ultrapopular micropublishing system. Got it?

What is the real idea then? It has been learnt that, by means of this, Twitter will enable advertisers contract to have their ads show up as tiny 140-word posts when users rummage around through Twitter or by way of other search engines that make use of its API.

What makes twitter follow the footsteps of Google so keenly? It is to be noted that Google makes almost a third of its money from its AdSense program, which lets publishers sign up and have little text ads run on their websites. This is a unique notion of business, without a shred of doubt that has taken the world by storm almost.
Twitter is a free social networking and micro-blogging service that enables its users to send and read messages known as tweets. Tweets are text-based posts of up to 140 characters displayed on the author's profile page and delivered to the author's subscribers who are known as followers.

Senders can restrict delivery to those in their circle of friends or, by default, allow open access. Users can send and receive tweets via the Twitter website, Short Message Service (SMS) or external applications. While the service itself costs nothing to use, accessing it through SMS may incur phone service provider fees.  

US Campaign to Ban Landmines (USCBL) on Twitter and Facebook

On March 1st, Human Rights Watch and other members of the US Campaign to Ban Landmines (USCBL) are organizing on Twitter and Facebook to tell both the administration and Congress that the US needs to relinquish antipersonnel mines and get on board the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. Our goal is to make the call for the US to ban landmines a trending topic on Twitter, and to raise the profile of the issue on Facebook and other social networking tools on March 1st, which marks eleven years since the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty became binding international law.
If you have an account on Facebook or Twitter, you can participate in this initiative on March 1st and during that week by:

1. Donating your status - Upload one of the "Ban Landmines USA" icons or ‘avatars' below and use it in place of your regular photo or icon on your Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Flickr, and other accounts. Switch your status to a "Ban Landmines USA" on Monday, March 1st and use it that day, that week, or for the whole month of March!
  
2. Tweeting the hash tag banminesusa - Our goal is to make the call for the US to ban landmines a trending topic on Twitter through use of the hash tag banminesusa. So on March 1st and during that week, please tweet banminesusa every time you see an article, press release, or campaign action in support of the objective to "Ban Landmines USA." Tell your friends on Twitter to do the same. Every time you see a tweet with banminesusa, please re-tweet it.

Background
On December 1, 2009, a US official confirmed that the US has begun a comprehensive landmine policy review "initiated at the direction of President Obama." The United States has not used antipersonnel mines since 1991 (in the first Gulf War), has not exported them since 1992, has not produced them since 1997, and is the biggest donor to mine clearance programs around the world. But it still retains 10 million stockpiled antipersonnel mines and has not joined the 1997 treaty prohibiting the weapon. 

The US Campaign to Ban Landmines and its member organizations are using the month between March 1st, 2010 (Mine Ban Treaty's 11th anniversary of entry into force) and April 4th (UN Mine Action Day) to remind the US that now's the time for the US to relinquish antipersonnel mines and get on board the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty.

Participating Organizations
Human Rights Watch is a founding member of the US Campaign to Ban Landmines and its parent, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, 1997 Nobel Peace Laureate. In addition to Human Rights Watch, other US Campaign to Ban Landmines members participating in this #banminesusa campaign include Jesuit Refugee Service USA and the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC).