Another year has come and gone, and as always, we’re taking a moment to look back at the happenings of 2009—the people, events and memories that made this year unique. Each year, we examine the billions of queries that people around the world have typed into Google search to discover the zeitgeist—the spirit of the times. As we welcome the new year, we hope you enjoy this glimpse at the past.

Michael Jackson

Michael Jackson

Fastest Rising (Global)

1. michael jackson
2. facebook
3. tuenti
4. twitter
5. sanalika
6. new moon
7. lady gaga
8. windows 7
9. dantri.com.vn
10. torpedo gratis

Fastest Rising in Entertainment (Global)

1. michael jackson
2. transformers
3. eminem
4. naruto shippuden
5. beyonce
6. peliculas id
7. paranormal activity
8. anime online
9. natasha richardson
10. poker face lyrics

Fastest Rising in Food & Drink (Global)

1. acai berry
2. picnic
3. ??????
4. tesco direct
5. senseo
6. peanut butter recall
7. nespresso commande
8. habibs delivery
9. mocktail
10. masterchef australia

Fastest Falling (Global)

1. beijing 2008
2. euro 2008
3. heath ledger
4. barack obama
5. amy winehouse
6. kraloyun
7. dailymotion
8. bebo
9. wii
10. emule

Fastest Rising in Sports (Global)

1. real madrid
2. us open
3. ufc
4. sahadan
5. livescore
6. pacquiao vs cotto
7. wbc ??
8. pga tour leaderboard
9. confederations cup
10. l’equipe football

Methodology

To compile the 2009 Year-End Zeitgeist, we studied the aggregation of billions of queries people typed into Google search this year. We use data from multiple sources, including Insights for Search, Google Trends and internal data tools. We also filter out spam and repeat queries to build out lists that best reflect “the spirit of the times.” All of the search queries we studied are anonymous—no personal information was used.

Except where noted, all of these search terms are most popular for 2009—ranked in order of the queries with the largest volume of searches this year. In some cases, we list the “fastest rising” queries, which means we found the most popular searches conducted in 2009 and then ranked them based on how much their popularity increased compared to 2008. Conversely, “fastest falling” queries were very popular in 2008 but flattened in popularity in 2009.

Google Chrome OS to Be Ready for the Holidays (Next Year)

Everybody has been waiting to see a glimpse of Google’s upcoming Chrome OS – that is Google’s new operating system. Those who attended an event at the company’s headquarters today had a chance to view a demo in person, and many more details than previously available are now out on the OS.

Google has now opened up the code for Chrome OS, so developers can get in there and see what it’s really all about. For all of the non-developer types, Google has provided the following short video, which sums up what Chrome OS is as a concept.

Google says Chrome OS is focused on three main things: speed, simplicity, and security. The main philosophy behind Chrome OS is that most people use their computers mostly to access the web, so Chrome OS cuts out the middle man, which is your operating system. With Chrome OS, your browser is the operating system. The programs you would use on Chrome OS are all web apps. They’re all in the cloud. Nothing is saved on your computer. This mean that if your machine dies on you, or you lose it, or if it gets broken, you can just get another one and all of your data will be readily available, because it’s all in the cloud.

Google says that it takes about seven seconds to go to the log-in screen, and three more to log on to an application. That’s much less time that it probably takes you to boot up and get onto Facebook on your current machine.

The look of Chrome OS is very similar to the Chrome browser, but it has application tabs and an app menu. You may have seen the screenshots at TechCrunch recently. Google did note, however, that the user interface could change to some extent by the time it actually launches.

When you use apps in Chrome OS, they can take up the entire screen, so that it doesn’t even look like you’re using a browser or an OS. You can also drag and drop tabs. If you hook up additional hardware to the machine, it will bring up windows for that. For example, at the demo, they pointed out that if you hook a camera up, it will bring up a window with the picture files, and you can pull a picture up and open it in a new browser Window.

Fore more technical details about Chrome OS, and how it handles security issues, read this live blog. Here is another account from Danny Sullivan.

From the sounds of it, Google Chrome OS will not be replacing established operating systems for users who use a lot of programs that aren’t web-based. However, it has the potential to cut significantly into the market share of Windows, Mac, etc. among users who do mainly use their machines to connect to the web. I can see this catching on in a big way, particularly with the Netbook crowd, which Chrome OS is essentially aimed at.

Google Chrome OS is currently scheduled to launch sometime before the holiday season next year. Do you think Chrome OS will be a hit? Tell us what you think.

Microsoft’s new OS is the best Windows yet. Is that enough?
By Michael DeAgonia

October 28, 2009 (Computerworld) Last week’s release of Windows 7 had Microsoft Corp. executives from CEO Steve Ballmer on down confident that this version of Windows is everything Vista wasn’t.

The launch of Windows 7 followed by two months the release of Apple’s latest operating system, Mac OS X 10.6 “Snow Leopard.” The latter mainly focused on under-the-hood technologies, and Apple went out of its way to promise no major obvious changes. Snow Leopard, which looks just like its predecessor except for a few UI tweaks, is supposed to provide a solid foundation for future technologies and hardware.

Microsoft, in many ways, took a similar tack with Windows 7. Following on the heels of the much-unloved Vista, focusing on the basics made sense. Windows users, like Mac users, want an operating system that works.

Fair warning: I come to Windows as a Mac user by nature and background — I’ve worked with Macs for 17 years, although as an IT professional, I’ve had more than my fair share of time with Windows machines. Put simply: As an IT professional, I work on whatever hardware is in front of me.

In recent months, Windows 7 has been praised for righting many of Vista’s wrongs. Back in August, Computerworld’s Preston Gralla offered his own take on the two operating systems. Preston, who leans toward the Windows side of things, evaluated them both and declared a tie.

With that in mind, I took Windows 7 out for a spin recently, focusing on its updated user interface, general usability, stability and performance over several weeks.

To evaluate both operating systems side by side, I installed them on the same hardware: a MacBook Pro with a 2.53-GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 4GB of RAM, a GeForce 9600M GT graphics card with 512MB of video RAM, and a 500GB, 7,200-rpm hard drive. Snow Leopard, of course, runs natively on Apple hardware; I used Apple’s Boot Camp software to run Windows 7 without virtualization but had to improvise when Boot Camp couldn’t format the target drive to NTFS. I was able to circumvent the issue by simply installing Windows 7 from the CD it shipped on. (Apple plans to update Boot Camp by the end of the year to address this issue.)
OS pricing

Microsoft offers several versions of Windows 7; I tested the Ultimate edition. Since Apple ships just one version of its operating system, the only version of Windows that matches it for full functionality is Ultimate. If you’re buying a new computer, upgrade pricing won’t be an issue; Windows 7 will come preinstalled (now with less craplets!) But if you’re moving from Vista or XP, Windows 7 Ultimate will set you back $219.99 for the upgrade or $319.99 if you buy the full version. Windows 7 comes in both 32- and 64-bit versions.

As it has in the past, Microsoft also offers less-expensive versions — Home Premium and Professional — with fewer features.

Not sure which version of Windows you should get? Microsoft released a convoluted upgrade chart to help you decide. Good luck; it’s not very helpful, given the various combinations of upgrade options.

In contrast, Mac users got a reprieve on Snow Leopard pricing this year: It costs just $29 if you’re upgrading from Mac OS X 10.5 (a.k.a. Leopard). (In the past, Apple charged $129 for its OS.) Apple also sells a $49 Family Pack that allows for five installations. Snow Leopard, which requires an Intel-based Mac, comes preinstalled on all new Macs, and it will run applications in 32- or 64-bit mode automatically, depending on your hardware. (If you’re upgrading from Tiger, you’re supposed to buy the Mac Box Set, which includes Snow Leopard, iWork 09 and iLife 09.)

Conclusion

In terms of pure interface, Microsoft has raised the bar for Windows users. Windows 7 is the best-looking OS out of Redmond, Wash., yet. But let’s not confuse that with “innovation.”

Many of these features aren’t new at all, and many have been available on Mac OS X for years. While Windows 7 closes the gap with Snow Leopard, it does so only at a superficial level. At first, I was impressed with the interface changes and got caught up in the beauty of the Aero themes and sleek look. But after a few weeks of use, reality began to set in. After a Registry issue prevented me from installing an app, I realized Windows 7 is still Windows. Prettier, a little snappier than Vista, perhaps more stable. But at some point, you still face many of the underlying issues that have made Windows a pain to use in the past.

Microsoft’s main enemies here aren’t really Mac OS X or Linux. What Microsoft needs to worry about are the users and sysadmins who think the hardware and OS already on their desks works just fine. If you’re still using XP after all these years, the slick interface and modest under-the-hood changes may not tempt you to spend money on Windows 7.

A friend of mine who works in IT for a major corporation explained it this way: The biggest problem Microsoft has is that after all these years, XP still works for many businesses. “What will force us to move [to Windows 7] is when Microsoft stops releasing security updates [for XP],” he told me. I believe that if Windows 7 appears to be solid right out of the gate, companies may move toward adoption quickly. XP is, after all, nearly a decade old.

If you’re still using XP or are finally fed up with Vista, by all means check out Windows 7. It’s certainly the best version of Windows yet — just as it’s equally true that Snow Leopard is the best version of Mac OS X. That’s why you’d be well advised to check out Snow Leopard before shelling out money for Microsoft’s latest.

As an IT professional, I support both operating systems at work. But I have Macs at home; after all, who wants to troubleshoot computer problems on their own time?

My final verdict in this smackdown? It’s not even close: Snow Leopard is the better OS.

By Kim Zetter | October 9, 2009

Twitter suspended the account of a security researcher after he posted a message to his followers warning them about a threat, according to ZDnet.

The company has since restored his account, but has left the researcher perplexed about why it occurred in the first place.

Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at F-Secure, was told he was suspended for posting a message containing the URL to a site containing malware. On August 3, Hypponen posted a Twitter message reading: “I guess somebody will fall for it … a desperate Myspace phishing site at www. rnyspece. com. (don’t go there).”

Hypponen inserted spaces in the URL to prevent Twitter’s system from automatically turning it into a hyperlink that readers could click on.

Hypponen told ZDnet that he has worked with Twitter in the past with regard to Twitter worms and other matters and was surprised he was suspended for simply warning users about a bogus site.

“I think their process leaves a little to be desired,” he told the publication.

By Jonathan Fildes
Technology reporter, BBC News

The US government has relaxed its control over how the internet is run.

It has signed a four-page “affirmation of commitments” with the net regulator Icann, giving the body autonomy for the first time.

Previous agreements gave the US close oversight of Icann – drawing criticism from other countries and groups.

The new agreement comes into effect on 1 October, exactly 40 years since the first two computers were connected on the prototype of the net.

“It’s a beautifully historic day,” Rod Beckstrom, Icann’s head, told BBC News.

The European Commission, which has long been critical of Icann’s alliance with the US government, welcomed the new deal.

“Internet users worldwide can now anticipate that Icann’s decisions…will be more independent and more accountable, taking into account everyone’s interests,” said Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for information society and media.

‘Global system’

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) is a not-for-profit private sector corporation – set up by the US government – to oversee critical parts of the internet, such as the top-level domain (TLD) name system. Top level domains include .com and .uk.

Since its inception in 1998, it has periodically signed accords – known collectively as the Joint Project Agreement (JPA) – with the US Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

“ we endorse this Affirmation and applaud the maturing of Icann’s role in the provision of internet stability ”
Eric Schmidt CEO, Google

These papers meant that the US government was responsible for reviewing the work of the body.

These have now been abandoned in favour of the new “affirmation of commitments”, a brief document which turns the review process over to the global “internet community”.

“Under the JPA, Icann staff would conduct reviews and hand them over to the US government,” explained Mr Beckstrom.

“Now we submit those reviews to the world and post them publically for all to comment.”

In addition, independent review panels – including representatives of foreign governments – would specifically oversee Icann’s work in three specific areas: security, competition and accountability.

The US will retain a permanent seat on the accountability panel.

Mr Beckstrom said the decision to break away from the US government in all other areas had been made “over the last year and a half”.

“Stakeholders told us that the JPA should not be renewed and that it wasn’t appropriate for it to be renewed,” he told BBC News.

“It is also recognition by the US government that the internet is a global system.”

The internet began as a research project by the US military, known as Arpanet.

On 1 October 1969, the second computer was connected to the network, said Mr Beckstrom. Ever since, the US has paid close attention to the workings and growth of the net.

“Today’s announcement bolsters the long-term viability of the internet as a force for innovation, economic growth, and freedom of expression,” said US Assistant Secretary for communications and information Lawrence Strickling.

“This framework puts the public interest front and centre.”

Businesses have also welcomed the change of direction by the US.

“Google and its users depend every day on a vibrant and expanding internet; we endorse this affirmation and applaud the maturing of Icann’s role in the provision of internet stability,” said Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google.

However, the new agreement does not totally sever the links between the US government and Icann entirely.

In addition, Icann also has a separate agreement with the US – to run the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) – that expires in 2011.

The IANA oversees the net’s addressing system.

I learned HTML at a time when some people were still building several versions of their site. I’m not talking about the web, mobile and iphone versions – more like the netscape and IE3 versions. That was a time when writing “standard” HTML was still a fairly novel idea, but a powerful one. It made sense: the alternative was “write standard code or risk having browsers crash miserably on your web page”.

That was more than a decade ago. Browsers, meanwhile, have made incredible progress at gracefully rendering even the most broken web page. And that is a good thing.

Does this make validation and quality checking of Web pages moot? Of course not. There are many more incentives to build great standard-compliant websites: ease of maintenance, show of professionalism, or, in the words of Zeldman, “Client who saves $5,000 buying cut-rate non-semantic HTML will later spend $25,000 on SEO consultant to compensate”.

It makes me curious, however, to know what are the real-life arguments in favor of valid, standard code today. Do you have an untold story of validation getting you rid of an awful rendering glitch? Real-life accounts of a search engine bump achieved by fixing the syntax of you HTML ? A typo in a CSS stylesheet that hours of glancing at code didn’t show, but the validator did? A forgotten alt that would have lowered your search rank for an important keyword, or cost a big fee for non-accessibility?