So what can you do with Unite? Several things, including:

• Share files, including photo downloading and music streaming.
• Host chats with your friends.
• Run a web server for a simple web site.
• Leave or receive notes on your computer.

Unite requires an Opera account, and an alpha build of Opera 10b (Windows, Mac, Linux).

Opera Unite is a local web server, but it interacts with a proxy server. This means that end users don’t need to establish a firewall or set up port forwarding on their machines. They can just install Opera and go.

After starting a service, you can set three levels of access control: Public (open to anyone), Limited (open to anyone with a password), and Private (available to you). With file sharing and web serving, you also control which directory you want to make available.

Once you have made a directory available, you can send the url — in the form of http://computernickname.yourmyoperausername.operaunite.com/ — to your friends. It’s viewable in any browser, including mobile devices.

Don’t be a dummy: be a safe(r) Unite user

As with any service that lets users share their hard drive’s contents, Opera Unite can be a potential resource hog and security hole. Opera got it right by making these services easy to start or stop, and by supporting restricted access via password. Still, it’s up to users to understand how it all works.

For example, I stumbled across one user’s web server directory that hosted PHP files. Unite, however, is a simple and light-weight HTTP server. There is no PHP, which means that everything — including his database configuration details — is being served as plain text.

So there are two lessons learned:

1. Unite is a basic non-Apache server with no modules that means there’s no PHP, Perl, Python, or even server-side includes available.
2. Don’t share directories with sensitive data, and limit the number of directories that are exposed via Unite

Something else to know: Unite ties you in to the My Opera social network and makes other members aware that your services are running.

Is Unite a game-changer?

I think it depends on what the game is.

I don’t think Unite is compelling enough for most users to switch to Opera as their primary browser or to join the My Opera community. But I would not be surprised if it gained some traction with the geek set.

The concept of Opera Unite is pretty powerful. I can see this being useful as an impromptu office file sharing network, or to stream music from a computer at home to another at a friend’s house party.

Keep in mind that Unite also comes with a JavaScript API that supports file I/O (input/output). In a way, Opera is moving us closer to ubiquitous computing and the browser as OS.

And perhaps that’s the real story of Opera Unite: it is now dead-simple to give as much as you get from the web and use the skills you already have to build new tools.

View larger version

One of the most recent entrants to this fairly crowded field, is Buzzword by Virtual Ubiquity, which was recently acquired by Adobe.

I tested Buzzword using Firefox 2.0.0.10 and Camino 1.5 on Mac OS X 10.4. Buzzword officially supports Safari 2.0.4 or 3.0.3, Firefox 1.5 (Windows only), Firefox 2.0 (Mac and Windows), Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 or 7.0. I didn’t have any problems with Camino, however. I’m also betting it will run just as well in Opera 9.x. No matter the brower, the Flash Player 9 is required.

Buzzword was developed using Flex (back end) and Flash (front end). The Flash interface means that Buzzword’s front-end has the kind of richness associated with desktop applications. Your default view is a page view, allowing you to see where your document pages break. Formatting controls have a high level of screen-to-print fidelity.

Other notable features?

• Document version history and restore
• Document sharing and collaboration
• Granular control over line and paragraph spacing
• Page headers and footers
• Endnotes (footnotes)
• Drag-able margin control that operates much like Microsoft Word
• Annotate a document with comments
• Numbered scroll bar indicates what page you are viewing
• Inline spell-checking
• Familiar keyboard commands

While Buzzword is darn sexy, it’s not perfect. You can share documents for collaboration or export documents, for example, but you can’t make a document public. You can link to it, but viewers will have to sign up for a Buzzword account. I’d also like to see Buzzword offer an HTTPS option for logins and document editing.

That said, I still feel comfortable making the bold claim that Buzzword is the most robust web word processor available. Google Docs, ThinkFree, and Zoho win for their integration with their other office productivity applications, but Buzzword excels at what it does.

Disagree? Share in the comments.

Related:

• Zoho lets you edit off line, Dust-Me Selectors version 2.0 debuts
• Tips for using the web to run your business
• Review: WorkSpace
• Google Spreadsheets

Miro, formerly known as Democracy Player, likes to compare itself to the on-demand video service Joost. The two are quite different, however. Joost is very much on-demand television over the Internet with chat and sharing features. Joost’s shows are, for the most part, full-length programs provided by major media brands. But Miro is essentially a feed reader for video. Think of Miro as an open-source version of iTunes with less of a focus on audio.

With Miro, you can subscribe to channels via RSS. Most of the content available via Miro is high-quality video podcasts or television segments, not 30-or-60-minute television shows. Some of the content providers are big brands, though. ABC News, the NBA, and Wired TV produce just a few of the videos available. And many, if not most of these videos are ad-free.

As with iTunes, Miro lets you create playlists. You can also import videos from your hard drive into your Miro library. And though it’s not a highlighted feature, Miro can also manage and play audio files.

Want to share your channel line up with friends or between computers? Not a problem. Just export or import your feeds with an OPML file.

My favorite feature is Miro’s integration with major video sharing sites. You can search Yahoo! Video, Google Video, Youtube, Revver, and Blip.tv (among others), and import the search results’ RSS feed as a channel. True, RSS feeds from search are a feature of the aforementioned sites, but I like the ability to search and save from within the user interface.

Is it worth switching to Miro from iTunes or Joost? I think it complements Joost’s programming, but it doesn’t have any of Joost’s social features and lacks the heavier-hitters in Joost’s content lineup. Miro trumps iTunes for video playback, but iTunes still wins for music management. If you have an iPod, sticking with iTunes is a bit of a no-brainer. And because Miro’s channels are RSS, you can watch a good deal of its content by subscribing through iTunes. But it is open source, and that means a lot to many people.

Have you test-driven Miro? Do you prefer your Internet video in short bursts, or in a more TV-like experience. What software or web applications do you use to view the video podcasts you follow? Do we really need a desktop-based RSS feed reader for video? Say what you mean and mean what you say in the comments.

What do you get in the pro edition that’s not available in the community version?

• JSON support
• Support for secure FTP connections (via SSH & SSL)
• JavaScript debugging for Internet Explorer
• Project reporting engine
• Priority support for one year
• Access to preview and nightly builds

Earlier, no-cost releases of Aptana supported SFTP server connections. I’m disappointed to see that change with the release of a professional version.

Aptana is, without question, one of the best front-end development environments available (I haven’t used its server-side language features much). At $99, it hits a sweet-spot between affordable text editors like Panic’s Coda (Mac only; currently $79; regularly $99), BBEdit (Mac-only; $125), or NoteTab (Window only; $29.95) and pricier editors such as Dreamweaver (Mac / Win; $399).

At its full $199 price, however, it becomes harder to justify its purchase. For $100 less, Coda gives you many of Aptana’s core features and adds some sexy bits (like a built-in shell emulator and CSS color picker) of its own. For $74 less, BBEdit gives you a wider range of language support and a deliciously uncluttered interface. Plus there are some powerful free text editors such as jEdit (Java-based; cross-platform) and HTML-Kit (Windows only) that are good enough for many developers.

What’s your take? Have you used Aptana? Would you consider a professional license? Are you too wedded to your current text editor to switch?

Related posts:

• Open source favorites
• What’s your favorite text editor or IDE?
• Aptana IDE: Is it the text editor you’ve been looking for?

• Support for plain text
• Syntax highlighting for HTML, JavaScript, CSS, PHP, SQL, Java, and Perl.
• Limited auto-complete
• Ability to connect to multiple FTP servers at once
• Ability to upload, download, rename and delete files.
• Line numbering

Now what if this was all available in a web-based application? Enter WorkSpace.

WorkSpace — which currently is currently in limited beta testing — is an online text editing environment with an eye towards web development. You can create documents and save them in your hosted sandbox, or directly to your server via FTP.

Uploading files, creating new files and editing existing files is an easy, intuitive process. Copying files is a little bit trickier. You can’t, for example, copy a file to the same folder. You must select the file, choose to copy it, then paste it in a new directory. Compare this to, say, Transmit which will automatically save the duplicate file in the same directory as “filename copy.extension.”

Moving a file takes some creative thinking as well. Much like the *nix command line, WorkSpace does not allow you to move files, per se. Instead, you have two options:

1. Copy the file to a new directory, then delete the original.
2. Use the ‘Rename’ command and prepend the new path to the file name.

For example, to move “colors.css” from the root directory to “styles/,” for example, you can just rename the file “styles/colors.css.” A better interface, in my opinion, would include “Move” as an option for managing files, and handle the how behind the scenes.

WorkSpace also doesn’t yet offer version control or (to my knowledge) integration with a versioning system. You also can’t share access to a particular workspace, which makes this app fine for individual developers, but not for teams. Another “would be nice to have”: some sort of debugging or error-checking interface. I wouldn’t be surprised, however, to see these features in a final release version, or in WorkSpace 2.0.

Let’s not forget the big, honking issue with WorkSpace: security. I don’t mean to state that the site is insecure. But it does raise some basic questions of trust and protection. Are you willing to give a third party the user names and passwords of your servers? What kind of encryption do they use to connect to your FTP server? Where’s the indication that the communications between your browser and their servers are encrypted? Are their servers well-protected against intrusion? If you delete a remote WorkSpace, what happens to that user name and password data? Those are questions that aren’t answered anywhere on their web site.

I do like the idea behind WorkSpace. It gives users the ability to code from any computer with a browser and an internet connection, but without requiring extra software. The downside is that you’re trusting a company with all of your web site data. I’m not sure the slight gain in the ability to work remotely is worth the trade-off of giving WorkSpace server access.

I’d really like to see some clarity about what WorkSpace is doing to protect user data. Show me that you’re at least trying to keep my FTP user name and password from getting jacked in transmission. Or alternatively, offer a self-hosted option for those who don’t trust third parties with their sensitive server data.

If you’d like to give WorkSpace a test drive, you can sign up for a beta testing account on their web site.

UPDATE: Aptana has released a beta version that has Ruby on Rails support

I first heard of Aptana in the comment thread of a Lifehacker post (about free CSS editors). I’ve been using it on and off for the last few months, both at home and the office. It’s (almost) a dream piece of software for front-end web development. The down side: it’s software for front-end development.

View a larger version

Because it is a modified version of the Eclipse IDE, Aptana is also open source. It’s licensed under the Eclipse Public License, and freely available from the Aptana web site.

Aptana is written in Java, making it cross-platform. Windows, Mac and Linux versions are available. Aptana is also available as a plug-in for Eclipse. You’ll need to JRE 1.4.2 or higher installed.

Aptana bills itself as a tool for JavaScript and Ajax development. But it’s also a fantastically capable CSS and HTML Editor.

It’s specialization, however, is also its biggest drawback. If you also write a great deal of PHP, Ruby, .NET, XML, or SQL code, skip Aptana. There are several text editors far better suited to multi-lingual coding. In principle, you could use Aptana to develop in other languages. But it doesn’t (yet) offer syntax highlighting for them.

For front-end web developers, however, Aptana is drool-worthy — it’s downright sexy when you consider its (non-existent) price tag.

Pros of Aptana

• Tag auto close.
• Auto formatting.
• Syntax highlighting
• Built-in tree inspector
• Automatic quote and curly bracket balancing.
• JavaScript, CSS and HTML quick complete, including -moz-* properties for Mozilla-based browsers.
• CSS and HTML code hints: displays valid attributes and property values for the tag in question.
• Automatically stores your JavaScript variables, and offers a complete feature for them.
• Parses and debugs code on the fly.
• Live preview lets you view your pages without having to fire up a browser.
• Integrated FTP / SFTP
• Unlike jEdit, can store an FTP / SFTP password.
• Supports code folding

Cons

• Tree inspector does not display text nodes.
• Requires a right-click (or equivalent) to set up SFTP. Kind of a pain for Mac users.
• Limited to front-end web development. No syntax highlighting for PHP, Ruby, Java, etc. Aptana has added support for Ruby and PHP.
• Freeze-prone on Macs (PowerPC-based and to a lesser extent Intel-based)
• Doesn’t recognize innerHTML (which is not technically standard JavaScript, but is widely-supported). I originally stated that Aptana doesn’t recognize innerHTML. It does. My bad and apologies to the Aptana team.
• No support for server-side languages.
• Interface is a little bit busy. Lots of panels and panes. Not an interface native to Windows or Mac.

Used Aptana? Like it? Hate it? Let us know in the comments.

Related: What’s your favorite text editor or IDE?