Ultimately, our goal with our tools should be to accomplish our tasks with as much efficiency as possible. For writing, the primary goal is getting the words recorded. The most efficient way to accomplish that will vary from person to person, but it's not unreasonable to assume that many people are more effective writers when focus on the task at hand is clear.

As unitaskers, typewriters offer are pretty targeted. Insert paper, type, take paper out. Formatting options are minimal, and there's no Free Cell. In many ways I miss my typewriter for the narrowness of its focus. But, even if I were to draft on a typewriter, at this point I would still have to get it into a computer some how -- my agent and book editor are both completely paperless during editorial. And, frankly, they require a Word doc. Word. Bleh.

But that doesn't mean I have to write in Word. And, in fact, aside from a computer manual many years ago I don't. For singularity of purpose, WordPad or its Mac-equivalent TextEdit are more than adequate for recording words. But when you get into the next phase of the writing process, other needs come up.

That's when you start looking at the tools available. And what works for individuals varies, though that need for focus often holds for many. Tomreedtoon, in his typical disdainful cleverness that misses point, nonetheless dances around a good question, the question of value.

WordPad and TextEdit don't offer true full screen, so, while free and ubiquitous, may not provide necessary value despite their simplicity and ready availability. WriteRoom, at twenty-five bucks, doesn't offer a lot for the money, though it may still be perfect choice for some people. Dark Room is hard to argue with since it's free.

Further value, though, comes from what you can do when you need to move away from raw word recording and get in to revisions, tracking research, or other details that are also part of writing. That's where, I think, the value of more robust software packages begins to outstrip even the free price of Dark Room, and certainly the twenty five bucks of WriteRoom. Individuals have to decide what they need, though. I speak from necessity as a Mac user (and whatever to those who have religious objections to the tool I use), but the kind of writing you do, your working methods, and your ultimate target for finished work will certain come in to play as to the tool you choose.

Bloggers may find themselves well served by MacJournal, which offers full screen AND blog editing and posting tools, entry organization, and other features which may be of value to bloggers. (WinJournal is the windows equivalent.) StoryMill, my choice, works well for me as a fiction writer. Scrivener is more free-form, probably better for people writing non-fiction and research. Montage for screenwriters also includes full screen mode. (Does Final Draft? I dunno.)

Even if I spend 80-90% of my first draft time in the minimally distracting fullscreen mode in StoryMill, my revisions require more time in ordinary window mode. That's where the power behind the fullscreen feature becomes important. So the choice, to me, seems like it's not just about getting fullscreen mode, but about getting it in a software tool that addresses the complete writing process in the way that you work.

Google finds the actual me, among several other folks with the same name, on the first page. Simple enough, with variety well represented so searchers will likely find the particular "me" they're looking for easily enough (probably not me).

Cuil associates my photo with links to another (rather famous and beloved) fellow of the same name. I'm sure this man's friends and family would be thrilled to see my lamer picture attached to his obituary.

Ultimately, it's not about where I land in searches for my name in particular, though. It's about the strange way Cuil displays results and makes connections. It's clunky and and screwy, and a long way from worth using.

I'm voting for President Not McSame and Vice-President Not McSame, whoever they may be. Once againsa presidential election comes down to deciding between a shitty choice and a shittier choice. (And, sorry, Hilladroids, she's also shitty.)

ANYONE who presumes to run for president is arrogant.

Is the main reason I didn't renew my Salon subscription this year.

So childish of you to give a damn about the Constitution, or the expect the Democratic candidate to keep his word. Stop caring about unimportant stuff, like freedom, honor, and integrity.