Unfortunately the link to the download page says the beta has expired and no longer available! Does anyone have a copy they saved (and hopefully the software can still be installed)?

Did you notice that Amazon's order form lists an accessory on the bottom? It's a USB-driven nightlight on a bendable arm. I sure haven't seen it, but would guess you can drive it from the USB port on the Kindle. Obviously that will reduce the battery life, but it would give what you're asking for.

> the SD chip were bad for all the units sent to Staples

Not all. I just bought mine from Staples yesterday and it worked great out of the box.

Data entry is sluggish but otherwise I like this as well or better than my TomTom Go that I paid $650 for less than 2 years ago!

You youngsters may dis this Beast and say it's too big and hot to be a laptop, but let an old timer tell you how impressive this thing is.

My first personal computer, back in 1982 was an Osborne 1. This was the first "portable" computer on the market. It had dual-floppy drives (92k each), a 5" diagonal B&W screen, an Intel 8080 CPU. It weighed 32 pounds and cost $1995.

Compare this relic against The Beast and note that the Dell weighs 1/3rd, has a screen has 11 times the viewing are, 1,100 times the storage capacity, 31,000 times the memory, and the list price is only 50% more. I'm sure if you actually took inflation into account, the Dell would cost less!

Call it ugly, but also call it FAST and very reasonable for the computing power you're getting!

(No, I've never worked for Dell or any of their subsidiaries, nor have any relatives I know of.)

My wife's had her 512Mb Shuffle for 16 months and it's never had a battery problem! This one looks sweet!

The link *within* the blog entry is broken, but the "Read" link at the bottom works to take you to the original article.

http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/2005/08/03/nutrition-health-lifestyle-cx_sy_0803feat_ls.html

Simple yes, but most nutrition plans (aka diets) will tell you that snacks between the big-three meals are a *good thing*, not bad. They keep you from being ravenously hungry during meals, plus your body doesn't go into "starvation mode" and start hoarding calories. So I have a snack bar at 11:30 and 4:30 and it helps keep things level.

Unfortunately, I also drink 2 Cokes a day (not diet). [sigh]

A comment about the original article:

"Professor Shah Ebrahim, who led the research, told BBC News Online the findings indicated infrequent shaving did increase a man's risk of stroke."

Don't they teach the difference between correlation and causality in the UK? This is ridiculous to suggest that the act of shaving reduces a man's risk of stroke. They say later that it's probably due to lower levels of the hormone testosterone, but the statement above implies causality.

Joey said:

"Money should be spent on glass not the body. That is where you will see the biggest difference."

I agree that spending your money on high-quality lenses will get you better photos. But why should you have to spend more money to buy the same anti-shake technology in EVERY lens you buy? If the IS technology is built into the body then you can keep the same high-quality lenses while upgrading the body. So the cost of the lens goes into the optics, not into IS.

Implementing the IS in the lens is like building a car and implementing 4WD in a car's tires.

"a floppy disk"

What's that??? ;)