Still running a PowerPC Mac and hurting for some serious browser speed, up-to-date security and web standards compatibility? Being open-source applications, Mozilla’s web browsers and Thunderbird email client are open to being breathed on by third-party developers, several of whom specialize in optimization of particular versions of the Mac OS — such as Chris Latko’s Mac Intel-optimized variants of Firefox.

Terrific Results

However, for us PowerPC holdouts, a reader recently tipped me to some PowerPC-optimized Mozilla web browsers plus Thunderbird by R.P. Mozely, noting that he’s been getting terrific results and highly recommends these tweaked apps.

That sounded promising, as I’m still using two G4-upgraded Pismo PowerBooks for production work, and haven’t found the latest Mozilla gecko-based browsers to be particularly happy campers on the old laptops running OS 10.4 .11. So I keep reverting to old Netscape Navigator 9, which works nicely, but is getting long in the tooth, beginning to encounter some limitations content-compatibility wise. Of course it hasn’t had any security updates for nearly two years, since development was terminated.

Squeezing Every Bit of Speed Potential Out

Now this R.P. Mozely cat doesn’t just provide a one-size-fits-all PowerPC generic optimization, but discrete dedicated versions for G3 PowerPC 750, G4 PowerPC 7400, G4 PowerPC 7450, and G5 PowerPC 970, presumably all the better to squeeze every bit of potential speed out of each respective processor. My hot-rodder Pismos have 550 MHz G4 7400 CPUs, so last weekend I proceeded to download the G4 7400 optimized builds of Firefox 3.5.6, Camino 2.0.1, and the SeaMonkey 2.0.1 Internet suite application.

Worth the Effort?

So was it worth the effort? I think so. These browsers are definitely faster than the stock builds, performing remarkably well on the old Pismo, even when it really needed a restart to clear the memory heap, dipping into virtual memory swapfiles on the hard drive routinely.

I had been especially hopeful that the PPC-optimized Camino would work well, and it does. My seat-of-the-pants assessment is that it’s the fastest browser I’ve used on the Pismo — livelier even than Opera 10, which is no slouch speed-wise itself.

Sluggishness Banished

I’ve found recent versions of Firefox, Camino and SeaMonkey a bit sluggish on the old G4 machines, which is a big part of why I keep using Navigator 9. But that complaint is pretty much eliminated with these PowerPC optimized builds of the current Gecko browsers, at least in their G4 7400 iterations. However, for what it’s worth, I think the Camino variant is the pick of the litter.

If you’re still hanging in with a PowerPC Mac, I think you’ll thank yourself for taking the trouble to download one or more of these PowerPC-optimized browser versions.

Macworld’s Joe Kissell observes that there are many fine Mac Web browsers to choose from, and there’s no reason not to have several installed so that you can switch among them as needed. Indeed, I virtually always have at least three up and running at any given time.

Safari vs. Firefox

However, most folks are inclined to rely primarily on one main browser, and for that purpose, Kissell recommends using one of the two most popular ones — either Apple’s Safari or Mozilla’s Firefox  – which he says both make excellent all-around choices and work well as a default browser, which I don’t dispute, although neither are my own choice as my number one browser. Kissell notes that certain situations may make one or the other of these two browsers an especially good choice, outlining several areas where in his estimation they respectively excel. Of course such evaluations tend to be somewhat subjective.

For example, Joe likes Safari’s built-in PDF support. I’m personally not a big fan. While the built-in facility means you don’t have to switch to Preview or Adobe Reader to launch a PDF file you still have to wait while it loads in the browser window, and saving it is another step. I prefer the download and view mode, but that’s just me. Joe mentions that if you like inline PDF viewing, a free extension called Firefox-Mac-PDF will add similar functionality to Firefox.

Another Safari feature Joe likes is the ability to resize text area controls (multi-line text fields) by dragging the handle in the lower right corner of the field. This is indeed handy, but not a killer feature, in my opinion.

How Often Will You Want to Do That?

I do agree that Safari’s full-text history searches (Safari’s Top Sites view>History -> Show Top Sites) and search field for words that appeared on Web pages you viewed recently even if they’re no longer open is pretty cool, and he likes Safari’s ability to display graphics in non-Web TIFF or JPEG 2000 formats, although how often will you want to do that?

When Firefox May Be a Better Choice

However, Joe thinks there are also instances where Firefox is a better choice than Safari, such as when using Google Toolbar — another free extension for Firefox that adds a long and user-configurable list of features to the browser, including quick access to various Google Gadgets.

He also likes Firefox’s more flexible and versatile privacy setting configuration that lets you configure many privacy settings per domain, as opposed to Safari’s all-or-nothing privacy setting limitations, and praises the vast range of choice in Firefox add-ons and plug-ins compared with the lack of an officially supported plug-in API for Safari. For folks who like to tweak their browser functionality, Firefox is the way to go.

Firefox (and its sibling Gecko-based browsers like Camino and SeaMonkey) can also display inline mathematical equations, while Safari and other WebKit-based browsers only support display of linear strings of characters.

Why I Use Opera and Chrome More Than Safari and Firefox

Personally, I use Firefox more than Safari, but Opera 10 and lately Google’s Chrome for Mac each respectively get more hours of surfing on my machines than Firefox and Safari combined, and both Opera and Chrome have features I miss when using the more mainstream browsers, such as their superior download managers, Opera’s up-front and versatile Zoom menu, and Chrome’s raw speed, fast startup, and “right now” Finder response. Opera and Chrome both seem more nimble and less inclined to be memory hogs than Safari and Firefox (although the latter has cleaned up its act in that regard somewhat in recent iterations). I prefer the looks of Opera and Chrome as well, but as Joe Kissell noted, we have an embarrassment of choice in browsers these days, and everyone should be able to find a browser (or two or three) that suits their needs and tastes to a tee.

What’s your favorite OS X browser, and why?

Related GigaOM Pro Research: What Does the Future Hold For Browsers?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• What Does the Future Hold For Browsers?
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis
• Mobilize 09 Wrap-up

I usually have at least three browsers open at any time. One will be a Mozilla Gecko app (Firefox, Camino, or SeaMonkey) and one an Apple WebKit based program (Stainless, Cruz, iCab, Shiira, OmniWeb, or especially since Safari 4 was released, Safari itself). Interestingly, I find I like Safari 4 better on my old Pismo PowerBooks running OS 10.4.11 than I do under Leopard on my Core 2 Duo MacBook where Stainless tends to get the nod.

However, the browser I consistently use more than all of the others combined is Opera, and it’s an abiding puzzlement to me as to why Opera has thus far been unable to carve out a more substantial market niche in North America.

According to NetApplications’ HitsLink Market Share statistics watch for August, Opera now has a cumulative global two percent share (2.35 percent when Opera Mini is included) behind Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, Firefox, Apple’s Safari, and Google’s Chrome, thanks largely to its popularity in Eastern Europe and Asia, where it has about four percent of the market. Opera claims that in some regions of the globe, such as Russia, Ukraine and parts of Europe, it is now the most popular browser with growth last year of 67 percent and roughly 100 million users worldwide (translation into 39 languages probably doesn’t hurt either). But its penetration in the U.S. and Canada is more like one percent. Indeed, Google’s Chrome, still a beta with no general release Mac version, has now bumped Opera from forth to fifth place in the U.S. browser market.

“The reality is that in the U.S. we have some work to do,” Opera boss Jon von Tetzchner recently told BBC News.

Opera 10 reportedly hit 10 million downloads in its first week, so it will be interesting to see how that plays out in the September Hitslink stats, but there’s no indication that Opera 10 is taking the U.S. market by storm.

Personally, I warmed slowly to Opera, which has been around since 1994, and released its first Mac versions in the late ’90s, at which time it had an interesting interface and some unique features, but was pretty awful performance-wise. However, Opera’s Mac support is now impressively strong, and since the release of Opera 8, it’s been a fixture on my desktop, and most of the time it’s the browser I reach for first for general surfing and a lot of my work-related browsing as well.

Probably one of the things about Opera that handicaps it in North America is that it’s a bit — and in some instances more than a bit — different from other browsers, which is partly why I like it, but North American consumers tend to be conformists, which explains why Windows has 90-odd percent of the desktop operating system market. When there’s the slightest learning curve to scale, many people balk. With Opera, the learning curve is not steep, but it’s there.

Have you given Opera a try? Did you stick with it? Why or why not?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A 2011 Green IT Forecast
• Green IT’s Q4 Winners: Wind Power, Solar Power, Smart Energy

The real power of OS X lies in all of the hidden gems beneath what you see at first glance. Technologies like Expose, Spaces, Stacks, Spotlight and others help users tap the power of their Mac, while keeping the experience sleek and elegant. Aptonic’s Dropzone, a third-party application designed to further simplify your Mac experience, fits into this group perfectly and naturally.

It’s Like an Intern for Your Dock

Dropzone is an application that resides in your Dock like any other app. The power of Dropzone comes into play when you begin dragging files onto its icon. Similar to the appearance of a Stack, Dropzone will expand giving you options of what to do with the file or files you’ve selected. Think of it like Automator for your Dock.

For example, if I have a handful of files selected, and drag them onto my Dropzone icon, I am presented with a series of choices, one of which is “Zip files and email.” As simple as it sounds, dragging the files onto this icon zips the files automatically and attaches them to a new email message inside of Mail. Gone are the days of right-clicking to compress the files, attaching that to an email and then deleting the zip file when I’m done.

Another “destination” included is the ability to install applications quickly by dragging a DMG onto the “Install Application” destination. Behind the scenes, your Mac will mount the DMG file, locate the application inside, copy it to your Applications folder and launch it, unmount the DMG and move the DMG file to the trash.

Other destinations include quick access to uploading images to Flickr (including copying the image URL to your clipboard when its done) or upload files to your FTP server. Want those files zipped before upload? No problem. Just hold down the option key as you drag the files onto the icon. It’s quick and simple and really does save time.

I’m the type of Mac user who likes to keep my Dock as simplified as possible, but I do enjoy the ability to be able to drag files onto an application icon and force the file to open in that application. Dropzone allows me to throw applications I use frequently inside of it and then I have the ability to do just that. Compared to attempting the same thing with a stack in Leopard, I only spawn Finder windows.

Taking It Further

Several optional downloads can extend the functionality of Dropzone. There are add-ons to allow you to start your screensaver, mount/unmount firewire drives, and set your computer to sleep, in addition to many others. Dropzone even includes support for popular web services, including the ability to quickly share photos via TwitPic, shorten a dropped URL via the Is.Gd service (and copy it to the clipboard automatically), and quickly share photos and documents on Posterous.

If you are comfortable programming ruby scripts, Dropzone also offers a scripting API to allow you to create your own “destinations” to further extend the application.

If you’d like to try out Dropzone, it’s currently available for Leopard or Snow Leopard users. Aptonic does provide a trial version of the software, and the cost is only $10 to purchase the full version. The trial does limit you to 15 days of use and up to five “destinations” at a time. I spoke with the developers at Aptonic and they informed me that updates through 1.0 will be freely available to users who register, but the $10 price is likely just an introductory price. Download the demo version here.

I’ll be the first to admit, much like Quicksilver or Spaces, once you get used to integrating this app, it really does save you time. If you have tried out Dropzone, let me know your thoughts in the comments below!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: The Connected TV Marketplace
• How to Market Your iPhone App: A Developer’s Guide

Mac Menus For Multiple Monitors – I use my TV as a second display for watching movies, playing games, etc. Which means that not having menus on either one or the other display really cramps my style. Thanks to jkOnTheRun, I now have at least one option, even if it’s not ideal (that would be a top menu on each screen).

Microsoft to Tango With MobileMe – If you want to cut in on a competitor’s territory, the best place to strike is where they’re weakest. Apple knew Vista was disappointing, so they targeted the OS in their ad campaign. Microsoft may have learned that lesson, since they’re set to release a MobileMe competitor.

Seagate Drives Prone to a Slight Case of Not Working – Barracuda series drives that are used in some Apple computers are developing a nasty case of the fails. The good news is that the data can be saved on failed drives. The bad news is that an application which could warn you of imminent failure doesn’t run on Macs.

Apple Now Selling Used Products in China – Apple computers aren’t selling like hotcakes in China, which now represents a major market, even with the global economic turmoil going on right now. They’re probably hoping that offering used/refurb deals will net some more customers.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• What Does the Future Hold For Browsers?
• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce

If any one application is near and dear to almost every Mac users heart, it is the web browser. With more applications becoming web based, and web applications becoming more complicated, the browser’s appearance, feel, and most of all performance become even more important. 2008 has been a big year for web browsers, with Firefox 3, Safari 3.1, and several massive improvements in javascript performance. 2009 is poised to be even more impressive in browser achievements, with new versions of most browsers in the works, and the promise of a new player with a big impact, Google Chrome.

Each browser was run through the industry standard Acid3 and SunSpider tests.

If you are looking for choice, performance, feel, or appearance, at least one of the 16 browsers below should fit the bill.

Webkit Browsers

	Safari: Apple’s default web browser, Safari is the most popular browser in the Mac market, and for good reason. Safari is elegant, fast, and integrates deeply into the Mac environment. As great as Safari is though, there is always room for improvement. My biggest gripe with Safari, and I’ll admit it is a small one, is how it handles the contextual menu search. If I highlight a word, CMD-Click and select “Search with Google”, Safari should open a tab in the background with the search in it. Right now what Safari does is replace the tab I’m reading with the search. If there’s a hidden preference for this somewhere, someone please point it out to me. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3609.2ms
	Omniweb: The Omni Group’s venerable web browser OmniWeb is the only one on this list that is not available for free. OmniWeb sells for a list price of $15. OmniWeb is packed with features, and integrates just as well as Safari does into the Mac. OmniWeb’s distinctive tabs, which are really thumbnails in a drawer, make the interface stand out from the crowd. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3745.4ms
	iCab: Another ancient web browser, I was very surprised to see iCab updated. iCab is fast, but it also has a few annoying characteristics. For one, unless you donate to the developer, you get a window that appears every time it’s launched. Also, iCab uses very non-standard buttons in its toolbar. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3727.0ms
	Shiira: The browser from the Land of the Rising Sun, Shiira aims to be “better and more useful than Safari,” and attempts this by adding a few interesting features. It creates large screenshot tabs at the bottom of the window, similar to OmniWeb. I found them rather obtrusive there, but they are customizable in the preferences. Its “Tab Expose” feature is nice, as are the HUD windows for bookmarks and history. Sadly, it seems that Shiira may be abandonware, as there have been no updates since January, and there are rumors of the projects death in the forums. Acid 3 Score: 74/100 SunSpider Total: 3571.4ms
	Sunrise: Sunrise uses a URL field to both search and enter addresses, which I think is a great idea. I’m not sure if Google thought that up with Chrome first or not, but I think from a usability standpoint it’s excellent. Bookmarks are a little different in Sunrise as well. It takes a screenshot of the web page to bookmark, and then instead of a standard menu there is a list of the screenshots that slides out from the right hand side. Interesting, but I’m not sold on how useful this is. If there are only a few bookmarks, then I suppose this would work well, but I doubt this could scale very far. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3558.0ms
	Cruz: Cruz is a very early attempt to blend the best of Firefox and Safari into a webkit based browser. As a 0.1 release, its more of a proof of concept than a usable everyday browser, but it does seem like it has some promise. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3556.4ms
	Stainless: Another “proof of concept” browser, Stainless is an attempt to clone Google Chrome for OS X. The developers describe Stainless as a “technology demo,” and advise that it is not for every day use. The main feature of this browser is that each tab is an independent process, so a web page could crash the tab, but the application could keep running. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3630.4ms
	AOL: Wow, this was a blast from the past! AOL still has the familiar “You’ve got mail!” voice from years past. The browser portion of AOL looks to be based on webkit, and seems quick and usable. The only item I find incomprehensible with the AOL for Mac desktop is the tab bar at the top of the screen, which really equates to a series of bookmarks that take up a whole lot of screen real estate for very little functionality. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3551.4ms

Gecko Browsers

	Firefox: The other big dog in the Mac browser market besides Safari, Firefox has all the speed of Safari along with its famous extensions that can add a ton of functionality. Firefox on the Mac feels much more at home than previous versions have, and is a serious contender for the browser crown. Acid 3 Score: 71/100 SunSpider Total: 3389.0ms
	Flock: You’ve got at least one blog, a Facebook account, photos on Flickr, videos on Youtube, and you are on on Twitter 24/7. If this is you, Flock is your browser. Flock is built from the ground up to integrate into the social web. Flock has several features that make it easer to stay connected. Unfortunately, it also has a user interface that makes it easer to stay distracted too. Acid 3 Score: 75/100 SunSpider Total: 3419.4ms
	Camino: It used to be brisk, baby! Camino is the older Gecko engine from Firefox built into a Mac browser. Camino seems to have fallen behind the development curve lately, but it still sports a clean interface and proper Mac integration. With Firefox’s new and improved Mac port, I’m not sure we will see too much more from Camino. Acid 3 Score: 53/100 SunSpider Total: 11683.4ms

The Odd Man Out

Opera: Opera’s user interface takes some getting used to, with the tabs on top and the controls on the bottom. However, once the mind set of each tab being completely separate is achieved, it makes a lot of sense. Opera mimics the functionality of the older Mozilla browser, including not only a web browser, but a mail client, and RSS feed reader, a widget rendering engine, and a sink from either the kitchen or bathroom, I’m not sure. Even with all the extra ability, Opera seems quite brisk and responsive. Opera is also the only browser that doesn’t include either the Webkit or Gecko rendering engines. Opera builds its own, named Presto. Opera is a good browser, but it’s a port to the Mac, and unfortunately, that’s what it feels like… a port. Acid 3 Score: 85/100 SunSpider Total: 6740.0

Betas

	WebKit Nightly: Wow. I mean that… the latest WebKit nightly are incredibly fast. Safari and the rest of the WebKit gang have a lot of goodness to look forward to. I’ve started using WebKit as my main browser for now, essentially getting the next version of Safari before it’s actually released. Acid 3 Score: 100/100 SunSpider Total: 956.8ms
	Firefox 3.1 beta: Not as impressive as I’d hoped it would be. The latest Firefox beta seemed a little sluggish during my limited testing of it. Acid 3 Score: 93/100 SunSpider Total: 1655.8ms
	Opera 10 Alpha: Another good port from Opera. Alpha quality software for now, should be interesting when released. Opera recently hired John Hicks from Hicks Design to head up their user interface, so maybe we can expect a little better Mac integration in the future. I’d be all for fewer features and being a better Mac citizen. Acid 3 Score: 100/100 SunSpider Total: 5507.2ms
	CrossOver Chromium: OK, speaking of ports… I threw this one in because I’m so anxiously waiting for Chrome to be released on the Mac. I use the Windows version at work on XP, and it beats the pants off of everything else. There are no features, there are no add-ons or extensions, there’s just a amazingly fast browser that does one thing and does it very well. This is actually an emulated Windows Chrome running in a special version of Wine from the guys at CodeWeavers. Even with the emulation, Chrome performed very well. When Chrome is released for OS X, it will change the browser market. Acid 3 Score: 73/100 SunSpider Total: 1527.0ms

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• TV Apps: Evolution from Novelty to Mainstream
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast
• A 2011 Infrastructure Forecast

The 24″ Cinema Display is mounted on an aluminum stand with an adjustable hinge that makes tilting the display easy and convenient. The downside? This puppy has a suggested retail price of $899. Ouch! If you can afford that comfortably, more power to you, but I think most of us will swallow hard before coughing up 900 bucks for a monitor — even a super-monitor like the 24″ Cinema Display.

JkOnTheRun’s James Kendrick announced last week he’s going to sell his 17″ MacBook Pro and switch to a new aluminum MacBook as his primary computer, so he wants to buy a big external monitor to use for for desktop mode duty. I’ve been musing about a somewhat similar strategy for my own next system upgrade. I’d love to have a 17″ MacBook Pro to replace my wonderful old 1.33 GHz 17″ PowerBook G4, but I find 17-incher prices, even for Apple Certified Refurbished units, too hard to justify rationally for what I do with computers.

David Wegener at Mac laptop specialist reseller Wegener Media suggested that a more sensible solution might be to buy a smaller screen Apple laptop and connect it to an external monitor — such as a 15″ MacBook Pro paired with a refurbished DVI 22″ panel, which David says is his personal preference. Wegeners can currently supply refurbished 22″ HP DVI displays with tilt option for $219, and this setup offers more portability with the 15″ machine but serious Desktop real estate with a 22″ panel at your workstation. For more information on the refurb displays, send a query at Wegeners’ contact page.

James Kendrick says he ordered one of the new Apple 24″ Cinema Displays, primarily because he knew it would work well with the unibody Mac, but it turned out to be back-ordered, which elicited some sober second thought, and he canceled that order, explaining “The more I thought about the high cost of that Apple display the harder it was for me to justify paying it. There are many third party monitors available today that sell for less than $400 and it’s just lunacy to pay $900 for an Apple-branded monitor. So I canceled the order and now I’m looking for a good alternative…”

I completely agree with that reasoning. A unibody MacBook with the 24″ Cinema Display would be a nice rig (still no FireWire, though), but money has to be an object.

Kendrick says he’s leaning toward a sub-$400 Samsung 24″ display that he’d like to confirm will work well with the new MacBook and is soliciting user reports and recommendations from readers, feedback from which I will be following with interest with a nod to my own system upgrade deliberations.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Virtual Worlds: Trends and Opportunities
• Infrastructure Overview, Q2 2010
• What Does the Future Hold For Browsers?

The typo: instrucitons

The intended word: instructions

The suggested spelling: isntrucitons

The notes: The spellchecker does offer the correct spelling as one of the choices; how isntrucitons ended up in there is beyond me…

The typo: applicatication

The intended word: application

The suggested spelling: applicaticataion

The notes: FAIL. 

Also, Dictionary.com offers up upland cotton as a possible alternate for applicaticataion and no alternates whatsoever for applicatication. That said, it was one heck of a typo on my part in the first place, but that’s no excuse for making up words! :P

The typo: positiove

The intended word: positive

The suggested spelling: positionve

The notes: Like the first one, the correct word was among the choices, but again, Leopard decides to have a little fun with our minds. 

I’m guessing these are just bugs in the spellchecker. Hey, at least this bug is mostly harmless!

Are there any words that you have noticed that spellchecker gets incorrect? Let us know in the comments.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

Last night, I made Safari my default Web browser in Windows. With any luck, I won’t be turning back to Internet Explorer or Firefox any time soon. But while some initial issues with the beta version of Safari 3 have been well-documented, including security and font rendering, at least for me, the biggest hole in the current offering is .Mac integration.

Apple’s .Mac is an integral part of the Safari experience, especially if you routinely run more than one computer from different locations. Across computers, my bookmarks and folders in Safari are perfectly synchronized. If I make changes or bookmark a new site at home, the changes are made at work, thanks to .Mac. But on Safari for Windows, I don’t have those bookmarks at all – a significant blow to the user experience.

I see two routes Apple can go to remedy the missing .Mac functionality in Safari. First, and likely easiest, would be to add a .Mac tab within the Preferences of Safari. I would enter my login details, and they would be synchronized from Cupertino. The backup option would be to create a Control Panel for .Mac within Windows, similar to the preference pane in Mac OS X today. But adding a .Mac control panel for Windows might indicate support for other .Mac staples, including Backup, iCal and Mail.app.

If Steve Jobs and the rest of Apple don’t want to give away the full Mac experience to those who haven’t yet made the switch, .Mac integration in the Preferences section of Windows Safari is the way to go. In my limited time with Safari on Windows so far, I’m very impressed with how similarly the application follows its Mac counterpart, and I hope .Mac integration is coming soon.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks