This week, I tested Asus’s (usa.asus.com) first entry into the all-in-one PC category: the Eee Top. All-in-one computers like Apple Inc.’s iMac save space by building in a computer’s guts, speakers and disk drive directly behind the monitor, and they’re typically more expensive than separate computer towers and monitors. But Asus’s Eee Top costs $600, half the cost of the least expensive iMac or Hewlett-Packard’s all-in-one HP TouchSmart.

Like the TouchSmart, the Eee Top has a touch screen and runs its own software to make its touch features more usable, like large icons and menus that get pulled onto the screen with swiping gestures. But it’s a lot smaller than the $1,200 HP TouchSmart — about a third of the HP’s size.

Users can navigate around the Eee Top using a finger for almost everything.

This computer would fit well in many kitchens and its small footprint — 1.67 inches deep — means it won’t take up valuable counter space and could easily be stored out of the way. But its touch-friendly software lacks tools for scheduling and isn’t customizable; instead, it uses preloaded icons that can’t be changed. And some of the Taiwanese company’s Asian influence shines through in menu titles that seem to have been lost in translation. Who knew you could find music and photos in a category called “Eee Cinema”? Still, as a secondary PC for the kitchen or a kid’s room, this all-in-one fits the bill.

Floating on Air

The Eee Top is head turner. Its 15.6-inch, resistive touch LCD screen, though small, appears to be hovering on the countertop thanks to a clear, plastic stand. It comes in black or white and has a wired mouse and keyboard. The keyboard tucks snugly into a holder behind the screen when not in use, and I kept it there for most of my time with it. A handle on the back of the Eee Top makes it easy to carry this 9.5-pound PC from room to room.

It has one gigabyte of memory and a 160-gigabyte hard disk. Also included are built-in Wi-Fi (802.11n), a memory-card reader and six USB ports, including one that stands alone for those annoyingly large plug-in devices (ahem, Flip camcorders). Two speakers below the screen pipe out surround sound that quickly fills up a room, and a built-in 1.3-megapixel Webcam captures videos and still photos.

As is the case with Asus’s low-priced netbooks, the bargain Eee Top has its tradeoffs. For starters, it runs Windows XP and uses Intel’s Atom N270 processor, which is used for most Asus netbooks. This processor consumes less power, but can give the PC a sometimes sluggish feeling. More than once, my Eee Top crashed when I had several programs opened at once.

The Eee Top’s touch software, called Easy Mode, lacks a calendar and an address book, two tools that are of utmost importance for families who will use this PC in their kitchen.

Another missing element in this all-in-one is a DVD drive, but thanks to downloadable software, music and videos, I don’t think most people will miss it. If so, Asus is selling $64 external drives that plug into the Eee Top via a USB cable.

I navigated around the Eee Top using my finger for almost everything and never used the optical mouse. A stylus that pops out from the side of the keyboard can be used to pinpoint hard-to-tap icons in Windows, but everything in Easy Mode is large enough to touch or swipe with a finger.

Easy Mode is divided into four categories that are labeled with tabs at the top of the screen: Communication, Fun, Work and Tools. Communication includes Skype, Email, Eee Memo (virtual Post-Its) and Internet, which opens 12 preset links to URLs that Asus chose. This last section could be filled with personalized favorites for sites like a school’s daily lunch menu or WSJ.com, but Asus really blew it by prohibiting changes here.

A Virtual Keyboard

When it’s time to enter text in Easy Mode, a virtual keyboard saves you from pulling out the physical keyboard. This virtual keyboard is surprisingly easy to type on because it can be resized to fit your fingers by dragging one corner. It was adequately comfortable for quick tasks like entering URLs and labeling photos, but vertical typing wasn’t conducive to lengthier tasks, like emails, so I used the physical keyboard instead.

But the virtual keyboard doesn’t automatically appear when you need it; instead, you must open it. And when you’re done typing, say after you’ve entered a URL, the keyboard isn’t smart enough to automatically disappear, and this gets frustrating.

Handwritten Text

A handwriting-recognition option can be used to enter text with either the stylus or a finger. Though this worked well, it was slower to use compared with the virtual and physical keyboards, and I opted not to use it.

I switched back and forth between the Easy Mode layer and regular Windows XP by hitting a house icon from either mode. Opera is the default browser in Easy Mode, and it has a slightly different setup than most people are used to in more popular browsers. But Internet Explorer is a click away, and opening it automatically returns users to the Windows XP side of things.

A useful pop-out menu In Easy Mode called the Eee Bar is accessible from any program. This thin, horizontal menu holds links to all programs in Easy Mode and is the only menu that can be customized by deleting or adding programs. But I think people will forget about this bar since it’s hidden most of the time.

Projects like documents, spreadsheets and slideshow presentations can be made on the Eee Top using Sun’s preloaded StarOffice/StarSuite rather than Microsoft Office. These programs are similar enough for newcomers to use StarOffice without too much trouble.

The Eee Top is a great-looking computer that brings the fun and accessibility of a touch-screen computer to people who might not otherwise afford it. If you can accept its shortcomings and sometimes slow speed, it could work well in your home as a secondary PC.

Edited By Walter S. Mossberg

• Email us at mossbergsolution@wsj.com. Find this and other columns and videos online free at the All Things Digital Web site: http://solution.allthingsd.com

Today, parents can use sleek, light video cameras that capture and record high-definition footage directly onto tiny memory cards, which hold much more than an old VHS tape. Yet many people hesitate to buy new camcorders, scared off by steep prices and intimidating technology.

This week, I tested a simple video camera that fits into the palm of your hand and lets you record footage almost as easily as you share or save it: the Flip Video Ultra from Pure Digital Technologies Inc. (www.theflip.com). This rectangular-shaped video camera comes in two models that capture 30 or 60 minutes each and cost $150 and $180, respectively. Both models are available starting today from stores like Amazon.com and Best Buy.

The Flip Video Ultra’s front has a camera lens and microphone; the back, a 1.5-inch viewing screen, four directional arrows, delete and play buttons. A USB plug pops out from its side so you can connect it directly to a computer’s USB port without cables.

Special software that opens when the camera attaches to a computer walks users through sharing or saving clips in a few straightforward steps. And if that’s still too complicated, the device can be dropped off at affiliated stores (like CVS) where footage is extracted and turned into a DVD.

This tiny video camera made it a pleasure to record startlingly good footage for a camera of its size both indoors and outside. It’s designed to be held comfortably in front of you, which didn’t make me feel removed from the event I was recording like many other video cameras. Not without flaws, the Flip’s 2x digital zoom isn’t ideal for shooting from afar, and on more than one occasion its software froze up on Windows PCs and Apple Macs. But once I got going, I started shooting videos in a new way, unobtrusively using it and then fitting the Flip into small purses. Saving and emailing footage was a breeze after a few initial hiccups.

Flip Video Ultra from Pure Digital Technologies

This gadget, however, is not only non-HD, its footage isn’t as high resolution as that of a standard camcorder. Its quality is great for email and Web posting, but won’t fill up a big TV or satisfy serious amateurs. This is the Flip’s tradeoff for size, price and simplicity.

The Flip Video Ultra is an improvement on the Flip Video, which Pure Digital introduced in May. Though it costs $30 more, the newer version features higher-quality sound and video (footage is half as compressed as that on the old Flip), a transflective screen with a better resolution and improved video-processing technology. The new Flip also integrates direct uploads to YouTube in its software program.

I took the new Flip along with me on a business trip to California and carried it around Washington, D.C., shooting in different environments: inside a dark auditorium at a press event; outside at dusk overlooking the San Francisco skyline from a rooftop barbeque; in my house at nighttime; and during a visit to Google headquarters with my boss, Walt Mossberg. The Flip worked well in each situation.

This video camera measures roughly four inches high by two inches wide and an inch deep, and the 60-minute version comes in black, white, pink and orange; 30-minute models only come in black and white. Though the Flip Video Ultra doesn’t have a flash, it’s designed to perform well under circumstances with low light because Pure Digital assumes most users will be recording indoors. It captures in 640×480 resolution at 30 frames per second.

I used the 60-minute Flip. In capture mode, an on-screen message tells how many minutes remain on the camera. In playback mode, captured clips are labeled with duration and numerical order, such as “Video 21 of 24.” Hitting the Delete button twice while a clip is on screen erases it.

In a couple instances when I wanted to shoot something farther away, I was a little dismayed by the video camera’s weak zoom. But in most situations I was recording things that were nearby, so this issue wasn’t a big deal. Parents who are heading to dance recitals with this Flip will need seats in the front.

The exciting part of capturing video is sharing it with others, and Pure Digital’s built-in software does a superb job of this. I plugged my Flip into four computers running Microsoft’s Windows XP and Vista and Apple’s Mac OS X operating systems and opened the camera’s software to see thumbnail images of my clips. Each clip can be played or selected for saving or sharing. Only on Windows XP did the software automatically open when I attached the camera; opening it on the other platforms required extra steps.

The Save Videos option asked me to choose whether I wanted to save clips to my computer or if I wanted to save them in a smaller format for emailing to someone else. Saving these videos took a little time, but nothing that was too much of a hassle.

Sharing videos took a little longer. Three choices within the Share Videos menu offered to walk me through the steps for sharing videos via emails with links, in an electronic greeting card with embedded video or online using YouTube or other Web sites.

The first time I plugged the Flip into each computer I went through a few extra set-up steps to get the software started. I encountered a few instances during which sending videos to friends via email took a little longer than I expected. Once, on my iMac, it took more than 30 minutes to send a video that was two minutes and 36 seconds. But this was the exception; most of my videos that were roughly that long or shorter took only about five to 10 minutes to be sent.

Editing footage in Pure Digital’s software works for average users who might do some simple editing, like shorten a video or cut out a certain part. Easy-to-use slide bars adjust start and end times for videos, and edited versions of clips can be saved in addition to the originals. The company says that if clips are converted to standard Windows or Mac formats they should be editable in any standard video- editing software.

Muvee software is also built into Pure Digital’s software to let Windows users choose a bunch of clips, select music and a theme for the movie and watch as an automatically organized montage of clips plays.

Pure Digital plans to continuously issue software updates; the next is coming at the end of the month. But as is, this tiny video camera delivers a remarkably good picture on a device that anyone can use. With this product, Pure Digital Technologies again shows the value of simplicity, this time with the bonus of better technology.

Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

But while Adobe provides a free reader for viewing PDFs, creating PDFs yourself can be costly and confusing, even though the format is great for saving and sharing documents of almost any kind including images, Web pages, Word documents and emails. For users who want higher-end PDF creation and collaboration software, Adobe Systems Inc. offers its $450 Adobe Acrobat 8 Professional software program. But that’s pricey for most casual users. So this week I tested some inexpensive or free methods for making PDFs.

Converting documents into PDFs is simplified with Adobe’s online service (top) and Docudesk’s deskPDF program (bottom).

There are plenty of Windows programs available for download online that will help you create basic PDFs. On Windows computers, I tried three programs, starting with the $20 standard version of deskPDF from Plano, Texas-based Docudesk Corp. (www.Docudesk.com). I tested a stripped-down and less-expensive version of Adobe’s program called Create Adobe PDF Online, which works by uploading your document at www.CreatePDF.com and costs $10 monthly or $100 annually. And I also used a free program called CutePDF from Acro Software Inc. (www.CutePDF.com).

If you own a Mac, things are even simpler. Macs come out of the box with the ability to turn documents into PDFs, and I tested that function as well.

DeskPDF and CutePDF worked roughly the same way, though deskPDF costs $20 and CutePDF is free. Adobe’s less-expensive program offered a few more features than deskPDF and CutePDF, such as the ability to add password encryption to a document or to make it unprintable by others. Making PDFs on the Mac was a cinch, including options to compress or encrypt a PDF. None of these methods allowed me to add extra features to PDFs like bookmarks and hyperlinks; for that, you’ll need a more serious program.

When Microsoft’s Office 2007 program shipped early this year, many people expected that it would have the built-in ability to save documents in PDF format; it didn’t. Users can find a patch that fixes this on Microsoft’s Web site.

Apple’s operating system has long been known for the ease with which it can create PDFs using built-in tools. Put simply, any document that can be printed from a Mac can also be turned into a PDF. Users follow the normal steps necessary to print a document or Web site (usually File, Print), but can choose a button on the Print screen labeled “PDF” that converts the document.

In seconds, I turned all types of documents on my iMac into PDFs, including images in JPEG and TIF formats, emails, Word documents and Web sites. This last conversion was helpful for saving not just a view of the current screen, but the entire site from the top of the page to the bottom.

Options labeled “Compress PDF” and “Encrypt PDF” can be chosen in this Print screen. I chose Encrypt PDF and protected a PDF using a password in one quick step. The option to compress a PDF will decrease the size of an image in a document, but won’t decrease the size of a text-only document.

Two of the three Windows programs use a method similar to Apple’s, letting me send documents or Web sites into print mode and converting them into PDFs. Downloading and installing deskPDF or CutePDF adds a virtual printer driver to the computer. Rather than choosing a separate button labeled “PDF,” the conversion program is selected from a list of printers, and hitting the Print button saves the document as a PDF file. The first time I did this, I thought my document was printed rather than saved because a printer icon appeared in the bottom right-hand corner of the screen, as if the document was printing. But a screen appeared asking where I wanted to save the new PDF, and I specified a location.

Docudesk offers free 24-hour technical support with all of its deskPDF programs, even trial versions. The company also touts its $40 deskUNPDF program, which restores PDFs to Word documents for editing purposes, one of the features also found in Adobe’s $450 product.

CutePDF writer and deskPDF must be used with separately installed converter programs, but these are small and free, and their installation is prompted after each of the core programs is downloaded. Both programs are also offered in upgraded versions that cost $50 for CutePDF Pro and $30 for deskPDF Pro, enabling advanced features like hyperlinks, encryption, password protection and printing restrictions.

Adobe’s Create Adobe PDF Online program offers a few more features than the others, but feels a bit disconnected because it uploads documents to the Web for PDF conversion rather than converting documents in an installed program.

An option called Create Adobe PDF Online Printer installs a printer driver on your PC, like deskPDF and CutePDF. But this saves your PDF online forcing you to retrieve it via Adobe’s Web site, an emailed link or an emailed attachment.

After registering to use Adobe’s online conversion product, users must select the file or Web page intended for PDF conversion. Security features are optional with each document, such as requiring a password to view it or not allowing others to print it. I tried both successfully. Once converted, a document can be delivered to you via email in a link or attachment. It can also be retrieved from a Conversion History section on the site or converted directly on the site.

Most of these conversion programs are available in some free capacity. DeskPDF can be used five times free of charge in the standard and professional versions before it starts adding a watermark to each PDF, which is intrusive. Adobe’s program can be used five times for each email that you register before you must subscribe to its conversion service.

If you need to save a document in a format that has the greatest likelihood of being viewable by all of your recipients, PDFs are the way to go, and they aren’t difficult to make.

Edited by Walter S. Mossberg

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com

Two of the biggest phenomena in pop culture have been the “American Idol” TV show and the plethora of Web sites that depend on user-generated content, such as eBay, Craigslist.org and YouTube.com. People love to try out for “Idol,” and to vote for those who make it. And they love to submit entries to Web sites.

So, what if you could combine those two forms and create performance contests on the Web instead of on TV? That way, anyone could enter, or vote, or even create a contest, without the need for a TV network, judges or any other barriers.

This week, we had a fun time testing a Web site that does just that. The free site, called Bix.com, officially launched today. It hosts contests that include “American Idol”-style stuff like singing, but can range beyond that into comedy, photography, art, lip-synching or even writing.

Bix.com, a free new Web site, lets you enter a competition by choosing from a list of existing contests or by creating your own contest.

The Bix strategy is rather simple: You can either create a contest yourself or participate in an existing contest, and Bix members can vote for you using a thumbs-up or thumbs-down icon. All you need to view entries and vote is a computer connected to the Web. To enter the singing or comedy contests, only a Web camera and microphone are required — devices that are increasingly being built into new computers.

We fooled around with the Bix.com Web site, creating contests of our own, joining existing contests, voting for participants and easily emailing links for certain entertaining entries to our friends. Each process — signing up, creating a contest, entering a contest — only takes a minute. This means you can pay full attention to the site’s entertainment factor, and we think this will make users really enjoy using it.

Currently, the Bix Web site is ad-free, depending for revenue solely on corporate-sponsored contests, which run alongside contests users can start at no charge. These contests are created when a company pays Bix to use its site to host a competition, and the contest winner gets a cash prize paid by the sponsor — not Bix. (Normal contests needn’t carry a prize, and most don’t.) Bix says it will seek alternative revenue sources, including advertisements on its site and user-generated ringtones — yes, this could mean hearing yourself sing when your cellphone rings.

Some contestants were truly talented, while others definitely should keep their day jobs. The types of contests revealed some of the creativity that Bix is tapping, including a beauty contest for “Cutest Pet,” a photography contest for “Funniest Sign” and a comedy contest for the funniest 60-second act. Anyone can view the Bix contest entries, but only Bix users can vote or add comments about an entry.

Songs and lyrics are loaded onto the site for karaoke competitions.

For one of our favorite Bix examples, see: http://www.bix.com/entry/383. It’s an amateur rendition of the Martina McBride song “My Baby Loves Me,” done with plenty of heart and style.

Bix provides the tools for lip-synching and karaoke competitions: music and lyrics for about 2,100 songs are loaded on the site and can appear on-screen, karaoke-style, while you sing along. A built-in application automatically opens to record audio and/or video using Mac or Windows operating systems and their browsers — Mozilla FireFox, Internet Explorer and Safari.

We signed up easily by entering only our email address, a Bix user name and a password. The site offers simple options to enter or create a contest. If you choose to enter a contest a list is opened, revealing all existing contests (past contests also can be accessed). These were organized in a smart email-like format with a preview screen below so as to display thumbnail images of the entries for a selected contest.

Walt found and entered a photography contest called “Cars!” that was filled with 13 different images by simply choosing an Enter Contest option, uploading a photo of his favorite car, and adding a title and description of his photo. In a second, his image appeared alongside the others in the contest, where anyone could see it and other users could vote or comment on it. Now, images on the Bix Web site can’t be enlarged by selecting them, but Bix hopes to improve this.

Voting can be done by selecting an up or down thumb image near the contest’s description, and positive results are shown after you vote (each user is limited to one vote). Here, you can see the user names of those who vote positively for your entry. Your user profile, on another page, will show you a tally of the negative votes for contests that you’ve entered, but not the names of the users who gave you negative votes. We can understand that Bix wouldn’t want to reveal the negative voters by name so as to keep the peace on its site.

Katie also entered a contest called Lip-sync Idol, lip-synching to Celine Dion’s passionate song “I Drove All Night” using an iMac G5 with an Apple iSight camera on top. The software program within Bix automatically turned the iSight on and Katie could see the words and an image of her video recording as she went. She was able to play it back or rerecord it afterward before submitting it to Bix for the contest.

The problem with Web cameras is that even expert lip-synchers might look bad because of audio transmitting faster than visual movement. This happened at a few spots in Katie’s recording and in that of other users in the contest, making their lip movements look a beat behind the audio.

Creating our own contest was uncomplicated, too. We chose from a list of formats that included lip-synch, karaoke, dance, a cappella, comedy, art, photography, beauty, writing and other. Next, we chose whether to keep our contest private, by entering a limited list of email addresses, or to open it to the public. We then gave our contest a title (Scenic Photography) and a brief description before setting the start and end dates.

At any time, you can select your user name from the top right corner of the Bix.com site to see information about your profile, the contests you’ve entered and the contests you’ve started. You can also remove an entry when you don’t want it online anymore. Another option allows you to export your entry to your MySpace page or other Web site, so everyone can see your talent — not just those voting on Bix.com.

For now, winning a contest started by a regular user — not a corporation — just means earning satisfaction. But users who have created some contests already are giving away prizes of their own. Bix just announced a karaoke contest of its own with a $50,000 cash prize.

If you think you’re talented, or if you get a laugh just looking at those who think they are, you’ll enjoy Bix.com. It’s easy to get the hang of, and it has a lot of potential to expand. We think people of all ages with enjoy this user-friendly Web site.

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com.

Internet radio is very cool. It allows you to listen to both traditional radio stations from all over the globe, as streamed through Web sites, and to stations that exist only on the Net. The variety of music and talk these stations offer is staggering, but there’s a problem: To listen to them, you have to be sitting in front of a computer.

Many folks would rather listen to Internet radio in rooms where their computers don’t live, or where they’d rather not lug a laptop. To do so today, you have to buy a device that transmits music from a computer to remote speakers. These include the Squeezebox from Slim Devices Inc., Netgear’s MP101 Wireless Digital Music Player and Roku’s SoundBridge M1000.

None of these devices includes its own built-in speakers. You have to attach them to your audio system, and some require you to manage software on the computer that allows them to work over your network, a tricky process.

But, this week, we tested a new Internet radio product that’s totally self-contained and requires almost no setup. It doesn’t depend on a computer to bring in Internet radio, but does the job itself, wirelessly connecting to your broadband service, just like a computer does. And it doesn’t require an external audio system. It has its own built-in subwoofer and speakers, just like a traditional radio. It even looks like a traditional radio, but it does much more.

This new product is called the SoundBridge Radio, and comes from Roku LLC. It’s due to hit store shelves in a few weeks at around $400, which includes a remote control.

By including speakers, Roku eliminates the intimidating extra step of fiddling with wires to attach the device to a separate sound system. With its own sound system, the SoundBridge Radio can also function as an alarm clock, and it can receive your local AM and FM stations over the air, in addition to Internet radio.

Roku’s SoundBridge Radio, priced at $400, includes a remote, built-in speakers and a subwoofer.

And, even though it doesn’t require a computer for radio, the SoundBridge can pull music off your computers wirelessly and play it. It can even play music stored on a SecureDigital memory card.

We rocked out all week, listening to all different types of radio stations, and concluded that the SoundBridge Radio is a decent product, but its user interface could stand some improvement.

In addition to playing roughly 100 preprogrammed Internet radio stations, the SoundBridge Radio also detects and plays music from all libraries within range of your wireless network — without having to install any special software on your Windows or Mac computer. These libraries can include content running on Apple’s iTunes, Real Networks’ Rhapsody, Windows Media Connect and Windows Media 10, as well as services like MusicMatch, Napster, MSN Music and Walmart.com.

To add your own Internet radio stations onto the SoundBridge Radio, you must use a convoluted method involving iTunes. This summer, Roku plans to upgrade its software so as to include many more preprogrammed stations on each device.

The SoundBridge Radio is black and measures 11 inches wide, 6 inches high and 6½ inches deep. Two speakers are built into its front panel, and a subwoofer is built into its rear. A horizontal display with blue-green lettering runs across the front panel, and 13 buttons are built into the top ledge, including a hard-to-miss sleep button and six numbered preset buttons. A headphone jack and SD card slot are positioned on the player’s right side.

We had no trouble setting up the SoundBridge Radio. We plugged it in, and its display screen immediately came to life, asking us a few simple questions, which we answered by pressing the Select button on an included remote. After a few seconds of waiting, we were on our way.

This text in the display screen can be adjusted to one of six different fonts; we chose the average-size type. While the smallest enabled us to see more text, it was impossible to see across the room, and the largest font had to constantly scroll to display song information. Unlike on some other devices, the remote has no built-in little screen of its own.

Navigating through the SoundBridge Radio was confusing at times. A Source menu listed the six sections of the player, including each of our share-enabled iTunes music collections, and read: Play Walt’s iMac, Play Katie’s Music, Play AM Radio, Play FM Radio, Play Internet Radio and System Configuration. The radio itself had a Source button on it that, when pressed, easily retrieved this menu, but the remote had no such button.

The remote does have a Home button (represented by a house icon), but this goes only to the main menu within the current source, not to the useful Source menu itself.

After selecting each of our music libraries, options for how to play the music appeared on the screen, such as by selecting premade playlists or by browsing through and choosing a specific artist. We played a few songs from each of our iTunes libraries, including Billy Joel and Coldplay, and were impressed by the sound.

Music bought on Apple’s iTunes Music Store will not play on the SoundBridge Radio because of Apple’s refusal to license its digital rights management software. Instead, the title of that purchased tune shows up in the display line with a tiny padlock icon next to it; playable music is distinguished with a music note.

But backing out of a song while it played wasn’t as easy as we had hoped — pressing the Back button didn’t do anything. We pressed the Home button, which took us two steps further back than we wanted to navigate.

AM, FM and Internet radio each had its own list of stations. We attached two separate antennas to the SoundBridge so the AM and FM radios could be received, then used seek buttons on the remote and radio itself to find stations. About 100 Internet stations were preloaded on the SoundBridge Radio, but these could be sorted by various categories like name, genre or language.

We listened to various Internet radio stations, including Beatles Radio, Swiss Radio, Smooth Beats, Southern California Public Radio and CNN Radio. But we had trouble with a few stations — like ESPN and Pacifica Radio — that failed to stream content to our radio after five tries. Roku said that this might have been because the stations’ servers were busy.

Without the remote, the Roku SoundBridge Radio functions — but not completely. The six numbered preset buttons are categorized into A, B and C, so there are really 18 places to save a station from AM, FM or Internet radio. You can also use the preset buttons to save specific playlists, as well as lists of search results, by holding down a preset while listening to a song or station in that category. For example, while listening to music from Walt’s iMac, we held down the number six button, and a new label was placed on that button, smartly titled “All songs on Walt’s iMac.”

If the Radio is in standby mode, the time, or the time and full date, can be displayed. Pressing any of the preset buttons will turn on the device and start playing music saved under that preset. Another button brings the Source menu to the screen, but Roku didn’t think to add a select button to the Radio, so we couldn’t navigate far enough to listen to music from the Katie’s Music or Walt’s iMac libraries.

Overall, the Roku SoundBridge Radio is a smart device that needs a little tweaking. If the company really wants to market it as an alarm, it has to understand that users will want to play all of its available music, including computer libraries, without a remote. And navigating with the remote itself needs to be improved so that users don’t feel like they can’t back up out of a menu.

But by designing this receiver with built-in speakers, Roku made it less confusing for average users — a move that might encourage more people to step away from their computers, while still enjoying great music.

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com

Just a couple of months ago, in this column, we proclaimed that Apple Computer’s iMac G5, then the company’s flagship Macintosh desktop computer for consumers, was the best consumer desktop PC on the market. In fact, we called it the “gold standard” of desktop PCs and said no desktop from the major makers of Windows-based computers could match it.

Last week, in a surprise move, Apple gave the iMac a brain transplant. It chose the iMac as the first Macintosh model to be converted to work on the same Intel processors used by makers of Windows PCs, rather than the PowerPC processors from IBM that have powered Macs for many years. This was serious surgery to perform on the company’s star product and launched the planned transition to Intel much sooner than originally expected.

Apple’s new Intel-powered iMac.

Apple says it changed chips because Intel’s latest processors are faster and run cooler, and allow for more flexible and creative computer designs in the future. It says the new iMac is two to three times as fast as the old one, mainly because the Intel Core Duo chip it uses packs in the equivalent of two processors.

But there’s a downside. Nearly all existing third-party software for the Mac, including major programs like Microsoft Office, will have to be rewritten to run on the Intel processor — a process that is under way but will take months to complete. Apple had to build into the new model special, invisible, translator software that allows the older programs to run on the new chip in the meantime. This translator software, however, doesn’t work with every program and can slow down the ones it does work with.

So, how did the brain transplant go? Is the new Intel iMac as good as its predecessor? Does the machine’s raw power offset the translation slowdown?

To find out, we’ve been testing an Intel-based iMac against an iMac G5 only about a month old. The two machines look identical and sport nearly identical features. The major differences are hidden under the hood.

For days, we ran a wide variety of software on the two iMacs, and performed all of the common tasks mainstream consumers do — surfing the Web, emailing, instant messaging, word processing, using spreadsheets, editing photos, playing music, managing personal finances, playing simple games.

Our verdict: The brain transplant was a success. The two machines behaved almost identically in our tests. Compatibility is excellent. The new model easily handled all the major consumer software we threw at it. We never noticed the translator software, called Rosetta, and any slowdowns it imposed were so slight as to be indiscernible.

The new model was actually a little faster at a few of the tasks we tried, but nothing like the two to three times as fast that Apple claims. A mainstream user who didn’t know what was under the hood couldn’t tell the difference between them, even after using them for hours. It appears that the faster chip roughly balances out the translation effect.

So, if the new model works only about as well as the old one, what’s the advantage for consumers? Well, the slight, scattered, speed gains we saw should grow greater over time, as Apple and third-party software makers tweak their applications to take full advantage of the dual-core Intel chip. A year from now, an Intel iMac purchased today will likely be notably faster, if you update your software to newer versions.

But, even now, this is a terrific computer. It’s still the best consumer desktop on the market. It still runs crisply, still is free of viruses and spyware, still has the best operating system and the best built-in software of any desktop we’ve tested. Given how smoothly the new machine works, and how likely it is to get even better, we would prefer it today over the iMac G5, which Apple is still selling for the same price until inventories are gone. The G5 is still a fine machine, but the Intel model has a brighter future, and, based on our tests, it seems ready to go today.

There are a couple of caveats about our results. We tested only common consumer software and tasks, not heavy-duty or professional applications, like Adobe Photoshop, or professional music and video programs, which tend to stress the processor. Some of these nonconsumer products won’t work right until they are rewritten.

Also, there are two drawbacks to the Intel-based iMac that we judged relatively unimportant to most users, but which could be crucial to some. It can’t run old, pre-2001 Mac programs that were written for the old Mac operating system, called “Classic.” And, even though it now uses the same processors that Windows machines do, the new iMac can’t run Virtual PC, the Microsoft program that allows Macs to run Windows software. Microsoft is rewriting Virtual PC for the new Macs but won’t be done until 2007. Some other company may bring out a way to run Windows stuff on the new Mac sooner than that. But, for now, it can’t run Windows programs.

On the other hand, the new iMac has a few advantages. It has a faster video card than the old model and a digital video connector rather than an analog connector.

Doom 3, a non-Apple program, ran well on the new iMac.

From the outside, the two machines are twins. Apple was careful to keep the same physical design, a beautiful white flat-panel monitor with the entire guts of the computer stashed behind the screen in an amazingly thin space. Both have a built-in camera and microphone. The user interface and software features are also identical. Both models run the same excellent Mac OS X operating system. And both also include Front Row, the special interface that allows you to view photos and videos, and play music, from across a room using a small, included remote control.

Even the price of the new model is the same — $1,299 for a version with a 17-inch screen and $1,699 for one with a 20-inch screen.

For our tests, we copied all the third-party software and files from our iMac G5 to the Intel iMac, so the machines were configured comparably. Both had the same amount of memory, the same DVD drives and the same Internet connections.

We ran a mix of Apple and third-party software. We weren’t surprised that all the Apple programs, like iTunes and iPhoto and the Safari Web browser, ran perfectly and swiftly. Apple has already rewritten them for the Intel chip.

But we were pleasantly surprised by the performance of non-Apple programs. We tested Microsoft Office, Adobe Reader, the Firefox Web browser, Skype, Google Earth, Quicken, the Eudora email program, Doom 3, Kodak EasyShare and others — none of which had been rewritten. All launched quickly and ran smoothly and well.

We did find one program that wouldn’t run at all on the Intel iMac: AOL for Mac OSX. But AOL’s main features can all now be accessed from its Web site, so you don’t need this software in most cases.

Web pages loaded swiftly on the new iMac, though not markedly faster than on the old model. We changed the font on a thousand-word document in Microsoft Word and saw no lag at all. We created a chart in Microsoft Excel, and it appeared almost instantly. Email worked indistinguishably well.

This column was written in Word on the Intel iMac, and there were no glitches or hitches or hang-ups of any kind.

On four of our test tasks, the new model outperformed the old one significantly — all in Apple software that had been rewritten for the new chip. It was 15% faster at importing music from a CD, using iTunes. It was 42% faster at converting a video clip from one format to another, using Apple’s QuickTime program. It was 44% faster at importing nine large digital photos into iPhoto. And it was 24% faster at duplicating a huge folder filled with more than 27,000 files occupying more than 12 gigabytes of space.

Why didn’t our results support Apple’s claim of a two to three times speed gain? Like most computer companies, Apple bases such claims on special, complicated benchmark software that doesn’t necessarily match up with the kinds of mainstream consumer tasks we tested.

The bottom line: Apple’s iMac, with its new Intel processor, is still the gold standard of consumer desktop PCs. And it stands to get better over time.

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com.

When Apple Computer launched its video iPod last month, the hype was so great that another important Apple product announcement was lost in the shuffle. The company also released that day a new, improved, and yet cheaper, version of the already excellent iMac G5, its flagship consumer desktop computer.

At the same time, Apple Computer also introduced a new software program called Front Row — embedded in the improved iMac — that, like Microsoft’s Windows Media Center, allows users to play music and to view photos, videos and DVDs from across a room, using an included remote control.

The new iMac G5 includes an entire computer, with the processor, in a flat-panel monitor.

We’ve been testing this new iMac, and our verdict is that it’s the gold standard of desktop PCs. To put it simply: No desktop offered by Dell or Hewlett-Packard or Sony or Gateway can match the new iMac G5’s combination of power, elegance, simplicity, ease of use, built-in software, stability and security. From setup to performing the most intense tasks, it’s a pleasure to use. And, contrary to common misconceptions, this Mac is competitively priced, when compared with comparably equipped midrange Windows PCs; and it handles all common Windows files, as well as the Internet and email, with aplomb.

As for Front Row, we liked it as well. Though it does less than Microsoft’s very nicely designed Media Center version of Windows, Front Row is cleaner and simpler, with a much easier remote control. It could use some improvements, but, even in this first version, it enhances an already-terrific computer.

The combination of the new, improved hardware, plus Front Row, makes the iMac G5 the best consumer desktop you can buy this holiday season, period. For mainstream consumers doing typical tasks — Web surfing, email, office productivity, photos, music, home videos, etc. — it’s the finest desktop PC on the market, at any price. Hard-core game players, stock-market day traders, serious video producers and some other niche users should look for other computers. But, for most people, the new iMac G5 is the best choice.

At first glance, the new iMac G5 looks very similar to the model it replaced. Like its forerunner, it packs an entire computer, including the very fast and powerful G5 processor, into a slender, striking, white flat-panel monitor. The guts of the computer are entirely contained behind this gorgeous, vivid 17- or 20-inch screen. People viewing the machine for the first time often mistake it for merely a monitor.

But the new model has a slightly faster processor and is even thinner and lighter than its predecessor. And it now has a high-quality built-in camera for videoconferencing and taking snapshots, formerly a $150 external option. Plus, it includes the remote control and Front Row.

Yet the top-of-the-line model, with a 20-inch screen, is now $1,699, down $100 from its predecessor. The 17-inch model is still $1,299, despite the added features.

About the only hardware feature we wish the iMac included is a set of slots for the flash memory cards used by digital cameras and other portable devices. Many Windows models now include such slots, but iMac owners will have to buy an external card reader.

The new model is 15% sleeker and 10% lighter than before. While the older iMac’s shape was flat across its white rear panel, this one tapers off at the edges to give it a slightly thinner, more elegant, look. The power button, and the USB, FireWire, Ethernet and other ports, are still on the rear, though they’ve been rearranged.

Unlike most desktops, the iMac G5 comes with built-in Wi-Fi wireless networking, so you can use it far away from a wired Internet connection. It also includes Bluetooth wireless networking; a DVD and CD burner; 512 megabytes of memory; and Apple’s new two-button mouse. The 20-inch model has a 250-gigabyte hard disk and a processor that runs at 2.1 gigahertz. The 17-inch model has a 160-gigabyte hard disk and a processor that runs at 1.9 gigahertz.

Like all Macs, the new iMac comes with Apple’s excellent Tiger operating system, which hasn’t yet attracted any successful viruses and has no reported spyware. Tiger already includes the key features Microsoft is promising for its next version of Windows, due in about a year. These include an integrated desktop search, parental controls and tougher security. And it comes with Apple’s iLife suite of first-rate multimedia programs for managing and creating music, photos, videos and DVDs — better than any similar software for Windows.

Apple’s Front Row software program is embedded in the new iMac, which is 15% thinner than the earlier model.

The small, thin remote magnetically clings to the right edge of the computer, almost hidden from view. This remote has just six buttons, and the layout is similar to that of an iPod shuffle portable music player — including a circular ring that doesn’t scroll like that of a regular iPod. On this circle are Seek and Volume buttons, and its center is reserved for a Play/Pause button. A lone button labeled Menu is positioned below this ring.

Front Row uses the same concept introduced by Microsoft’s Windows Media Center Edition three years ago — simplifying the system’s display with huge icons and large type to make your computer’s media usable from across a room. Media Center is one of Microsoft’s better programs, and it has been well-received by many users. Unlike Front Row, it can also play live TV from a PC with an included TV tuner and can record TV shows like a TiVo does.

Apple says it deliberately decided to leave out the TV function, which it doesn’t believe many people want on a computer. In fact, many Windows Media Center models are now sold without the TV function.

After loading songs, videos and photos onto our new iMac, we sat a little ways back from the desk, aimed our remote at the Apple logo beneath our screen (where the infrared remote receiver is hidden) and started fooling around with Front Row. Pressing the remote’s Menu button instantly sends your desktop view off into the distance, replacing that with Front Row’s home screen, a black background and four giant icons clearly labeled Videos, Music, Photos and DVD. The remote’s Seek buttons rotate the icons around the circle in either direction until the icon representing your program is in the lower, center part of the screen.

The remote also functions when you don’t have Front Row open to adjust volume and skip through songs or various photo albums.

We started with Music, selecting it with the center Play/Pause button and using Seek buttons to scroll through a menu like that seen on an iPod’s home menu — Now Playing, Shuffle Songs, Playlists and so on. The Menu button worked as with iPod, sending us back one screen each time we pressed it.

Once a song was selected, its title, artist and album were displayed on the right, and a large image of the song’s album art took up the left half of our iMac screen. A giant progress bar took up the lower edge of the screen.

We backed out of Music and into Videos, where we chose from a list of Movie Trailers, Movies, Music Videos, TV Shows and Video Podcasts.

The Photos section is similar to Videos. It shows a list of iPhoto content; in our case, it listed Library, Last Roll, Last 12 Months and the three albums that we had stored in Apple’s photo-organizing software. Whenever one of these listed items was highlighted, the photos from that album or section were displayed in a mini slideshow on the right. Selecting the section started a full-screen slideshow.

DVD use is simple with the remote; we used its Seek buttons once again to navigate around menus in the movie “Shrek” without a problem.

We liked the remote’s simplicity, but we wish Apple had included a Power button, and made it work like a scroll-wheel iPod. And Front Row itself lacks many of the functions of the iPod and iTunes software, like the ability to rate songs, to show only a song’s album art or lyrics, or to accompany the music with a colorful visualization.

We liked the iMac’s built-in iSight video camera and a smart little built-in application called Photo Booth that takes your picture with as many as 16 different contortions and can keep you entertained for a while.

All in all, we can heartily recommend the iMac G5.

• Email: MossbergSolution@wsj.com