This is it, folks: the last day to get your speculatin' groove on. The Apple Expo Stevenote is tomorrow, so if you've got any last-minute guesswork to squeeze out from between the creases in your grey matter, now's the time to do it. However, we should mention that crystal-gazing for PowerBook info has pretty much been done to death by now; the latest in that particular saga is that MacRumors cites its own sources providing "further confirmation" that there will indeed be some new slingable aluminum come tomorrow, possibly three models priced between $1999 and $2999. (The implication is that, judging by the price points, we're going to be seeing maybe two 15-inch models and a 17-incher, and that the 12-inch refresh might be kept under wraps for a while longer.)

Now, if you're dead set on continuing to ponder the whats and wherefores of potential PowerBookage tomorrow, we're certainly not going to stop you. But it's our duty to inform you that all the cool kids have long since moved on to goofier subjects, such as the rumor du jour over at Think Secret: reportedly one of the goodies that Steve is currently stuffing up his spring-loaded sleeves is a "special edition" iPod, exclusively available via the Apple Store. Capacity? 40 GB-- just like the regular top-of-the-line iPod. Price? 549 Euros-- also just like the regular top-of-the-line iPod, at least according to the Apple Store France.

We know what you're thinking: so far this edition doesn't sound very special. Indeed, Think Secret admits that "it's unclear what the special edition iPod will feature"; the only potential differentiating factor listed is "some sort of new remote control," and unless said remote manages volume, play/pause, and track skip on the iPod and can instantly change traffic lights at busy intersections for hours of crashtastic entertainment, we just can't see that being a very big deal. But whereas vagueness is a serious drawback in the legitimate press, it's a positive boon in the rumors trade, and as we hinted before, guessing what puts the "special" in "special edition" is the hottest new trend to sweep the land since stuffing hula hoops into telephone booths. Go wild.

No, we don't know the answer, although we've got a few ideas. Historically, "special edition" to Apple has meant "available in stunning Graphite," and while we doubt Apple would do the late-'90s retro thing and resurrect the rich steely grey that served it so well for years, we wouldn't be at all surprised if the only real difference between the iPod Special Edition and its less-special siblings turns out to be one of color. C'mon, Apple's been pulling this kind of thing for years; remember the clear Newton 110? The white PowerBook 170? The pink chiffon Color Classic with the matching clutch purse and tiara?

So, given the fact that the alleged iPod Special Edition carries no price premium, we're guessing that (assuming that it exists in the first place) it's just some snazzy color combo-- probably black and silver, or maybe white and gold. Either that, or it includes an integrated stun gun, a portable wet bar, and the ability to flag down passing spaceships for a lift. Your call.

You know, some people fail to recognize the potential health risks inherent in nonstop Apple-themed prognostication; it can entail some strenuous brain work, and people who leap right in without stretching first have been known to sprain a frontal lobe. In the interest of viewer safety, we're compelled to issue the following public service announcement: if you felt any building pressure or unusual heat in the cranial region when participating in something as benign as puzzling out what an iPod Special Edition might turn out to be, you should probably steer clear of more challenging games of "Whatizzit," because certain topics are so open-ended they can send a sane man spiralling uncontrollably into an eternal abyss of madness and pain, or even pop a braincase like a grape in a microwave.

But, you know, in a good way. It's fun for the whole family!

That said, why not jump right in and tackle the next big puzzler of the day? MacRumors has been Dumpster-diving through the databases of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office again, and uncovered a new Apple trademark, filed just last month. Ready for this? It's "Garage Band." And, as usual, the PTO only gives the vaguest hints about what Garage Band might in fact be: if you hop on over and do the search, you'll find that it's categorized under "computers, computer software, and computer peripherals; computers, computer software, and computer peripherals." Say, we love it when the government is redundant and repeats itself!

So that's what we know: it's called "Garage Band" and it could be just about anything. Not a lot to work with, there, so be extra careful that you don't hurt yourself on this one. Try to limit your guesswork to one particular likely sphere. "Garage Band" certainly invokes the subject of music, so don't bother wondering whether or not it's the next version of AppleWorks or a new 30-inch display; going that far afield will only lead to one whopper of a headache in the morning. At best.

No, it's far likelier to be something like some sort of add-on that turns a Mac into a passable recording studio rig for cheap. Or maybe a system whereby unsigned musicians can bypass the record labels and submit their recordings for direct inclusion in the iTunes Music Store. Or it could just be a new plugin for iTunes that makes even the most professionally recorded music sound amateurish and out of tune; c'mon, you know you always wanted to hear Mariah Carey sound like the half-drunk lead singer of some two-bit bar band with no bassist playing Lita Ford covers all night, right?

Whatever. Have fun with it, but don't push yourself; most health insurance doesn't cover speculation-related head injuries, and since Apple's registration of a trademark is not a guarantee that the company will ever actually use said trademark, we may never know what the company had in mind. If you don't think you can handle that much uncertainty, wrap your head in a warm, moist towel, apply pressure, and watch predictable network sitcoms until the anxiety passes. Trust us, it's important. Perishing of an exploded head is bad enough; losing your cleaning deposit too is not the way you want to start your afterlife.

Well, we find ourselves faced with quite a dilemma, here: we've got just one more scene to go, today, and two equally enthralling plot points between which we must choose. On the one hand, we've got Newsweek's little foray into Mac-centric bean-spilling, with its revelation that Apple has "moved up the date for expanding its current Mac-only iTunes for the vast universe of Windows-based PCs to mid-October," which may signal the start of a whole new ball game as Apple redefines itself as a cross-platform digital media service provider for the masses-- a gambit whose success or failure may indeed determine the very future of the company as hearts, minds, and souls hang in the balance.

On the other hand, we've got something about Steve Jobs's wardrobe.

Okay, so Steve's wardrobe it is. (Oh, like it was ever close. Please.)

Here's what we've got: faithful viewer SeanLovesAnna (awwwwwwwww!) tipped us off to the Forbes "Best- And Worst-Dressed Billionaires" lists, in which the publication enlisted the couturial horse sense of Joan and Melissa Rivers (for some reason) to judge the threads of people far richer than they are. But lest you think that His Jobsness might have come off poorly, consider that Joan, quite fairly, understands that style is all about context: "If you're in a new business, a dot-commer, I want you to look casual and hip and current." Well, we're not quite sure Apple qualifies as a new dot-com, but it's the same ballpark, right? So isn't it nice that Steve Jobs tied for fifth place? "He looks right for his job," says Joan, and Melissa adds, "I like Jobs. He's in jeans, he's in jeans, but he's the right age to be in jeans. He looks appropriate in them." (What, no props for the mock turtleneck?)

Meanwhile, guess whom he tied for fifth? None other than his bestest buddy and lifelong pal Larry Ellison, whose personal sense of style runs more to ten thousand-dollar suits (meaning, suits that cost ten thousand dollars, not ten suits that cost a thousand dollars each; the latter would be awfully uncomfortable to wear all at once) than to jeans and turtlenecks. But it apparently works for him, probably because his company Oracle is all about enterprise. "He's got a current look," says Joan; "I would trust him with my money. He's knows what's happening in the world that he's functioning in. He doesn't waste shareholders' time shaving his beard." (Instead he just wastes it racing yachts.) Melissa chimed in with "he looks current without looking ridiculous." Gee, and here we always just thought he looked like the bad guy from Die Hard.

So there you have it: tied for fifth best-dressed, high-tech's very own Felix and Oscar-meet-the-Wonder Twins. And in closing, we can only ask this: What, no Steve Ballmer? But we were told big honkin' sweat stains were in this year!

(By the way, don't forget to vote in the poll! Go Steve, beat Oprah!)