TV-PGDecember 12, 2002: Turns out we missed one-- there's a No Doubt iPod available, too. Meanwhile, Apple sues another employee for revealing trade secrets, but this guy might have bigger things to worry about, and Quark reportedly claims that its customers will continue to buy Mac OS 9-booting Macs until the middle of next year...
But First, A Word From Our Sponsors
 

As an Amazon Associate, AtAT earns from qualifying purchases

 
Presenting... The LogoPod (12/12/02)
SceneLink
 

Whoops, looks like we missed one of those new-fangled celebrity iPods when we mentioned them yesterday; faithful viewer Larry (of MacMinute fame!) tipped us off to the fact that in addition to the fame-o-riffic Madonna, Tony Hawk, and Beck signature editions, Apple is also selling a limited edition No Doubt iPod, which features the band's logo laser-engraved on the back. To be fair, though, when we actually wrote that scene, apparently no one knew about the No Doubt model, as even MacMinute's coverage at the time had omitted it, and seriously, those guys are on top of everything.

Now, what's interesting about this No Doubt iPod isn't so much the implication that the band's members are probably Apple fans, which hints that you might have an infinitesimally greater shot at scoring with Gwen Stefani just because you're a Mac geek. (Note that we're not here to poop on anyone's dreams, no matter how insanely unlikely it is that they'll ever come true.) No, the intriguing bit is the fact that Apple apparently isn't restricting itself to laser-engraving signatures on these celebrity models, since logos are also fair game. Given that these "limited edition" CelebPods are raking in an extra $49 per unit, we figure that if Apple releases more iPods emblazoned with popular corporate logos, the company could make a mint.

But what corporate logos should Apple use? Nike? Krispy Kreme? Mr. Sparkle, a joint venture of Matsumura Fishworks and Tamaribuchi Heavy Manufacturing Concern? Wait, we've got it-- it's obvious what Apple needs to do: it should capitalize on the raging brand loyalty of the Mac community and start selling iPods with the Apple logo on them. Man, we bet those would sell like hotcakes!

Now that we've solved Apple's revenue problems once and for all, perhaps the company would consider moving beyond simple signatures and logos for its special edition iPods. Is there any particular reason they can't laser-etch faces into the iPod's shiny hinder? Because all joking aside, if Apple ever sees fit to release an Ellen Feiss iPod sporting a reasonable facsimile of everybody's favorite teen spokesdeity, we'd trade up in a second. Hey, if her likeness works so well on a pumpkin, why not on an iPod?

 
SceneLink (3886)
It's Worker Bee Redux (12/12/02)
SceneLink
 

Okay, granted, it's not exactly as heart-stoppingly significant as the whole "celebrity signatures on iPods" development, but we suspect there's at least a smidgen of drama to be extracted from Apple's latest tussle with Those Who Leak. No, that's not a bathroom joke (though such things are by no means beneath us-- our humor tests at a third grade level and we couldn't be prouder); we're talking about Apple's ongoing campaign to crucify, incarcerate, wreck the credit ratings of, smear grape jelly on, and otherwise make life generally unpleasant for any employees willing to violate the sanctity of the NDA by revealing product info to the unwashed masses before Uncle Steve gets to spring his big surprise.

If you remember the Worker Bee fracas from a couple of years back, then you're well-primed for this most recent development: faithful viewer Jailhouse Smythe reports that Apple yesterday slapped a former contract employee with a civil suit, alleging that Jose Lopez spilled the beans on the Power Mac, presumably by posting those spy photos that surfaced last July. CNET notes that Apple seeks "compensatory and exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and an injunction restraining Lopez from releasing future product information." However, one wonders how Apple expects Lopez to steal and release more trade secrets from Apple while the guy's in stir.

See, this sordid mess goes slightly beyond the Worker Bee paradigm of "sue the pants off those who would betray us"; according to an Associated Press article, in addition to Apple's civil suit, Mr. Lopez also has to contend with honest-to-goodness criminal charges. That's right, folks, last week the district attorney in Sacramento charged that he "did knowingly and willfully, and with the intent to appropriate a trade secret to his own use and the use of another, steal, take and carry away and use without authorization a trade secret, to wit: schematic drawings and engineering details of the Power Mac G4, belonging to Apple Computer Inc." The DA then "issued a warrant for his arrest." Ooooh, that can't be good.

Call us cynics, but we're going to go out on a limb here and guess that the DA wouldn't have sicced the cops on Jose "The Leak" Lopez unless Steve Jobs had applied a certain amount of... persuasion. We're not sure what sort of penalty that crime carries if Lopez is convicted, but if "Hang 'Em High" Steve and his Reality Distortion Field are anywhere in the vicinity of the judge when the sentencing comes down, we're guessing twenty-five to life. Gosh, we wonder how the other inmates treat intellectual property thieves in the Silicon Valley Big House? Something tells us that product squealers rank a notch or two beneath puppy kickers when it comes to deciding whom to pummel. Helpful hint for Mr. Lopez: a sharpened bedspring makes for a handy makeshift shiv!

Hmmm, tossing leakers in the slammer nary a month before Macworld Expo... you don't suppose Apple's trying to send a message or anything, do you? (We love the lil' goobers, but subtle they ain't.) Well, we're going to look on the bright side and take this as a sign that Big Things™ are coming in January-- things that Apple wants to keep even more secret than usual until then. And assuming no one decides to risk jail time telling anyone about them, we're perfectly content to wait it out for another few weeks.

 
SceneLink (3887)
The Quark Problem Solved (12/12/02)
SceneLink
 

Good news, Mac classicists: rumors are rampant that Mac OS 9 may have been quietly granted a reprieve. You may recall that Apple has been announcing the death of the "classic" Mac OS for quite a while, now; just check out this presentation on The Future of Mac OS 9 from the last MacHack-- thanks to faithful viewer John A. Vink for the tip (and the camerawork). Indeed, a few months back the company officially announced that, starting in 2003, new Macs would no longer boot into Mac OS 9 at all. As far as coffin nails go, that one looks to be pretty final.

Many people, however, see this decision as a gargantuan risk on Apple's part, since professionals who rely on specific applications and/or drivers which may run better (or only) in Mac OS 9 aren't likely to buy any new Macs until their tools gain Mac OS X support. There's a distinct possibility that Apple's gambit (obviously intended to force the slowpokes out there in Developerland to get on the stick and port to Mac OS X, already) will wind up depressing sales of pro Macs still further-- and those sales aren't looking too great to start with.

Well, here's where the rumors come in: according to Think Secret, representatives from Quark, currently the biggest bad boy when it comes to a lack of Mac OS X support, have been calling up important publishing customers to assure them that, despite Apple's claim to the contrary, Quark users "will still be able to buy Mac OS 9-booting hardware" after New Year's. Apparently the company is claiming that it "negotiated with Apple to ensure that XPress users would be able to buy new Mac OS 9-bootable Macs until the middle of next year." That could mean a couple of different things; either Apple has decided to hold off on killing Mac OS 9 bootability until later, or the company plans to keep offering existing hardware to any poor Quark-using saps who want to buy it, despite the fact that faster and ginchier Mac OS X-only Macs will be available.

If it's the latter, then we're really starting to believe all those folks who insist that Quark CEO Fred Ebrahimi is ninety-seven hues short of a Crayola Big Box. We've heard several anecdotes that indeed seem to place Fred at the top of the Crazy CEO Heap; we're not at liberty to repeat them, but suffice it to say that if they're true, several of the things Fred has done and said over the years makes Steve Jobs look like Saney McSane of the Saneville McSanes. And if he really thinks that publishing professionals are going to spend good money on last year's (er, this year's) hardware just to keep running Quark XPress in Mac OS 9, well, the men in white coats had better start reaching for their oversized butterfly nets. We can't wait to hear how this one turns out...

 
SceneLink (3888)
← Previous Episode
Next Episode →
Vote Early, Vote Often!
Why did you tune in to this '90s relic of a soap opera?
Nostalgia is the next best thing to feeling alive
My name is Rip Van Winkle and I just woke up; what did I miss?
I'm trying to pretend the last 20 years never happened
I mean, if it worked for Friends, why not?
I came here looking for a receptacle in which to place the cremated remains of my deceased Java applets (think about it)

(1240 votes)

As an Amazon Associate, AtAT earns from qualifying purchases

DISCLAIMER: AtAT was not a news site any more than Inside Edition was a "real" news show. We made Dawson's Creek look like 60 Minutes. We engaged in rampant guesswork, wild speculation, and pure fabrication for the entertainment of our viewers. Sure, everything here was "inspired by actual events," but so was Amityville II: The Possession. So lighten up.

Site best viewed with a sense of humor. AtAT is not responsible for lost or stolen articles. Keep hands inside car at all times. The drinking of beverages while watching AtAT is strongly discouraged; AtAT is not responsible for damage, discomfort, or staining caused by spit-takes or "nosers."

Everything you see here that isn't attributed to other parties is copyright ©,1997-2024 J. Miller and may not be reproduced or rebroadcast without his explicit consent (or possibly the express written consent of Major League Baseball, but we doubt it).