And thus does the mystery live on! iPhoto users will be relieved to hear that while the enigmatic vanishing 4.0.2 update is still missing in action, Apple has now posted a brand spankin' new 4.0.3 updater to replace it. Not surprisingly, 4.0.3's brief list of changes is exactly the same as 4.0.2's was before Apple spirited it off to a parallel dimension a few days ago: the 5.9 MB download "addresses minor issues with Smart Albums and European books, and provides notification when new versions of iPhoto are available." Of course, what Apple doesn't tell you is that it also doesn't do whatever unspecified heinous thing that 4.0.2 did-- possibly something as benign-though-annoying as the widely-reported "really long 'quit' time," though we personally suspect it was something far more sinister-- which prompted Apple to banish it forever from this plane of existence.

So evidently iPhoto 4.0.2 was one of those updates like Mac OS X 10.2.8 that was too flawed to leave up, but not so flawed that it couldn't be hammered into a slightly less obnoxious state and reposted later. (We don't quite recall what the problem was with the original version of 10.2.8, but if memory serves it had something to do with dead network connections and spawning killer cyborg mutants that ate children.) Hey, at least this time Apple saw fit to change the version number; remember when there were two different operating systems floating around, and both of them were 10.2.8? It was like an episode of the Patty Duke Show or something. Only with slightly more murderous cannibal cyborgs.

Well, faithful viewer Tadd Torborg informed us that, while iPhoto 4.0.2 flat-out crashed when he tried to launch it, 4.0.3 updated his photo library and appears to work perfectly-- so we decided to take the plunge and give it a whirl ourselves, because, y'know, what the heck? You only live once, and we just recently bought more cannibal cyborg insurance, so we threw caution to the wind and loaded that bad boy up. So far everything looks okay; the pictures still look like ours, everything feels pretty snappy, and we definitely aren't getting that "really slow quit" thing that was widely reported by users of 4.0.2. And not a killer mutant cyborg in sight! Looks like we won't have to fumigate the place again after all.

So based on those two data points, iPhoto 4.0.3 seems like a benign update that you can install with impunity. As for whatever fate befell 4.0.2 and what crime for which it was banished, we may never know; at least it was one of those pulled updates that came back to us in some form, though. As far as we know, that eMac HLDS Combo Drive Firmware Update that appeared on Apple's servers six weeks ago and promptly dissolved into nothingness with zero explanation still hasn't reappeared in any noticeable form. We fear the worst.

Meanwhile, iPhoto isn't the only Apple software to receive an update today: the Xcode 1.5 upgrade has hit the streets, and apparently it does a whole lot more than fix Smart Albums and German photo books. The info page lists a dozen or so major improvements, including Java and AppleScript code completion, remote debugging, and all-around faster performance. Get it while you can, though, because the way things have been going lately, you just know it'll be gone by the weekend...

Gosh, is it really 10-Q time again already? If you're the type who happens to think that poring through 86 pages of SEC-mandated dry financial jargon and tables with headings like "Diluted Earnings Per Common Share Before Accounting Change" constitutes light 'n' breezy summer reading, by all means, download the PDF and knock yourself out. If, on the other hand, you're about as likely to read a full quarterly 10-Q filing as you are to staple two carrots to your forehead and go charging at a bull, we suggest that you take the easy way out: read the summary thoughtfully provided by MacMinute, who's gone to the trouble to extract most of the more dramatic revelations detailed by Apple this quarter.

From our perspective, though, even most of the summary points are pretty dry-- percentage sales increases we've already heard about at the quarterly results conference call, that sort of thing. The one bit that really got our motors revving, though, was the list of lawsuits Apple is newly facing or has recently settled. For one thing, that TIBCO ("TIBCO!!") lawsuit over the "Rendezvous" trademark has been settled. It also seems that Apple's getting sued again over this iPod battery goofiness-- in New York, no less, which was also the setting for that Neistat Brothers bit of vandalism. (What's the deal with people from the Empire State not being able to keep their iPods running? Ours will be hitting their three-year mark come Christmas and we've got no battery complaints.) On top of that, Apple was also sued for patent infringement because of the light-up keyboard in some of its PowerBooks; that suit's now been settled, too.

The big one, though, is also described over at CNET: Virgin Mega is apparently just as desperate to license Apple's FairPlay digital rights management system as RealNetworks was-- but instead of cracking the format without permission like Real did, Virgin decided it would be more fun to sue Apple in a French court for "wrongfully refusing to license FairPlay." Now, we're not familiar with French law, but "wrongfully refusing"? What, did Apple forget to say "sorry" when it said no? We can't imagine that Apple's share of the downloadable music or portable music player markets constitutes a monopoly, but maybe France's antitrust laws are a lot stricter than U.S. ones or something. Who knows? All we can say for sure is that now Apple has to contend with people suing it for the heinous act of not licensing something it invented and owns. We figure Apple France should countersue for not allowing Apple to put the Virgin logo on iPods. Sure, why would anyone want to, but it's the principle of the thing, right?

Indeed, we're amazed that Apple gets anything done at all, given all the legal activity it has to contend with. The music-related stuff, in particular, seems positively overwhelming; in addition to the iPod battery lawsuits and the Virgin thing we just mentioned, don't forget about the Eminem lawsuit, the Beatles lawsuit, and the Freeny lawsuit. "What Freeny lawsuit?" you ask. Why, the Freeny lawsuit that Apple just settled, as described by The Register, we answer. Some company called E-Data owns a patent on "a system and method of distributing [commercial] digital content over electronic and wireless networks," which it claimed that Apple was violating with the iTunes Music Store. Rather than duke it out in court, Apple apparently feels that it was best to cut its losses and license this so-called "Freeny Patent." So that's that, as far as Freeny is concerned.

Okay, we admit it: this whole thing was just a setup so we could say "Freeny" a couple dozen times. Freeny. FREENY. Freenyfreenyfreenyfreenyfreeny.

Makes us happy.

(Freeny.)

Hey, everybody, it's "Pathetic Excuse For a Segue Day" here at AtAT! So, uh, in the same general vein of Apple France's "wrongful refusal" lawsuit for not licensing FairPlay to Virgin (which potentially falls under the general category of "freaky foreign laws"), wouldja believe that iPods are all but illegal in Australia? Well, okay, not really-- but using one pretty much is. A few days ago we stumbled upon an article in the Sydney Morning Herald that pointed out the irony of an Australian Apple magazine ad which "demonstrates how to copy songs from a CD onto a computer and then from the computer onto an iPod," but which also includes Apple's standard small-print plea to its customers: "Don't steal music."

So where's the irony? Right here, Sparky: in Australia, apparently copying music from a CD you've legally purchased, even just to listen to it on your own personal iPod, is stealing music. That's right, Australian copyright law has no "fair use" provision like we've got here in the States. So the next time you're fuming about the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (as well you should, actually), you can take a little solace in the fact that at least no one's calling the feds because you transferred your own purchased CDs to your iPod. (Yet.)

To be fair, no one's calling the feds in Oz, either; iPod sales are brisk, and reportedly much of the population is blissfully unaware that the simple act of ripping their purchased CDs for use on an iPod makes them a pack of dirty, stinkin' criminals. A spokesperson for the police admits that "it's unlikely that the Australian Federated Police would investigate individuals for offences such as illegally copying a CD." Nevertheless, a copyright expert at Melbourne University maintains that there's technically "not much you can do legally with an Apple iPod in Australia" until the iTunes Music Store makes it down there except for "use it to listen to music that you've recorded yourself or even to a recording made by your friend's band. But that's about it."

Nonsense, we say! What about Solitaire?

Of course, if you're the pessimistic sort and you doubt that tens of thousands of Australian iPod owners shelled out hundreds of dollars apiece for a portable Solitaire game, then, well, you're assuming that just about everyone with an iPod from Perth to Brisbane is breaking the law-- and we're not sure it's wise to make broad generalizations about a whole nationality of people like that. It's rude and narrow-minded, and what's more, those guys are all descended from convicts, so if you get them mad they'll likely come over and crush your skull.

Ha! Just a joke, Aussies! We love convicts.

JOKE! Another joke. Honestly, we're all about Australia over here. Jack even lived in Melbourne for a few years as a kid and barracks for Collingwood. So in closing we'll just say three things: 1) Just kidding; 2) Go Magpies!; and 3) please don't kill us.