yes, it's a non story, but what was Steve's reaction when Apple Corp sent him a similar letter in the late 1970 that they didn't like his hippie self using "Apple" and mooching off their fame and name. That little fiasco was "no big deal" right?

What was Steve's reaction when Cisco pointed out at iPhone LAUNCH they still owned the "iPhone" trademark?

On the other hand why would one company CEO bother Jobs about something like that? It's not professional either. That's for lawyers and any lawyer would have said to just pick a new name as apple was rigorously defending their trademark and to move on.

Isn't this against the terms of the App Store because the data is already available via Apple's website with the Safari browser. Why would they make an app that duplicates existing functionality.... people get rejected for that and sent to the back of the approval line.

the real question is why APPLE needs this API for THEIR applications? If it's so important to privacy, why isn't it locked out better in the first place.. or do only "friendly" companies get to use it?

it's crowd-sourced editing!

It's ALREADY sold to Apple... Apple paid Samsung 500 Million last fall (see Steve's "cash is king" comments) to pre-order chips. That gets them first place in line for new toys like this.

Somebody was using the Bozo sort to make those top spots more visible.

If the top spot is really that important, then Apple should put any 10 random apps on the same page as the top ten by downloads... if being in a certain spot is so important (and iPhone app buyers so gullible), everybody should get a shot!

It's less evil than that. Intel has a monopoly (from patents) on chipsets for intel processors starting with the i5/7 (maybe sooner I stopped caring and bought a mac) and the next atom.. this is why Nvidia is taking yet another jab at them while OEMS sit silently and take it. Even though Apple uses Nvidia NOW, they're playing with Intel to jump to light peak about the same time Intel cuts off Nvidia from making laptop chipsets... how polite!

What's Intel's rush for USB3? Most of the PC market CAN'T buy their chipsets anyplace else. Why release it now, when they can make everybody buy new in 2 years to get the feature?

What makes it doubly bad for anybody else is that in 2011 when Intel finally does release a chipset with USB3, whatever bugs or tweaks their product has will instantly become "de facto" standard everybody releasing products/chipsets NOW will have the "astroturf tech media" calling existing products "broken" the day blessed Intel's hits. This is just like Microsoft shut down the performance for 64bit processors when AMD was 3 years ahead on the desktop.... until Intel started shipping 64bits now 32 & 64 is in the same box.

Nvidia's got to be sore.. they priced themselves out of AMD buying them and now nobody with the cash can touch them due to anti-trust concerns. (AMD/ATI can't, VIA doesn't have the cash, and Intel can't buy them [AT] and can just let them die off) Nvidia made the day for everybody else... their video cards keep pros and gamers buying expensive Intel processors for the last 10 years, their graphic chips help Microsoft found Xbox on sold ground... but like the "safety" prom date nobody's returning their calls now.

Why would Apple push HTML5 and push to obsolete MS IE dominance only to tie iPhone to the boat-anchor of Flash and closed Adobe programs?

The last several visible Mac exploits in hacker contests have been Adobe Flash plugins that are poorly written.. why contaminate iPhone?

iPhone safari uses a similar engine to desktop safari and HTML5 should be everywhere... Safari, Opera, Firefox... why do we NEED Flash to browse pages? We certainly don't need Video Pop-up ads!!!

generally rules for repair of other items like Cars require you to be told up front in very specific terms the part will be rebuilt (in the case of engines and transmissions) opposed to new, especially if it is out-of-warranty repair.

IBM has a similar term "Servicable Used Part" to identify non-new parts sent back to the warehouse to be tested and repackaged. But the warranty agreement specifically says the parts replaced under service plans may be used and under IBM's server warranties they have less than one day to fix it, and you can keep running the CE to your site until it's right!

I know Apple makes you sign a similar thing for replacement parts that I signed to get warranty work done, but for things like motherboards that have $600+ replacement costs they better be putting in new parts if that's what they're charging for, but I'm sure they follow the "letter" of the law.

part of driving an electric car is to use the regenerative breaking features to regain breaking energy, it's the point of the vehicle. In a gas car all that "acceleration" is literally burned off when you hit the breaks... it's simply lost as friction and you have no way to recover it.

The magic number is about 500 miles, that's what my mini-van does on a full tank of cruise-controlled highway driving. The real problem is the recharging. Once you burn up your miles, it can be up to 8 hours to recharge... that totally sucks versus 10-15 minutes at the service station to fill up gas. At this point fuel cells seem most interesting because they convert hydrocarbons chemically to electricity, which is 2-3x as efficient as burning the gas for mechanical energy. Because the conversion is controlled it's easier to control the environmental byproducts in fuel cells. Hydrocarbons (gas, diesel, ethanol) are still the best reasonable energy storage mechanisms for easy access to large amounts of energy.