It is quite true these days that sometimes the free software is as good or is just enough to beat paying the price for the retail counterpart, if one exists. I just have to think of OpenOffice.org and GIMP, both of which I sometimes use instead of Microsoft Office and Photoshop. I have all four and use all regularly, depending on whether I am on my desktop, laptop or at my machine at work.

I could not have confidently written such a statement five years ago, even though I regularly advocated and promoted free software available on the Internet. But now free software is getting less buggy and overloaded with advertising. As a plus, the rise of the open source movement has meant that many of the big programmes, such as OpenOffice and GIMP, are free of advertising or conditions. Sometimes companies release a free version of their retail software but with key features disabled. I tend to stay away from such programmes, unless they are really useful.

One advantage of the other, smaller programmes remains. Many people do not need all the features of the big software suites. Instead they can get what they want in smaller chunks now. One of my long-time favourites, IrfanView, is a simple image viewer with enough editing and classifying features to make it quicker and easier to use than GIMP or Photoshop when doing less sophisticated jobs.

So how do you pick and chose which ones suit your needs? Instead of downloading and trialling two or three in the same class, and thus clogging up your computer and eating up your time, look to reviews posted on some of the well known computing sites, such as CNet (which runs Download.com) and PCMag.

In case you missed the list, last month's issue of PCMag had a compilation of what the magazine believes are the best 157 free software tools. The publication claims that if you used all of the software in each category you would save up to $5,183. But who needs it all? The "Hall of Fame" list coughs up the usual suspects I regularly use: Adobe Reader, AIM (AOL Instant Messenger), Firefox (www.mozilla.com), GIMP, iTunes, OpenOffice.org, Skype, and WinAmp. But the magazine also recommends Audacity (audacity.sourceforge.net), an audio recorder and editor that I aim to use. I have been searching for a good one for a long time, if only to be able to record and save my favourite online detective radio shows.

You might also want to test out Thunderbird, Mozilla's free answer to the Outlook e-mail program. It has everything from calendars to encryption. Meanwhile Ubuntu (www.ubuntu.com) is a Linux-based operating system that comes preloaded with a lot of the above free software.

For more specific software needs, PCMag helpfully classifies all the choices by category, such as operating systems, antivirus/anti-malware, video, graphics and games/fun, for example.

Time to try and remove my preloaded Norton software, one of the hardest in the world to get rid of completely.

There are lots of choices, so take your pick at www.pcmag.com. The article containing the lists are on the home page. If not, try www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2260070,00.asp. If you have young children in your house you should also look for the separate article making recommendations on what kind of software you need to protect them online. It is called '12 Tools to Keep Kids Safe Online'.

Lastly, hail to the US judge who reversed his decision to block the Wikileaks site in the US over documents released by a Julius Baer Bank and Trust insider. The insider alleges that the Swiss bank was using shell companies in the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes, when all of the operations were actually being done in Switzerland. Because the site is hosted by a server in Sweden, Julius Baer somehow convinced the judge to go after the domain name provider, which is based in the US.

So while US residents found it difficult to access the site (there are ways around the block) all the rest of the world was able to access the documents. On February 29 the judge reversed his injunction, rightly citing First Amendment freedom of speech concerns and questions about legal jurisdiction.

"Attempting to interfere with the operation of an entire website because you have a dispute over some of its content is never the right approach," said an Electronic Frontier Foundation spokesperson.

Wikileaks claims to be "an uncensorable version of Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis".

Their goal is to ensure that whistle-blowers and journalists from around the world (think China) do not face jail for emailing sensitive or classified documents.

Since the site started it has revealed the lie behind the US government's statements on Guantánamo Bay by posting the prison's handbook. Wikileaks is not owned by Wikipedia, but operates in the same manner by trusting in the online community to vet documents and weed out the false ones.

The great danger is the damage to innocent reputations through any falsehoods. But so far the concept seems to be working.

Bermuda also has a big section on the site, with the documents relating to the Bermuda Housing Corporation scandal all online, including the famous "Son of the Soil" letter.

Send any comments to elamin.ahmed@gmail.com