Trying to find honest reviews of web hosts is next to impossible. Do a search on Google and you get a ton of spammy, referral sites. The Web Hosting Talk forum is probably the best resource for real reviews from users. After doing some reading there I came across this thread: StableHost - 50% Off For Life - cPanel and LiteSpeed - US & Europe Locations. Further research found nothing but glowing reviews for StableHost and practically nothing negative.

I opted for their middle hosting plan (5GB/100GB, free domain) which drops to $5.45 if you sign up for a year at a time. With the WHT50 coupon you get 50% off for life which makes a whole year of hosting with domain name come out to $32.72. If you offered me hosting for $2.75 a month I'd probably ask what the catch is. Turns out there is no catch, just great hosting.

After signing up and switching over this site, I noticed an immediate increase in speed. Pages in the WordPress admin area would take a couple seconds to start loading and just seemed a little sluggish on LunarPages. The exact same install on StableHost is fast, really fast. I don't think I've seen WordPress run this fast before. I attribute this to nice servers that have not been oversold. The middle hosting plan only gets you 5GB of space and 100GB of transfer, but that is more realistic than a host offering unlimited space and bandwidth for 5 bucks. That just leads to overutilization and slow servers.

Performance is also helped by the use of Lightspeed instead of Apache. Lightspeed is a commercial web server that offers improved performance over Apache, but the extra cost probably keeps it from being more popular on shared hosts.

I've only had previous experience with GoDaddy, ResellerZoom and LunarPages, but I would choose StableHost over them and any other shared web host in a heartbeat. Throw in the free domain name and the hosting technically only costs about $23 a year. The WHT50 coupon could end at anytime so I'd jump on it if you are considering a new host or moving hosts.

Seriously good hosting for $2.75 a month - use WHT50 coupon

• Easier to fill wide mouth and option to use ice cubes
• Cap threads are made of plastic rather than metal, little nicer to drink from
• No coating on lip of spout, my brother has had this rub off over time on his newer bottles
• Better grip from the built in grooves on body of bottle
• Compatible with all Sigg caps

I really like these bottles and take one to work with me everyday. I quit our "water cooler club" which was costing close to $6 a month just for water so it has more than paid for itself. Amazon has them at a very reasonable price with several colors to choose from.

Sigg Wide Mouth Bottle - 1L (34oz) at Amazon.com

The Koss PortaPro's feature a "Comfort Zone" that places an additional pad above your ear where it can be set to transfer most of the "clamping" feeling from your ears up to the side of your head. This makes the PortaPro the most comfortable open, over the head headphones I've ever used. Ear discomfort is gone and I'm able to wear them for extended periods.

Along with being comfortable, they sound great. In fact I think I like how they sound better than the PX100's. The PortaPro's pump out some very nice low end while staying balanced and clear. The PX100's are a little more laid back and sound darker. The PortaPro's just have that extra bit of punch.

As of this writing the PortaPro's are $32 at Amazon while the PX100's are $50. Between the comfort, price and sound quality of the PortaPro's they are easily my favorite headphones now. They definitely get my sound geek stamp of approval.

Koss PortaPro Headphones at Amazon

For St. Patrick's Day we had dinner and hung out with friends and babies. Lighting was fairly low with a chandelier fixture in the dining room and one floor lamp bouncing off the ceiling in the living room. Even wide open at f/1.8, AUTO ISO was getting bumped up to keep the shutter above 1/40 second in some shots. Combine that with babies who don't politely sit still for pictures and you have yourself a difficult shooting situation. Take a look through the gallery:

From St. Patty's 2009

With one of the kit lenses or even the 18-200mm VR, most of these shots wouldn't have been possible. I had some ISO to play with on some, but most of them are hitting 1600 or 3200. If I stepped up to a minimum f/3.5 lens, my shutter would have dropped even more and my "keeper" rate would have dropped from 10% to maybe 3-5% without adding flash.

I'm extremely pleased with the lens. I swore off pixel peeping so I'm not going to go into boring details or shooting test charts. All I cared about initially was if the lens let me get indoor shots without using flash all of the time. If you're happy with the DX format (and happy not spending thousands more on a new FX body and lens) then I suspect you'll find the image and build quality of the lens more than satisfactory. What surprised me is that I'm starting to like the 35mm f/1.8 more than the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 VR AF-S DX .

One thing to consider with lenses is the size and weight. Compared to the 18-55mm the 35mm isn't a whole lot smaller or lighter, but next to the 18-200mm it is night and day. I got the 18-200mm as a walk around, jack of all trades lens and now the size and weight have become deterrents to taking it out with me. The 18-200mm weighs 1.23 lbs. The 35mm weighs 0.45 lbs. The D90 weighs 1.6 lbs by itself. That's a lot of weight to carry around all day on vacation or on a night out and I'd rather have 0.78 lbs less most of the time. The other difference is the 35mm situates it's weight closer to the body of the lens. The 18-200mm is front heavy and more awkward to carry around, it usually ends up pointed straight down with the zoom fully extended when I hang the camera on my shoulder.

I could never use the 50mm f/1.8 as a walk around lens because it was simply too long. I use the wider end of the 18-200mm more than I use the long end so I don't think I'll miss the extra reach. The 35mm f/1.8 isn't perfect, but it is such a well rounded lens that it might replace my 18-200mm and never leave my camera. At $200 I think it packs the best bang for your buck in the entire Nikon DX lens line up.

I got my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 at Amazon.

The gameplay is pretty darn simple. You have to connect your balls of goo into a structure to reach a pipe for your remaning goo balls to escape from. Each level has a goal to reach so you can't go crazy building your bridges and towers. There's a couple different types of goo that you have to use to your advantage. The physics and writing in the game are great. The demo only covered the first of four parts and I'm looking forward to the rest.

Pick up World of Goo this weekend if you want a quirky little game that requires a little more thought and problem solving than your average game.

I just finished playing through Tie Fighter for the first time in at least 8 years. I wore out several joysticks playing X-Wing and Tie Fighter as a kid and I always favored Tie Fighter for the simple reason that you were playing to serve the Emporer. 90% of Star Wars games are presented from the Rebel and Jedi perspective so this changes things up like playing as the Germans in [insert any WWII shooter here]. Also, you actually fly some ships without shields which adds a level of difficulty missing in X-Wing.

The Video Game Journey isn't about long meandering reviews and I'll get to the point quickly on each post. Star Wars: Tie Fighter is one of the best games ever. Considering it's 1994 release, the game is still extremely playable and addicting. The X-Wing Collector Series release is playable right out of the box in Windows XP so if you want to play this classic let me know, I'll let you borrow my copy and a USB joystick.

Tie Fighter = 9.5

All that leads to an enormous amount of micromanagement. That's not necessarily bad because it gives you control over your economy so you can build up your cities and pump out goods. That part of the game is actually pretty fun, but problems arise when you actually want to beat the game. I played 4 or 5 games and lost every single time when hundreds of Royal troops showed up at my doorstep and wiped me off the map after I declared independence.

Turns out the King will add troops to the expeditionary force depending on how much rebel sentiment you have generated and higher levels also increase the frequency. So the problem I ran into is I built my rebellion rating slowly over time as I built up my cities which led to gigantic enemy fleets and armies. I found some forum posts where people had figured out how to actually beat the game and once you figure that out the game becomes absolutely boring.

The flow of the game pretty much goes like this: build 2-3 cities, make lots of money trading, stockpile weapons and horses for Dragoons, destroy all but one inland city, get 50% rebel rating as quickly as possible, declare independence and then just wait while the expeditionary force throws themselves against the fortified walls of your city.

So while you can build out a vast network of cities and have fun doing that you'll never win the game. You can beat the game with only one city, but build more than 3 and you'll have a tough time winning. You can play on enormous continent sized maps, but what's the point if you only build 1 or 2 cities right next to each other.

Initially the game provides the illusion that you are free to decide how to play the game, but really you have to follow specific steps or you might as well just start a new game. The big problem I have with the game is that there is procedurally only one way to win, but it doesn't tell you that. I ran into a similar problem with Oblivion; as soon as I found out how many of the stupid gates I would have to close to continue along the story arc I just gave up (I went through the side quests, but never actually finished the game). Finding out how to beat a game shouldn't make you want to stop playing, if it does that means it isn't fun.

So if you are interested in a good turn-based strategy game look to the original Civilization IV and it's two expansions and avoid Colonization.

What's so great about it? The level of detail. Bombs and artillery leave craters infantry can use for cover. Buildings take damage and realistically collapse. Armored vehicles have weak rear armor that make flanking a required strategy. Infantry get pinned down by raking machine gun fire. Units attack in their line of sight making unit placement key. All these little details calculate into the strategy used to accomplish each mission.

The single player campaigns are well worth a play through on Normal difficulty which puts up a pretty good challenge without being frustrating. At higher difficulties you've got too be really good to keep up with the computer.

Highly recommended if you are a PC gamer of any sort.

In terms of user interface, the biggest departure from Diablo though is the use of the right-mouse button to move forward rather than just clicking on the ground. The level of environmental interaction is actually quite good and I'd say ahead of it's time. Tables and chairs are separate from each other, you can kick rocks as you run or knock down walls to discover hidden areas. The problem is you can run into and get hung up on those little objects. If you get caught between a chair and table you can keep running into either one to eventually push it out of the way or you can swing your mouse behind your character to backtrack and find a better path.

Diablo II came out the same year and it seems they tried to copy a bit from Blizzard's masterpiece without actually thinking it through. All weapons and armor have durability like Diablo II, but the rate of wear and the cost of repair is ridiculous. On top of that there is no handy way to get back to town to repair or replenish health potions; they should have copied town portals too. The best part about RPGs is the loot. Problem was all my best gear was constantly broken (or disappearing because I forgot to remove it before its durability ran out) and I was just using whatever I could pick up.

Nox won't be getting a repeat play through with the other classes, but it does give some insight into how things have changed in the aftermath of Diablo II. If you're an action RPG fan then it might be worth playing (let me know if you want a copy). Considering its age I'll give it a solid 7.

A few years ago I came across the Koss SportaPro headphones and was very impressed with their sound and comfort level. I handed those down to the wife to work out with and looked for another pair to use at work (programming requires good tunes). My requirements weren't too strict:

• Reasonably priced (under $50)
• Good sound quality
• On ear pads to allow in ambient noise (to avoid startling taps on the shoulder)
• Comfortable and easy to put on and remove

These few parameters helped eliminate a lot of products. I eventually ended up looking at the Sennheiser PX 100's, another pair of SportaPro's, and Grado SR60's (pricier and bulkier than I wanted). This review at Dan's Data finally sold me on the Sennheisers and I couldn't be happier.

In the 2-3 years I've had the PX 100's I estimate I've put 1500-2000 hours of music through them. The best way to describe how they sound is that they don't sound like headphones. They're clear and fairly detailed without being fatiguing in the high end and quite possibly pump out the perfect amount of bass. I highly recommend the Sennheiser PX 100's if you are looking for a good moderately priced pair of cans.

Sennheiser PX 100 (black)

Sennheiser PX 100 (white)