The PR & Marketing expert recently completed a ten-day experiment, waiting in line for the new iPhone 4S, where he couldn’t spend a single penny of his own money. Instead, he had to rely on donations from various companies, in exchange for promoting their brand during his stay.

Rob’s experiment was designed to test the global pull of Apple products, and considering that over one-hundred-and-fifty companies offered their goods and services to help, it’s fair to say that the Apple brand is a considerably powerful marketing tool.

Now just over two weeks on, Rob’s fully recovered from his experiment, and I’ve managed to secure a detailed interview with him about his experiences, which you can see below.

Q&A with Rob Shoesmith:

1. Did you encounter any logistical problems when it came to setting up for the experiment? Was it easy enough to get your gear down to London, and was setting up outside the Apple store a problem?

RS: “To be fair it wasn’t too bad. I had my own PA from My Lifestyle PA who offered 16 hours of their time. The owner of the company, Emma, greeted me at London Euston train station and helped me to transport all my kit to the Apple Store in Covent Garden.”

2. You pitched up a tent for ten days while waiting for, what would soon be released as, the iPhone 4S. Was it a disappointment to receive this instead of the iPhone 5, or was there another purpose to the experiment?

RS: “It was all about doing the experiment for the fifth generation iPhone, which the iPhone 4S actually is. In terms of purpose, it was such a great way to connect with new companies, people and media and to gently promote some of our existing apps.”

3. The British weather is a bit temperamental at the best of times. How did you handle the cold and the rain?

RS: “It was freezing at night! Thankfully I had the use of a Musuc Bag, which kept me relatively warm. I still found it a huge challenge to keep warm at night and it certainly opened my eyes to how hard it is for the homeless.”

4. The public response to your experiment seemed pretty positive. Did you meet any interesting characters as a result?

RS: “Yes plenty! The thing with London is it draws in such an international crowd of visitors. I must have spoken to over 2,000 people easily whilst I was in line. I have made some fabulous new friends and made some great new business and media contacts.

The silver-fox UK TV personality Philip Schofield even popped over and said hello! It was a pretty surreal experience to say the least, but old Phil is a top bloke and was really interested in hear about my experiment.

Belly Dancing Barbie a belly dancer from Edinburgh who even flew down to visit and got me doing some dancing to increase my energy levels.

I even had a supporter of the App Incubator come down and pitch me his idea for his iPhone app! He was so passionate about his idea he left work early to come and see me.”

5. You had a lot of wacky ideas for your experiment; I remember discussing the use of gnomes in particular to help generate involvement with the community. Did this work out?

RS: “Unfortunately not. About a week before the experiment took place I distributed them off around London but a lot of them were thrown in the bin by overzealous council workers, who couldn’t see that it was a bit of fun.

I’m firmly of the belief that you have to try an idea, and if it doesn’t work it’s just one of those things. A lot of people doubted me even being able to complete the experiment. I’m not a person who just talks the talk! I like to execute an idea and if it doesn’t work out, well, so what? At least I tried and I’ve learnt something from it.”

6. I understand that you were quite taken back by the homeless situation in London?

RS: “Yes. If I’m being honest, before I went down to London I used to ignore the homeless people asking me for a bit of loose change. Camping out on the street for so long opened my eyes massively to just how hard it is for these people!

Admittedly I had good quality equipment and was fed by restaurants in the area, but even I found it incredibly tough being outside for so long!

On my first day I met a homeless chap called Terry Partington who had been on the streets for around 3 months. It would be awesome if your readers could follow Terry on Twitter. I was really surprised to see him pull out a Mac Book laptop. He has managed to keep hold of it, and it was his life line to the world he desperately misses.

Just before the end of the experiment I gave him a laptop bag that was donated by one of my sponsors. Terry was just carrying his Mac around in a carrier bag and it would have been heart breaking for the winter rain to have damaged it. I gave a lot of the products I was donated to him and other homeless people I met throughout my 10 night camping experiment.

He is really interested in technology and is looking to study digital imaging to help him get off the streets! I now consider him to be a great new friend. He helped me adjust to life outside with very little sleep and helped me take some photographs and filmed some YouTube videos for my blog.”

7. And you’ve setup a just giving page to help tackle the problem, right?

RS: “Yes I’ve set up a just giving page to support a homeless shelter. People can donate at the following link:

www.justgiving.com/iphone5experiment”

8. Thanks to the mass media coverage, many people in the UK now know your name. What tips would you give to someone thinking of undertaking a similar experiment?

RS: “Go prepared! I thought I was fully prepared by having the support of over 150 companies, and yet I still found the whole experience incredibly tough to get through! The lack of sleep was a killer and I was nearly forced to call it a day through sleep deprivation under a doctor’s advice, so I would highly recommend doing an experiment with a group of people and remember to pack your ear plugs. A supply of energy drinks is also a must!”

9. Now the experiment is over, we’re all waiting with bated breath. What’s next?

RS: “I will be jetting off to Dubai on a holiday to unwind, courtesy of flight comparison website Direct Flights. They got in touch on around day 2 and when I was feeling very cold at night I pictured myself on a warm peaceful beach. The holiday on offer definitely helped me get through to the end!

After that… Who knows! I’m a person with lots of ideas and I’m very open to suggestions for new experiments to take part on. As things stand I have around 4 or 5 ideas I’m seriously thinking about. People can follow and suggest ideas to me on Twitter.”

10. Lucky you! Now c’mon, Rob. Tell us. We’re all dying to know. Did you have to pay for your iPhone 4S in the end?

RS: “MEDL Mobile the app company I work for were very kind and purchased the new iPhone 4S for me.”

11. Oh, and one last thing. I’ve just got to ask, how was the bog-in-a-bag to use?

RS: “It was pretty good actually! I only had to use it the once. It was around 3:00 AM in the morning and the toilets next to the Apple Store were locked and I had a ‘I gotta go’ moment and I hid myself under a wall and did the business. All I can say is that it was pretty grim!”

And that’s it. A big thank-you to Rob for the interview. I, for one, can’t wait to see what else you’ve got planned!

Many companies struggle to dominate their chosen market, let alone others, and would never consider trying to replicate their success elsewhere, particularly given the stiff competition. Google on the other hand love to break the mould, and following a flurry of experiments, outside the realm of the search engine that started it all, they’ve now set their sights on something completely new.

For those who are unaware, following a fuddled launched, Google recently introduced a laptop/netbook alternative, dubbed the ‘ChromeBook’. Featuring Google’s new operating system, Google Chrome, the ChromeBook hopes to revitalise the ageing portable laptop concept, boasting initially impressive features, including near-instant boot times and cloud storage for your files.

Notable, attention grabbing features aside, then, is the ChromeBook worth your money? Google enthusiasts are quick to defend both the hardware and operating system, but I’m not so sure – there are a whole host of issues that many individuals (and websites) appear keen to gloss over, which will affect not only the feasibility of the ChromeBook, but also the likelihood of purchase, for many.

And so, without further ado, here’s the list of six fundamental reasons for the potential failure of Google’s new flagship device.

Storage on the Cloud

A bright concept, but its brilliance is undermined by substantial flaws – the Google ChromeBook requires a persistent internet connection to operate, as your files are stored online, alongside the ‘Google Apps suite’; word, excel, calendar etc.

Practicality issues aside for a moment, i.e. what if you find yourself in a location without internet access, this also raises security concerns. Certain files, such as sensitive banking data, simply should not be stored online, particularly given the wealth of recent hacking threats by organised groups, such as Anonymous or LulzSec.

Furthermore, the ‘always online’ principle contradicts the benefit of a laptop; there’s no guarantee that you’ll be able to work from anywhere, due to the feasible dilemma of an intermittent internet connection – without which, many of Google’s web applications will fail to run.

In Google’s defence, there is some support for offline working, but it’s restricted to a handful of apps; a far cry from a traditional laptop. Logging in with a Google ID, as opposed to a localised account (as you would do for Windows 7) is also a neat idea but, again, a potential security issue.

Full screen woes

There are concerns flitting around the internet about the persistently full-screen nature of the ChromeBook. With the Chrome browser the primary platform through which to perform tasks, it’s always in full screen, rendering users unable to carve up their on-screen real estate between different applications. This is a likely to hit Windows power users the hardest, but also those make full use of multiple screens on a daily basis.

The issue of cost

Just like tablets, the ChromeBook is available in two offerings, either Wi-Fi or 3G.

This goes to further demonstrate the middling nature of the hardware; it’s not quite a tablet, but it’s certainly not a fully fledged laptop, either. The Wi-Fi version is also unpractical, as the purpose, and lure, of a netbook is that you can work from anywhere. However, due to the online nature of the ChromeBook, you’ll require an internet connection at all times, making the 3G version more of a necessity instead of merely an option.

With 3G, you’ll then have to pay a subscription fee to access the internet, further bumping up the cost. Considering a standard netbook is available for around £200-£250, around a hundred pounds cheaper than the ChromeBook, with which you could perform simple working tasks such as editing a word document, and without an internet connection, the financial practicality of the ChromeBook also comes under fire.

Back in May, Pocket-Lint reported the following monthly costs: “Chromebookers will get 3GB of 3G data to use in the first three months of their Chromebook’s life for nada, then they’ll have to pay either £2.99 for a 500MB day pass (valid until midnight) or go for a monthly bolt on of 1GB (£10), 3GB (£15) or 7GB (£25).”

They then go on to say this is “very reasonable”, but I would have to disagree. It’s little more than a glamorised money grabbing attempt, and one that offers very little in return for the considerably high cost.

Productivity concerns

The ability to compete with Windows, Mac and even Linux is also a major cause for concern. To counter the problem of a restrictive operating system, Google Chrome have introduced their own App Store, but as for how practical this is, from a productivity perspective, only time will tell. There’s further cost associated with the app store too, as many of the best applications retail for up to £5.

That said, due to the persistent online state of your Chrome account, your applications and web settings, along with your files, will always be accessible. The benefit that this provides cannot be ignored, but at the same time a Windows or Mac user could achieve something similar with a DropBox account, and thus you cannot argue this feature to be entirely fresh or innovative, and certainly not unique to Chrome OS.

Chrome browser use

Most websites render well in the Google Chrome browser, granted, but unfortunately not all. Mozilla Firefox and Internet Explorer have their own fair share of incompatible websites, granted, but for an operating system that’s built solely around the Chrome browser, compatibility becomes a matter of great importance. Windows or Mac users can flick between browsers as they deem fit, whereas ChromeBook users will be forced to endure the Chrome browser through the good and the bad.

The practicalities

Realistically, you could just buy a netbook or laptop – the features provided by the ChromeBook, at present, are simply not innovative enough to warrant the extra cost. Adopting a new operating system also has pitfalls for long-term users of Windows or Mac; for example, there’s not a native Skype application at present.

Drivers equally pose an issue, as it’s easy to forget the background tasks that Windows or Mac OSX perform for us. Despite sporting USB ports, you cannot simply plug a printer into your ChromeBook and expect it to work as intended. As with the rest of the operating system, you’ll need a printer that’s capable of talking to the internet, and even then you’ll be forced to use Google Cloud Print – a major hindrance.

For those few users who live online, though, requiring only email, social networking and office applications to function, then the ChromeBook is a real practical alternative. However, for the majority of us who also require video editing tools, access to coding platforms, and a platform that’s supportive of mainstream gaming, Google’s offering simply won’t cut the mustard.

The future of internet music?

A week ago, I succumbed to the lure of a persistent temptress.

For roughly a year now, I’ve been enjoying the musical delights provided by Spotify, and the countless hours of music that I’ve streamed for free have been nothing short of great. However, between batches of my chosen songs, an uninvited voice would pop up informing me of the many wonders surrounding Spotify Premium, and how for only £9.99 a month I could have access to absolutely everything.

“Pah, I already have access to everything!” I would proclaim on almost every occasion.

And I did, as did we all, for a while. A couple of weeks ago though, Spotify kicked its subscription service into overdrive, and began to limit those of us who had – until this point – enjoyed practically unrestricted access to a large amount of music. I knew that this couldn’t last forever, yet the unsolicited arrival of the “10 hour” countdown into my Spotify player was still difficult to accept.

Disgruntled, but still eager to expose my ears to a broad range of lyrical charms, I continued to listen. Each three-minute song clawed away at my “allowance”, and each couple of songs continued to be separated by the annoyance of an ad, as per usual. This ad was different though, and caught my attention. It offered a seven-day free trial of Spotify premium, which had recently updated to receive mobile support. I jumped at the chance.

Now, little more than a week into the full-service, I have absolutely no idea how I survived without it. I’ve devoured countless hours of music, discovered all manner of new musical tastes, downloaded my playlists to my PC and synced said musical collection to my iPod Touch for listening on-the-go, via the intuitive Spotify application. It just works, and it works well.

And I still haven’t handed over any cash. Not a penny! Unbeknown to me, by digitally associating my Spotify account with my “mobile” device (presumably the service cannot differentiate between an iPod Touch and an iPhone) I inadvertently upgraded my trial to a full thirty days. Thirty days of unrestricted, unlimited, unadulterated music! Okay, perhaps not that third one – but it’s still pretty great.

Now that I’ve sampled the Spotify product model in its entirety, I’m convinced that Spotify is the future of digital music. I’ve burnt through countless CD players, a handful of MP3 players and even a Zune, before I discovered an iPod (and with it, iTunes). For years I used iTunes to supplement my musical collection, and sunk many hundreds of pounds into the online service, for what I now know to be very little return, compared to what Spotify would offer for a fraction of the price. And as a result, I believe that Spotify at this point could mark the beginning of the end for digital music stores.

That’s not to say that the iPod will become obsolete. After all, I operate my Spotify collection through an iPod Touch. However, with record players and even Hi-Fi’s relatively old-hat in today’s society, we listen to music through new technology. Most people use an iPod, their phone or a computer to play music these days, and even those few who do own a Hi-Fi system – functionality permitting – will connect their portable music device to it, through which to play music.

As a result, a service such as Spotify that operates at both ends of the listener spectrum, both via mobile device and also via computer, won’t take long to overtake iTunes completely. Albeit you have to make use of proprietary software, but as a service that’s accessible almost anywhere, there’s little in the way of restrictions. The design itself even mimics iTunes, so there’s not much of a learning curve.

Furthermore, in an effort to create the collective home of your music, Spotify allows users to import their own songs, which will help to alleviate the problem associated with those few record companies or artists who are yet to hop on the Spotify bandwagon.

Spotify has also highlighted just how outdated the competition’s product model has become. iTunes will only allow a brief thirty-second preview of a song, before you’re expected to part with the best-part of a pound, whereas Spotify premium for £9.99 a month will allow unlimited access to as many songs as you wish, all for one low monthly sum. And with the average cost of an album £6.99, I’d argue that Spotify is a far better investment. This relays back to something that I mentioned previously, regarding the prevalence of the Spotify music system now, which makes the iTunes system almost irrelevant if you’re willing to fully devote yourself to the Spotify way of life.

Of course, this system is beneficial to artists too. Sure, they’re losing out on pure profit from the sale of albums and singles; however their music is reaching the ears of hundreds of thousands of listeners, who otherwise many not have ever stumbled across them. Sales from merchandise, tour tickets and similar are sure to follow.

The success of Film rental website, LoveFilm, also demonstrates the adaptation we’re making as a society. Before long it won’t be uncommon for a household to have one LoveFilm monthly subscription for films, DVDs and games, one Spotify subscription for musical requirements and what may very well arrive shortly – a kindle monthly subscription, for books.

There’s no guarantee of course, but this method of digital distribution – where the customer ‘loans’ the content for as long as this wish, and as long as they’re paying – is certainly becoming far more common. And it’s for this reason that within another five to ten years, Spotify may very well become a household brand of the same size that iTunes is today. After all, it’s not that far off in 2011.

Memory sticks, data pens, USB keys and flash drives. The terminology that we use for such devices varies greatly, but there’s one overwhelming constant between them all that just can’t be ignored – they get a pretty bad press. Prone to corruption, theft or good old-fashioned physical damage, they don’t have the strongest rap-sheet as robust storage mediums. And when you also consider the increasingly small form factor of today’s data pens, the probability of losing the device itself doubles, which makes our regular use and reliance on such equipment for data storage somewhat baffling.

As a result, you may be somewhat surprised by Freecom’s latest digital storage innovation, the Databar XXS. Designed to sit on your key ring for easy access, this USB device is astonishingly small, yet the concern of misplacing this device is offset – not only by its lightweight nature (just seven grams!) – but also by the fact that it’s tethered at all time to your keys; something that human beings in the twenty-first century seem programmed to have with them at all times. As a result, you can feel fairly confident that you won’t lose this device anytime soon. If you do, you’ll have far more pressing matters to attend to than lost data, such as locating the telephone number of a reliable locksmith to rectify your blunder, or perhaps even worse, explaining your mistake to the other half – yikes!

Design

As a device that’s intended buddy up with your keys, the Databar XXS is understandably small and compact. In fact, it clocks in at a mere 3cm x 1.2cm. But don’t let the size of this miniature device fool you, as this highly portable memory stick is available in models of up to 32GB, which retail at around the £50 mark. That age-old saying of “good things come in small packages” comes to mind here, and would appear to apply perfectly in relation to Freecom’s Databar XXS.

The model I received for review purposes was 2GB in size, which in itself is capable of storing 960 MP3’s, over 1,000 images or a staggering 72,000 text documents, and when you consider that this device is available for the very reasonably priced sum of £6, makes it ideal for frequent travellers, businessmen and students alike.

The small form factor of this device also makes for a rather pleasing break from the norm, as extra-large and impractically sized USB devices are becoming far more prevalent in technology today, which can cause some problems when positioning USB devices next to each other. Although the Databar XXS does not suffer from this issue, its overzealous attempt at the polar opposite can cause some confusion when attempting to insert the device into the computer’s USB port – as can be seen in the screenshot above. That said though, it’s rather unlikely that you’ll cause any damage to either the device or the USB port itself should you insert it wrongly, and this confusion is very much a once only, and short-lived, affair.

Build Quality

Of course, impressive storage potential coupled with space-saving ingenuity is only well and good if the device in question is up to task. At first, I was slightly concerned with the design of this product, as the requirement to make this USB key as small as physically possible resulted in the fairly necessary removal of the metal hood that protects the connection chip of traditional USB devices. Although not initially troublesome, this rather unique design choice does carry with it the fear that if this product is used as intended (i.e. as a permanent feature on your key ring) that it may become damaged or scratched overtime.

Thankfully, Freecom appear to have considered this probability themselves, as they have not only designed the Databar to be both waterproof and dustproof, but they have also coated the product in a glossy finish to repel inevitable scratches, and indulged the USB connector with gold plating, to help prevent damage to the most important component.

The durability of this memory stick is equally as impressive. Not only has the Databar survived copious intentional scratching from my keys, but also a couple of staged drop tests onto concrete from head height, and a number of other attempts to purposefully destroy the device. Two thumbs up and an enthusiastic smile awarded to Freecom here, for what could very well be the one of the most durable USB devices I’ve seen, within the sub £10 price range.

Performance

The Databar XXS ships formatted using the FAT file system, which carries with it a number of inherent restrictions; namely a maximum individual file size of 4GB. However, this is not a particular cause for concern, as the device can be readily reformatted to the universally recognised NTFS format within moments.

Regarding transfer speeds, online sources (such as this one) would have you believe that the Databar XXS is capable of a meagre 14.2MB/s, however in my tests, the device managed a far more impressive 30MB/s for a 700MB file, albeit fairly slower speeds of approximately 18MB/s when transferring a 350MB folder made up of numerous smaller files. Still, these figures are rather impressive given the size and nature of the product. Freecom have done well here, too.

The inherent ability of the Databar XXS to run on either USB 2.0 or USB 3.0 ports is equally a nice feature, yet with USB 3.0 now dwarfed by the impending introduction of Thunderbolt, the prevalence of USB 3.0 ports has dwindled to some extent. Freecom clearly recognised this technological development also, as the Databar XXS does not receive a performance increase if attached to a USB 3.0 port, instead it will function at the far more conventional 2.0 speeds. Although this is potentially disappointing news for the small collection of USB 3.0 users out there, it helps to keep the unit price lower for the masses; another plus.

Innovation

Freecom’s product catalogue is in abundance of clever innovation, which helps to establish them as far above the competition. As mentioned previously, the loss of USB devices is a pressing issue, and Freecom have moved to counter this problem via the introduction of “Don’t forget me” technology – which can be found on the ‘Databar Secure’ product, displaying a noticeable warning upon logout or system shutdown.

Unfortunately, the Databar XXS foregoes such a feature. Although I did suggest towards the beginning of this review that the attachment of your keys to the device at all times helps to eliminate the potential of forgetting it to some degree, it would still be favourable to include this feature as a fail-safe, particularly if your keys are at stake too.

Conclusion

The Databar XXS is a tough, useful and practical product, and given the affordable pricing structure, it’s also accessible to the masses. The only overwhelming flaw I found in this product concerns the lack of the aforementioned “Don’t forget me” technology, although for the price it’s understandable that this feature didn’t make the cut. Furthermore, the durability of this product is particularly impressive given the low-cost, and the fact that it also survived my series of mini-tests sets a strong precedent for this device to survive the duration.

As a product that’s less likely to be misplaced than a traditional USB device due to its design, and small enough to attach to your keys without adding any extra bulk, the Databar XXS is simply fantastic.

Score – 9/10

There’s a whole host of backup options out there for WordPress powered web portals, but VaultPress offers something a little different. Instead of providing backups via email, or perhaps auto-syncing with a predetermined FTP server, VaultPress instigates multiple cloud server backups each and every time you update your various WordPress files. And because it’s created by AutoMattic, the team behind WordPress itself, you can entrust the system with your files entirely (or at least until they give us a stunning reason to doubt them).

The service is provided via a hybrid of a plugin and a webapplet, via which you can manage your storage online. The plugin is also unique and individual to your account, to help promote security. Currently in the Beta phase, VaultPress is available temporarily via ‘Golden Ticket’ access only, of which they’re giving sixty tickets away every single day apparently, and you’ll still have to cough up some cash during this period too. This monthly cost is a shame, albeit a somewhat necessity, due to the fact server costs are still undoubtedly substantial during this initial setup phase.

As you can see by the above screenshot, even a basic account will set you back $15 p/m, and it’s for this reason alone that I question the validity of the service. If you’re not hosting techcrunch.com or lifehacker.com, chances are you won’t be pulling in a substantial amount of money from advertising revenue and similar. Therefore, your hosting requirements won’t have rocketed sky-high over the past few months, and thus you’ll end up shelling out more for a ‘what-if?’ backup service than you will do for the actual hosting where the files are kept, which is ludicrous.

When you also consider that most respectable hosts these days provide their own backup system, VaultPress becomes (to some extent) rather less compelling. Although you shouldn’t rely on your host’s backup medium entirely (because chances are it’ll be on their servers, and if they fail, you’ll lose your website and their backup together!) the backup process afforded to users in cPanel helps to bridge this gap. As I mentioned previously, those of us who are only running small-time blogs (such as this one) can afford to not have a daily backup, and thus the manual backup procedure provided via cPanel is, more often than not, perfectly adequate for a weekly backup – when doubled with the fact that your host is probably doing the same for you, included in your monthly hosting bill.

Furthermore, the way that VaultPress works is to upload your files to the cloud, eating up the bandwidth of your host. As a result, if you operate a website with a relatively small bandwidth cap, or perhaps more likely a large number of files clocking up multiple Gigabytes’ of data, that first synchronisation with the cloud could very well be disastrous; landing you in both hot water with your host, and inflated bills for that month on the account of you exceeding your allowance. Some hosts are kind enough to cut your hosting if you exceed your quota, and whilst this’ll save you money, you could argue that it creates the very situation that VaultPress attempts to eradicate – one where your website is down, and inaccessible by users.

The fact that files are backed-up in real time also presents problems for shared hosting accounts, as this can put considerable strain on the server and present a situation where your website runs sluggish and slow. This process is made worse by the fact that backups are created every hour on the hour, and this denomination of backups per day cannot be changed – which alludes back to what I was saying previously about how the average blogger wouldn’t require this level of protection.

Overall, VaultPress is a clever system, and those out there who can, firstly afford the service, and secondly have the regular user base to make it worthwhile, would greatly benefit from it. The average WordPress blogger clearly won’t be interested though, and unless AutoMattic drop their rates dramatically, or provide some sort of quasi-popular blogging backup option, then I fear they may lose out on an abundance of interested blog owners – the niche of the market, if you will.

Firefox has long been a popular alternative to Internet Explorer, and the initial download figures for both browsers would suggest that Mozilla’s open source contribution is still out in front. Microsoft proudly flaunted 2.3 million downloads within the first 24 hours, until Mozilla rolled out Firefox 4 to the tune of 7.1 million, within the same timeframe. But is the latest edition of the browser worth the hype surrounding it? Despite my criticisms of Internet Explorer 9, I’m still rather impressed with the developments that have been made, and also the features that have been introduced to revamp an aging browser.

Firefox is popular, there’s no doubting that. Yet whether or not Firefox 4 brings with it enough of the superficial stuff that really matters to stay ahead of IE9 and Chrome, well that remains to be seen.

Browser-wide compression

At first glance, little appears to have changed visually; there’s certainly not a substantial overhaul of the browser’s design. But look a little closer, and you’ll see elements of both IE9 and Google Chrome that have been hand-picked for their attractiveness and convenience, and implemented accordingly. The toolbars at the top have been compressed, and tabs have migrated north, to the top of the browser. The aging drop-down menus (file, tools etc.) are nowhere to be found, and have been replaced instead by a single ‘Firefox’ button – fear not though; the menu can be brought back from the dead by pressing the ‘alt’ key. Navigation buttons including back and refresh have also found a new home intermingled with the address bar, and have equally been reduced in size to match the new slim-looking browser. That rather unnecessary bar at the bottom has vanished, too.

Website real estate appears to be the selling point for all recent browser releases. It’s fair to say that Chrome instigated this change, followed eventually by IE9, and now Firefox 4 has blissfully hoped on the bandwagon. Unfortunately, with the three biggest contenders for the browser stakes opting for the same diet, they each look rather interchangeable as a result.

Do you have anything new to add, Mozilla?

One particularly notable feature is the introduction of ‘Firefox Sync’. Previously an add-on, sync is now all grown-up and has been fully integrated into Firefox 4. The setup of a free account is required, but once you surpass this minor hurdle, sync offers (as the name would suggest) the synchronisation of your bookmarks, passwords, the lot, to the cloud. Personally, as much as I appreciate this feature, I’m reluctant to trust Mozilla with data alluding to my passwords, even if they promise to keep it safe. Furthermore, sync is an interesting feature, granted, but it’s nothing we haven’t seen before. Ubuntu One has included the ability to sync your preferences to the cloud for some time, and whilst Firefox Sync is a definite plus on a practicality level, it’s far from innovative.

Firefox has made a move towards Internet Explorer in relation to progress bars. How far a website had loaded was previously shown via a small percentage bar in the bottom left, however Firefox 4 now adopts a spinning circle instead – which offers absolutely no indication of any progress, or indeed whether or not the website in question is loading at all. Adaptations to a working design such as this occur with alarming frequency, and this is a particularly prevalent situation for the age old saying to apply: “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

Subtle Improvements

Tabbed browsing has received a minor overhaul, as tabs can now be saved as ‘groups’. By using this tool, you can drag and drop active tabs into named sets, designed to give you quick access to collectivised websites; e.g. a group of social network tabs, a different group for news tabs etc. It’s an interesting approach to managing your various internet based vices, but I’m not entirely convinced that it’s necessary – In my opinion, groups appears to be the less successful brother of bookmarks.

Firefox 4 also boasts the ability to protect you against advertising cookies and robots. Through the use of a special piece of code transmitted to the website you’re visiting, Firefox has the potential to halt the tracking of your movements as you navigate the internet. This appears to be a rather simple and effective solution to the problem of targeted advertising and unwanted cookies snooping on your browsing habits, but unfortunately this feature is misleading; although it may be useful in the future, the majority of websites at present cannot recognise the code, and until it becomes a universal standard for websites and browsers alike, it won’t be very beneficial to users.

Akin to Google Chrome, tabs can now be pinned as ‘app tabs’. Adopting this feature will minimize the tab to a small square, with only the favicon remaining, helping to save on space in the process. Again, this isn’t anything particularly new, but it’s certainly useful, and a feature that IE9 should have utilised considering the severe space limitations Microsoft created due to the positioning of the tab bar alongside the address bar.

A slightly odd ‘improvement’ for tabbed browsing has also been introduced. Called ‘switch to tab’, when typing in the address of a website, you will now be presented with a drop down box that offers the ability to jump to the target website if it’s already open in another tab. Apparently, this quick switch functionality was included to solve situations where you have a large number of tabs open, and want to save time. Given that Firefox 4 doesn’t suffer from the same illegible tab issues as IE9 though, the only situation where this could be useful, is if you took full advantage of the ‘Groups’ feature. However even then this is a particularly ridiculous development, because the average user could simple click on the relevant tab, without needing to type anything. Even power-users would struggle to keep on top of more than ten tabs at once, and it’s only instances such as this that bring with them the rare occasion where this feature could be useful.

Performance testing

In the interest of a fair test, I submitted Firefox 4 to the same gruelling treatment as Internet Explorer 9. Again, I ran the Microsoft FishTank test, at a rather conservative setting of 10 Fish. The results were quite remarkable: whereas IE9 scored an acceptable 38FPS, and Firefox 3.6 a rather abysmal 21FPS, Firefox 4 blows both of these figures out of the water, topping my amateur test charts at a staggering 60FPS. Firefox didn’t stop there though – whereas IE9 slowed to a crawl at any fish denomination over 50, Firefox 4 still managed a satisfactory 31FPS at 500 fish, and even 12FPS at the test limit of 1,000 fish; which would have instigated a looping crash with Internet Explorer.

Firefox 4 didn’t quite match IE9 on the Acid 3 test, receiving only 97 out of 100, whilst IE9 walked away with full marks. Although the average user is unlikely to notice the difference, Firefox 4 was rather off on the representation of the colour blue (visible in the accompanying screenshot) which was far closer to the colour grey.

Summing up

Firefox 4 has received a substantial performance improvement, yet visually it offers little in the way of originality. Offering more features than IE9 and Chrome though, Firefox is still the best browser experience available. However, as Mozilla have recently reported that they will soon be adopting the Google Chrome method of updating (i.e. more frequently, yet smaller updates) IE10, if and when released, could very well blow Firefox 4.x at this point out of the water.

There’s also a certain nostalgia value tied in with my unwavering loyalty, but there’s nothing wrong with that. As the age old saying goes: you’ll always feel something for your first love, and while ‘love’ might be a little strong in reference to an internet browser, I have developed a degree of fondness towards it overtime.

Recent releases haven’t been up to scratch though; and so, like many others, a couple of years ago I reluctantly packed up my browser bag and left, venturing forth to find pastures new. I ended up with Firefox, and soon established a relationship similar to the one I once had with IE. But something was missing. Firefox had some large boots to fill, and it certainly wasn’t the Internet Explorer that I had ‘grown up’ with, in the technological sense.

IE Available For Download – 14th March

You can imagine my excitement therefore, when IE9 was released a couple of days ago. Finally, following numerous failed builds and poorly coded editions (with IE 6, 7 and 8 all falling into this category), the potential to rekindle my affair with IE was once again on the cards.

And all was well and good to begin with. The installation was a simple process; there was a smattering of inconvenience involved in the way of a system restart, but I could easily overlook that. After all, this was what promised to be the best Internet Explorer yet. A cup of tea and a system reboot later though, and things began to slide rapidly downhill.

I was already slightly irritated by the lack of a desktop icon, which might seem mildly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, especially considering that I would soon delete it after pinning IE9 to my taskbar, but that’s beside the point. The install was very ‘Google Chrome’ in style, and offered absolutely zilch in the way of control over the process. Like many tech enthusiasts, I long to be in control, and thus the lack of quick-access to the browser aggravated me more than it normally would.

Unattended installations appear to be the direction in which the web is moving though, and so I set aside my initial frustration. A quick tap on the keyboard later and I had found what I was looking for. I loaded up IE9, a little unsure as to what to expect, and I am saddened to say that I was instantly disappointed. Since my migration, I had grown to love the rounded tabs of Firefox, and to see that Microsoft had adopted a very square, rigid approach to their latest browser was rather visually unappealing. Still, not one to judge a browser by its cover (err… make that design?) I pressed forward, and for the second time in as many minutes, gave Microsoft the benefit of the doubt.

Terrible Tabbing

Clutted tab navigation

However it wasn’t long before I was disappointed once again. The damage of this complete visual overhaul was not instantly recognisable, but following a little further inspection it became alarmingly apparent that with version 9, IE has become an overly simplistic, yet remarkably crowded affair. I’m not sure what was wrong with the previous style of having an address bar straddling the tabs below, but now it’s gone. This new system of address bar and tabs occupying the same line doesn’t work nearly half as well, and once you’ve got more than a handful of tabs open, the whole thing becomes an undesirably cluttered mess. Throw more than seven or eight tabs in one go, and the description of each website becomes rather small, rendering each tab indecipherable from its next-door neighbour. Microsoft would have you believe that this new design is rather intuitive, but I’d rather argue otherwise.

Another issue I took with tabs is that each additional tab adds itself to the taskbar. Sure, Windows 7 clumps multiple instances of the same program together, but with IE9 this becomes an annoyance. Not only do I have a string of unreadable, unfeasibly small tabs within IE9 itself, but if I opt to try and differentiate between them by clicking on the program icon in the taskbar, the result is each tab rather unattractively flooding the lower portion of my screen. This is not an issue if you’re lucky enough to own a large monitor, but those considering running IE9 on a netbook should very well cringe at the thought – yes, it would be as ghastly as you can imagine. Google Chrome is working proof that multi-threaded tabs need not be an inconvenience, and it raises the question as to why Microsoft did not follow a similar route. After all, they copied their installation procedure, and so why stop there.

Overly large carousel feature

In the interest of a fair overview though, I suppose I should consider the one particular benefit associated with the new tab system – which sits uneasily amongst the sea of disadvantages, primarily because although it tries to be helpful, it’s not all that practical. You can now pin individual tabs to your taskbar, bringing a whole new meaning to the term ‘favourites’; and with this new development, you can theoretically access your favourite websites on the fly, and at speed. And it is the initial appeal of this feature that ultimately makes it even more of a disappointment. In a bizarre choice that further adds salt to the wound, this feature is only applicable to Windows 7 users, and even then it’s heavy on resources. The website you opt to create a tab for will not open as expected in as a new tab in the main IE9 window; instead it will launch its very own memory grabbing instance of the browser for each unique ‘pinned tab’. Again, what might not inconvenience the average desktop PC user is a nightmare for laptop and netbook owners, as is becoming something of a trend for IE9.

Performance Woes

I wasn’t overly impressed by the speed of the browser either, and undertaking Microsoft’s FishTank test, comparing the browser to Firefox and also Chrome made for some interesting results. Whereas there is certainly something to be said for IE9’s graphical performance under stress, the same could not be said for tests run where the fish denominations were less than 1,000.

I chose to run a speedy benchmark test around the denomination of 10 fish. I should point out that my laptop is far, far below the system requirements required for this, residing rather unhappily at the low end of the performance spectrum, yet the figures still speak for themselves: Chrome achieved an impressive 33fps, Firefox a meagre 21fps, and as predicted the lead contender was IE9. However, it wasn’t as dramatic a victory as the overzealous press releases surrounding IE9’s launch would have you believe, and Microsoft’s latest browser only scored 38fps. This is a rather far cry from the superior performance boost that is alleged to come with the built in hardware acceleration – and is certainly another nail in the coffin of netbook users.

Less than favourable performance from IE9

Microsoft has also introduced a couple of privacy and safety elements, but for the most part these have slipped under the radar. Browser security has hit something of a peak these days, and realistically, you’re more likely to succumb to a virus or suffer an invasion of privacy through the use of an unsecured connection, or via the failure to adopt an adequate firewall. No points for Microsoft to be awarded here.

Whilst none of the aforementioned issues were enough to send my sobbing uncontrollably back into the forgiving arms of Mozilla Firefox though, IE9’s shocking instability was. I tested the browser thoroughly for two hours, and experienced six individual crashes. One particularly messy culprit was the Acid-3 Test which caused some sort of looping crash, yet Amazon.com, and also on two separate occasions YouTube, proved to be equally difficult.

Fundementally Flawed

Internet Explorer 9 is certainly an interesting development, and had a couple of attractive features. The introduction of hardware acceleration is something that will undoubtedly result in significant web development, and the ability to pin websites to the taskbar cannot go unnoticed. However, IE9 is let down by its rather substantial flaws (mainly surrounding it’s sheer performance incompatibility with low end laptops and netbooks) and for the most part, I’m not convinced.

I think I’ll be sticking with Firefox in the meantime. My high hopes for IE9 have been shot down in flames, and unfortunately the issues I have with the browser go far beyond what a series of patches could realistically repair. Perhaps IE10 will be the return to the browser I know and love.

Perhaps, but I haven’t got high hopes.

Before I start, I would like to make it very clear that this is an opinion piece. If you’re looking for an article brimming with facts, figures and helpful diagrams, then this isn’t for you. I have, however, provided links to quasi-authoritative reports on the topics I discuss, to show that they are not merely the work of fiction, and certainly not plucked from thin-air.

Now that I’ve firmly established this basis of this article, allow me to begin.

You could argue that the UK has already warmly welcomed technology into its midst. These days, you can’t stroll down the street without spotting a businessman sporting a very fetching Bluetooth headset, or even turn on the TV without enduring rolling adverts for a new computer from PCWorld. But this isn’t what I mean by a ‘full embrace’. If you interpret ‘full’ as a synonym of ‘complete’, then for the UK to surrender itself entirely to the grasp of technology, this change would need to be reflected across all aspects of society – not merely the business and advertisement sectors.

And I think it’s finally happened. I’d dare to say that March 2011 marks the conclusion of this phenomenon. Don’t believe me? Then consider the following.

The House of Lords have recently announced plans to trial the use of iPads and other tablet PC’s during session. Although they’ve been extremely quick to restrict conventional laptops on the grounds that they’re far too noisy (all that infernal clicking!) and also provide an increased risk of distraction, this is still a tremendous step forward for the embrace of technology in the mainstream. If the highest echelon of British society is adopting technology in such a way, then by design we must be on the brink of a technology revolution. This could very well open the floodgates for mobile phones to become educational aids in schools, computer games to help treat the sick and even text messages to replace emails for all intents and purposes. There is an absolute bucket load of potential here, once all the necessary divisions of society are on-board, and to nail the highest tier first is good going!

For all the mystery that surrounds the Lords, the acceptance of the iPad is also fundamental proof that they are, for the most part, actually human. The fact that Law Lords are aware of what an ‘iPad’ is, is also rather suggestive of the considerable reach that modern technology now has. The potential for speeches within the House of Lords to be delivered via tablet pc is there; only time will tell whether or not the method is adopted.

It’s not just iPads though: the decision from the House of Lords was merely the icing on the tech-cake, as we’ve all succumbed to the lure of smartphones too – BlackBerry or iPhone, pick your poison. Actually, it doesn’t really matter which brand you went for, as they both serve the same purpose with regards to the national embrace of technology. The smartphone appears to be a timeless classic, a communication tool that is welcomed not only by teenagers, but the slightly older generation as well. Albeit the primary use of these devices does alter depending on which age bracket you’re looking at (I’m fairly sure that teenage girls are the chief adopters of BBM) the fact of the matter is this – we’re all using them. If American mobile sales figures are anything to go by, smartphones have become the recognised standard of mobile communication, and with fewer and fewer traditional handsets in use in 2011, it won’t be long before they cease to exist entirely.

We’re also developing the way that we interact with technology. No longer content with merely watching the action pass us by in a cinema, we want to live it. The notion of the gaming industry surpassing the film industry has fluttered delicately around the internet for some time; however 2011 could very well be the year for its big, final push.

Gaming titles that represent the interactive version of a movie have existed for some time, and for the most part they’re downright abysmal. Yet this year has seen the exact opposite happen, and chances are it’ll be just as successful as it’s gaming counterpart. Angry Birds, an iPhone App that has become a common household name due to its addictive gameplay and wide user base, has led to the production of a movie – dubbed ‘Rio’. That’s right, a movie about a game, and not the other way around; as has been the way since time began. Of course, it would be factually inaccurate to not recognise Doom, the first film to stem from a globally renowned gaming title, but Doom the movie was a flop. Rio on the other hand, if you use the number of app sales for Angry Birds as a guide, and the appeal the animated film should hold with the younger generation, should be quite the smash-hit.

The video games industry has outperformed the film industry in terms of sales for some time, but it’s now looking to bridge the gap even further, with the introduction of a new breed of titles that play out like interactive movies. Heavy Rain, Mass Effect and to some extent even Dead Space are all plot heavy, and feature numerous interactive elements that require the players direct input to propel the plotline further – which can seven cause recognisable alterations to the original storyline as a result. The imaginary line between a film and a game has become a little blurry in 2011, as both now offer a visual representation of an adaptive story. The interactive element afforded to this new style of game helps to keep players on their toes (similar to the way that a successful film keeps viewers hooked), unable to predict the numerous twists and turns the storyline will take.

There’s also the broadly increasing general knowledge surrounding technology. A decade ago, few people could rattle off the hardware that makes up their computer,  or perhaps a decade ago far fewer even owned a computer, but now just about anyone can name a hard-drive, ram and a processor. Of course, techaholics are still required to crunch data and differentiate between different hardware models, but the point that technology is becoming more understood on the whole still stands strong.

Considering the evidence above, by 2012 (assuming we’re all still here), the face of technology will have changed forever. There’s no escaping technology now, and its tactical infiltration of the legal system, the film industry and even the shopping habits of an entire nation cannot go unnoticed.

March 2011 seems to be the trigger, and from here the only way is forward.

Somewhere between our almost instantaneous broadband connections and the never ending onslaught of emails, IM’s and other unnecessary tid-bits of information, distraction snuck up on us and attached itself aggressively to our workload. The sheer difficulty associated with remaining productive for nine hours a day is now neigh-on impossible, because distraction has taken hold and is about to show productivity the door.

It all starts innocently enough. A lingering glance at the news headlines or a dash to the kitchen to make a cup of tea; but before long it gets troublesome. An email from a friend materialises in your inbox, and before you know it, you’ve been menacingly tricked into a two-hour, multi-threaded conversation about your plans for this weekend. And just like that, you’re done. Finished. Out for the count. If it’s not an email, then chances are you’ve succumbed to the lure of lolcats and viral YouTube videos, and now its 6pm – a full day of work wasted.

But it needn’t be this way. Your computer is littered with temptations, a productivity minefield, but a tool exists that will allow you to remain in control – you just need to use it. It’s called Q10, and it’s the ultimate anti-procrastination weapon in the war against interruptions.

At first glance, Q10 is nothing more than another freebie in the monumentally long list of text editors out there. Yet Q10 is different. It doesn’t boast some new feature, instead the unique quality of this program is that it is, in fact, feature-less. Well, except for the cornerstones of the text editing domain; spell check, quick text and even an auto save feature are included, but little else.

Gone is the familiarity of the Microsoft Word toolbox. Those fancy colours have gone too. Even your taskbar didn’t make the final cut. Q10 is a full screen, black writing box, and that’s it. There’s nothing here to distract you, merely white text on a black background, the current time and a word count.

And this is hugely beneficial to productivity.

No longer will you be distracted by the ruse of breaking news, or the familiar ‘ping’ of new email, instead with the use of this tool, you can return to previously lost realms of productivity and finish that article you’ve had planned for weeks. Once you’ve completed your work in record time, you can then yield to the allurement of the internet once again.

As is to be expected though, Q10 does have its limitations. Those who regularly rely on email or other applications to complement their written work will struggle to use this program effectively, as unfortunately there’s no current built-in access to the necessary evils of the modern world. You’ll have to alt tab in and out for that. Furthermore, at the time of writing, there is no option but to save in a .txt format, and depending on what you plan to do with your written work, you may find that you waste precious time copying and pasting .txt documents into workable .doc files – once again clawing at the very productivity you tried to claim back by using this program in the first place.

Even with the above in mind, Q10 is a very approachable and simplistic take on regaining lost productivity. The removal of all distractions, as long as you can survive long enough without them, is warmly welcomed, and helps to focus the mind on the task at hand. As an installable text editor that can be easily removed if required, there’s really nothing to lose from trialling this tool. It might even break the bond you had with Microsoft Word.

You can find Q10 here.

Hours past, and it was only at the point where my stomach grumbled for the umpteenth time, and my mouth was inexcusably dry, that I realised for quite how long I had been lost in this immersive world. But the deep, expansive mines and dungeons beneath Torchlight were addictive; I wanted more, and after a quick food break to sustain myself, I was firmly glued back in the hot seat. More hours passed, and as I continued to delve deeper into the loose storyline, I experienced firsthand the interesting gameplay mechanics that Torchlight has to offer.

You see, Torchlight takes the bread and butter of a dungeon crawler title, and then builds upon it. For example, my faithful canine friend is not only combat effective, but also has the unique ability to double up as an aspiring salesman (or is that salesdog? If so – I’m coining the phrase now!) whom I can dispatch to town burdened with my ill-gotten wares, safe in the knowledge that he will return minutes later, his pockets laden with gold. This is a feature that I never really thought of as essential to Video Games such as this, until Torchlight showed me the error of my ways. With the need to return to town every fifteen minutes now extinguished for good, and also the feverish scouring for town portal scrolls no longer a necessity, the previously difficult decisions surrounding what items to discard in order to create room in my inventory vanished immediately.

And it is for this reason that Torchlight appears, at first glance, to have hit the metaphorical ‘dungeon crawler’ nail firmly on the head.

Given its considerable success though, perhaps what it is most remarkable about Torchlight is how I have only just come to play it. For those of you who have equally spent the past few years under a rock, Torchlight is an unashamedly self publicised and incredibly fresh looking Diablo 2.5. Released back in 2009 to act as a comfortable stop gap between the rapidly ageing Diablo 2, and the perpetually pushed back Diablo 3, Torchlight is fun, approachable and simplistic – and to begin with, there’s nothing wrong with this.

Almost every avenue of this game has been simplified, including the class system. Gone are the ten or so predetermined classes found in the likes of Diablo, and instead they’ve been replaced by a mere three: the stereotypical brutish damage dealer, the ranged based assassin type and the gleefully weak spellcaster. Contrary to my usual preference of shooting things from afar (akin to the ‘ranger’ mentality) this time round I opted for a spellcaster, who I then turned into a badass necromancer chap by the terrifying, fear-mongering name of ‘Frank’. I know, scary huh.

Sadly, for the same reasons I initially liked Frank, it was not long until I began to loathe him. Following the first few hours traversing the intricate network of mines underneath Torchlight town, Frank’s quickly trained skills of summoning were warmly welcomed, and made levelling up a breeze. I’m now a conservative ten hours into the game though, and the small army that Frank can summon with the mere twitch of his little finger and a quick fist bump with God himself, has made my role in this game rather obsolete. I’m not longer required to help contribute to damage, or to mop up the excess foes with a quick spell blast, because my minion horde can do it all – and in half the time, too. Frank, and myself with him, have become little more than spectators to the carnage, unwittingly demoted to the rank of ‘loot collector’ whilst the many summoned forces at work nip from one group of enemies to the other, dispatching them in record time.

And this is a bit of a shame. Perhaps this issue could have been alleviated if I had of chosen a higher difficulty setting than ‘hard’, but I was lured into the false sense of illusion that ‘hard’ would in fact mean ‘hard’ or at least ‘difficult’. I would have even accepted ‘troublesome’, and anyway, somehow I doubt it would have made any noticeable difference. Instead, the very simplistic nature of Torchlight (which I fondly defended a mere three paragraphs ago) quickly became its undoing. Not once, in ten solid hours, did I find myself anywhere close to the grasp of death, and even the use of health potions proved to be an infrequent affair. I did not witness the untimely demise of my pet, either.

All in all I find this a little odd, considering that in true dungeon crawler style, Torchlight even offers a ‘Hardcore Mode’, which fans of the Diablo series will remember makes the inconvenience of death permanent – i.e. you had better make it a good one, because you only get one take. Yet I suppose in Torchlight’s defence, I only sampled the spellcaster class tree; however I should imagine that the same level of simplicity and a distinct ‘lack of death’ would apply to all the other classes, albeit with more clicking required.

Sadly there are other issues that plague Torchlight, too. For a game that performs amicably well on my laptop, the load times are borderline ridiculous. Perhaps this issue is restricted to my hardware alone, but a brief search in Google would suggest otherwise. There are also numerous bugs that riddle the combat. Summoned minions and foes alike have a nasty tendency to get stuck behind objects, and on more than one occasion I was able to defeat a particularly aggressive boss by standing on a higher level and firing at him mercilessly, as he ran repeatedly at the wall trying to reach me via the most direct route. Although initially humorous, issues like this are more of a pressing matter when combined with the sheer difficulty associated with actually dying in this game, and between the two I am now fairly certain that I could never willingly allow my character to do so. Not once, not ever. And this is a problem for me, because the risk associated with failure makes point-and-click based action-rpg’s appealing and addictive. Without the potential for death, I am merely a willing participant to little more than an interactive film, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it’s not what I expected, certainly not what I signed up for and clearly not what the developers had in mind either.

I also felt an overwhelming urge to blast through this game at full speed. Despite offering a sprawling network of mines, dungeons and (on the odd occasion) portals to explore, something about Torchlight focussed my attention towards blitzing through the levels. I barely stopped for long enough to pick up the abundance of loot that littered the floor, let alone to discover an alternative pathway to the finish, and I no doubt missed out on a great deal of extra content by acting in this fashion. However I don’t feel wholly responsible, as Torchlight’s simplistic nature and relatively infrequent presentation of fresh quests does not lend itself willingly to exploration. Instead this notion is replaced with the hopes of future quests, once you’ve pressed a little deeper, and this unpleasant mistake in the rather important delivery of fresh content within an RPG could be attributed to the lack of a detailed storyline. As mentioned previously, the background surrounding the town of Torchlight is loose at best, and in all honesty even though I’m a number of hours into the game, I’ve still no real understanding as to why I’m doing all this. Who created this large vertical network of caves? And why am I here?

The choice to go action heaving and storyline light though is a surprisingly good fit nonetheless. I only pondered the answers to my previous questions for a moment, before shrugging and returning to the action. I don’t know the true meaning behind my activities in Torchlight, and something tells me that I never will, but that’s okay. I don’t need to know in order to have fun or to feel like I’m enjoying myself – and this is a refreshing break from the Diablo mould, which forces a storyline down your throat so far that you begin to gag in retaliation.

Torchlight is a game that evidently doesn’t take itself too seriously, which is refreshing in part, yet it is this over-casual nature that ultimately lets the game down. Intelligent AI, a wider range of quests to help further inspire dungeon exploration and a little fine tuning on the ‘easy-mode’ wouldn’t go a miss here – and it is for these reasons that this game does not achieve the classic dungeon crawler status that it ultimately deserved.

Torchlight is fun though, despite these flaws, and for the price you could do far worse.