Yep, it really happened: AOL couldn't wait until Thanksgiving to stuff their collective face, so they gobbled up a browser company as an appetizer. They announced that the deal has been finalized, and they're buying Netscape for a little over $4 billion in stock-- and Sun gets a piece of the pie, too. Read more about it in this Reuters article.

Under the terms of the acquisition agreement, Netscape becomes a wholly-owned subsidiary of AOL, Netscape shareholders will have their stock converted to AOL common stock, and Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale will join the AOL board of directors. There are no real clues as to what will happen to Netscape's management and development structure, which we hope will remain largely intact; our biggest fear about this whole deal is that development of Navigator will suffer. As for Sun, AOL agrees to buy half a billion dollars' worth of equipment and services over the course of the next four years, while Sun will pay AOL $350 million in "licensing, marketing, and advertising fees." And one of the most interesting things about the AOL-Sun agreement is that AOL will use Java to create a version of AOL that runs on a set-top box-- and competes directly with Microsoft's WebTV. That could be a huge boost for Java, and a huge pain in the butt for Microsoft.

Meanwhile, according to a Wired article, both Microsoft and the government are claiming that the Netscape buyout strengthens their positions in the "Redmond Justice" case. Microsoft says it just shows that it has plenty of worthy competitors out there, while the government claims that Netscape sold out to AOL because Microsoft's antitrust tactics gave it little other choice for survival; "What you see here is essentially an exit strategy for Netscape," says David Boies. Whatever. All we know is, this deal could change the landscape pretty significantly when it comes to browser share, Java, and a slew of other factors. Isn't it neat how the tech world can shift drastically so quickly?

Lots of sites out there have picked up on the story that Apple has quietly filed to register "My Apple" as a service mark for something it's got up its sleeve. Apple certainly isn't saying what it is, though, and most of the people reporting this tidbit aren't going out on a limb to guess what it means. But Mac OS Rumors is, and that's why we love them. Their take on things is that "My Apple," which is filed as a "computer network service provider... providing multiple user access to a global information network," all ties into the rumors that next year's "P1" consumer portable will include some kind of wireless Internet access. Intriguing!

There are other clues that "My Apple" is connected with the P1; for instance, in the past Apple reportedly reserved its own high-frequency band for Data PCS, and testing of wireless technology using that band is rumored to be in progress right now-- in areas with Apple offices. So what does this all mean? Is Apple really going to start up its own cellular-access ISP for users of the P1? Or is "My Apple" just going to be another eWorld? We're willing to bet we won't know for sure until Macworld Expo in January, at the very earliest, and most likely not until a few months later. Meanwhile, http://www.myapple.com/ is registered and working, but right now it just loads the main Apple web site.

Incidentally, for those of you who have been trying to figure out whether Apple's going to call the P1 the iMate, the iBook, the eMac, or what, now there are more clues to throw into the mix. MacInTouch reports that, along with the service mark filing for "My Apple," Apple has also claimed the trademarks "MacMate" and "WebMate." Coincidence? Not likely.

Now there's yet another article out there on how Macs and Apple equipment show up on so many TV shows-- NewsWeek's a little late with their offering, but it's still a good read. You know the phenomenon, of course; if you manage to watch an evening of network television without ever catching a glimpse of a Mac or two, you're either not paying attention or you have really unusual taste in your program choices. Just last night we noticed iMacs and Apple Studio Displays being used on "Just Shoot Me," while faithful viewer P.J. Groult informs us that across channels on the WB there was a platform argument on "Felicity," in which the iMac is called "one incredible machine:" "Their love was not to last. He was an avid Mac user, and she was drawn to the dark side of the Wintel world." Pulse-quickening stuff, indeed.

While the placement of Apple products on all these shows is due to the very hard work of Apple's own Suzanne Forlenza, we have to assume that the dialog on "Felicity" was entirely the decision of the writers, who felt like throwing a nod to the iMac on the air. Between official product placements and these apparently unsolicited testimonials from TV writers, Apple's got some real visibility on the tube. And it makes sense; it seems that Macs are still the computer of choice with the creative set, so if TV people need to incorporate computers into their sets, why not use the computers they know and love? According to Suzanne, Apple products are also used as props because they "say something about a character: more hip, more innovative." That's why they show up so much on youth-oriented shows, like "Buffy" and "The Real World."

Probably the most informative part of the article is when Suzanne talks about situations in which she declined to allow Apple's products to be used onscreen. When she was pitched a movie where "the PowerBook was going to be used as an explosive device," she deemed that use "inappropriate" and said no. Inappropriate? But an old PowerBook 5300 would have been a perfect choice! Heck, you wouldn't have to do a thing to use one of those as an explosive device...