New Year's Eve Wrap-Up of Wrap-Ups

spydink writes "The Radio Netherlands website http://www.rnw.nl has a good hour-by-hour listing of potential local time live webcasts from around the world. May be helpful for those who want to raise a glass to the New Year every hour on the hour." (And there's some good news about that, too.) Read on for a few more end-of-year items, which you'll no doubt be seeing more of besides.

SkeeterMac writes "CNN ran an article today listing the top dubious achievements in personal computing for the year... raising again the point that PC speed can not be measured only in megahertz! Too bad the author doesn't think so, because they slam Apple for pricing the iMac around $1,500 for "chugging along at 700 Mhz"..."

cwill1004 writes "Mary Jo Foley has written up a set of predictions for Microsoft in 2003. She suggests that the tablet PC will be a bust, MSN gaining on AOL, and Microsoft getting more flak for its DRM (digital rights management) offerings, much like it did for the Windows Product Activation. It's on Microsoft Watch."

angkor links to Shift's "stupid web moments of 2002."

And the good news -- sulli writes "Just in time for New Year's, the New York Times (register now, use a workaround, or forever hold your peace) discusses at length the health benefits of alcohol. Prevent heart attacks, not with drugs or diet, but with a good California Zinfandel! Avoid strokes with a Perfect Gin Martini! Just don't overdo it, and you'll be fine - too much alcohol, like too much caffeine, has well-known effects. But in moderation, bottoms up!"

Update: 01/01 01:07 GMT by T : Here's another. An anonymous reader submits: "The BBC News has an amusing article titled the 'E-cyclopedia's glossary of 2002'. One wonders what future generations will make of our 'Bollotics' and 'Euronating'... Even Slashdotting gets a mention."

Comments

Re:Health benefits of alcohol

[corebreech]

In 1996 alcohol was responsible for 110,640 deaths. This doesn't include deaths from drunk driving or alcohol-inspired violence.

So, approximiately 100,000 dead vs. potentially 1,000,000 saved.

I don't know. I still think they should've published the data. If they were really concerned about the unhealthy effects of alcohol they could have then published that data too.

Re:when have they ever been cost effective?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can cost more and STILL be cost effective. If the Apple is more reliable, and you're able to get more work done, the added initial cost may be outweighed by the lifetime of added productivity. Even if it saves you 15 minutes a day, that's 300 minutes a month (5 hours), and 60 hours a year. If you make $30 an hour, that's $1800 or roughly the cost of the machine! (Okay, so it's a bit of a stretch, but it's important to take these things into account.)