That's about the most ignorant summary ever. Engadget and Tim Stevens should be embarrassed.

"...an industry heavy-weight that is finally delivering on years of rumor and speculation."

I think Thomas Ricker needs to review the history of the iPhone, it's SDK, the availability of GPS, then relearn what "years" means.

"And before the EE's here jump down my throat, I know the explanation above is flawed."

It sure is, Jon. No explanation is better than such an erroneous one.

"UGGGGHHHHH! Thats a lot of wasted energy!"

A reactive load doesn't waste energy, it simply stores and releases it.

"A CFL draws unevenly from the "current" side and very little from the "voltage" side. The actual wattage (power) is the same for both bulbs."

There is no such thing as drawing from the "voltage" side, in fact there is no "current" side and "voltage" side. Power is the product of voltage and current. The phase relationship between current and voltage is what is important.

12.5mm thickness has always been a standard. If you are too young to realize that you might want to keep it to yourself. Today, thinness has caused many notebooks to sacrifice the ability to take 12.5mm drives but virtually all notebooks too them once upon a time. The older generation MBP 17 would take 12.5mm; the new ones I don't know.

They don't; you just get that impression from a few idiots here that worship Apple. To fanboys, you are either an enemy or a friend.

Why do people like Adam feel qualified to comment?

No, they just give it away for free. Apple has to have a business case for this independent of the Pre.

What Apple does do is change their products to serve NO customer's interest but rather to deliberately damage the functionality of competition. There is no good way to look at this.

"From a tree hugger's perspective, this is definitely not an improvement."

Wow, for someone so pedantic with regards to percentages it's amazing how willfully incorrect you are with your own statements.

"It's been proven beyond a doubt that in blind testing, "CFL haters" will always vote for the color rendition and quality of light of a CFL above a standard incandescent."

No it hasn't, not by a country mile.

The test you referenced is garbage testing from a garbage publication. Here's how they described their color testing...

"To gather objective data, we used a Konica Minolta CL-200 chroma meter to measure color temperature and brightness ... Our subjective data came from a double-blind test with three PM staffers and Jesse Smith, a lighting expert from Parsons The New School for Design, in Manhattan. We put our participants in a color-neutral room and asked them to examine colorful objects, faces and reading material, then rate the bulbs’ performance."

The color meter they used is incapable of measuring CRI. Without knowing CRI, color temperature measurements cannot be compared. No objective color rendering measurements were performed and incandescent lighting, as a group, is substantially superior to fluorescent in CRI. It's objectively measurable; no double-blind testing is needed.

As for your claim that "CFL haters" will always choose CFL lighting, that's preposterous. The test used only 4 testers with precious little to characterize their qualifications or preferences. Your claim is as close to a lie as it can be.

I am a CFL hater and that's because I understand color rendering, not just pretend to. Even ignoring that huge difference, CFLs are incompatible with many light switches. I'd rather have true quality of light and a device that doesn't destroy my dimmer and blink incessantly when it should be off. For the pennies it costs, it's a no-brainer.

haha, jake, you talk like 100KW would be no big deal. A typical residential 200A, single phase service isn't even half that. With electrical service common today, a 100KW charger would be impossible for virtually all homes and 250KW, needless to say, is even more absurd. If you want to avoid expensive, systemic retrofits to electrical infrastructure you need to be thinking more in terms of 5-10KW chargers, not 100 or 250. How does that technology sound, jake? We aren't getting there without a lot of pain.