So... British English or American English?

I write a lot online, on my blog, in emails, on various networking sites, and for tech sites like GigaOM and ZDNet.

In my own — personal — writing, I try to write in the English I was taught; British English. In formal pieces for GigaOM et al I try to write in the English of the country in which those sites are based; American English.

I must admit that it's actually becoming harder and harder to remember what is correct where. Any word with a 'u' in it is obviously British English. Any mention of 'pants' in polite company is obviously American. Pavements must be watched with care. But those 'z's and 's's are a constant torment. And then there's odd concepts... like 'fortnight.' Increasingly, I find words and phraseology homogenis(z)ing oddly, creating a mid-Atlantic munge that typically ends up including words likely to grate for both US and UK audiences.

All of which leads to the question. I see both British and American English all day, every day. I am (generally) comfortable with both, although 'aluminum' will bug me for ever and ever. I would imagine that most internationally engaged British readers are similar; we are surrounded by American English, and are generally comfortable accepting most of its differences to the language we were taught.

What about Americans? Does British English appear odd/quaint/annoying/wrong... or do you generally just read it quite happily?

And what about the rest of the world? When you read my British or American English on a site like GigaOM, do you wish for a UK spelling, an American spelling, either one so long as it's consistent, or do you simply neither notice nor care?

I'll probably keep writing the big pieces for places like GigaOM in their American English. That feels like the right thing to do. It's the shorter pieces — the Today in Infrastructure, and the Daily Links — where I find myself falling back into spellings with which I am instinctively comfortable. Is this a bad thing? Should I stop that, and remind myself — forcefully — to write like an American?

I honestly welcome your thoughts...

Google takes browser obsession too far; relegates Santa to a little box

For some years, Google and NORAD have teamed up to apply their tracking and web skills to the task of following Santa as he travels around the world.

Initially, this was brought to us via the wonders of Google Earth; a downloadable application that looked pretty impressive, full-screen on a big monitor, as Santa swooped from place to place, drawing ever-closer to insufficiently sleepy little people.

Gradually, Google's web tendencies began to exert themselves. First - usefully - we could see Santa on a Google Map, embedded in a web page. Then - as a teaser for what was to follow when we went full screen in *proper* Google Earth - Google offered a pokey little Google Earth widget, embedded into a web page. Sort of like watching a film on an iPhone instead of on a *proper* cinema screen.

And this year? Google appear to have withdrawn any way to see Santa in the proper, downloaded, Google Earth application. All we have is the Google Earth plug-in, embedded into the browser.

It's nice enough, I suppose, but Santa really can't SWOOP in a pokey little window.

Google has plenty of reasons to push web apps over downloaded applications, and many of them are ones I would (obviously) agree with. But please, please, please, can we have Santa back in the downloaded version of Google Earth, so that he can return to swooping across the glowing expanse of my cinema display?