Apple is suing thinksecret over recent stories, including the proposed headless Mac. Apple sites specific articles in the suit. It’s not crazy to assume the speculative articles are based on good information.
Apple is suing thinksecret over recent stories, including the proposed headless Mac. Apple sites specific articles in the suit. It’s not crazy to assume the speculative articles are based on good information.
guess it is true then
Now Apple has implicitly confirmed that the rumours are true. Apple would have been better to laugh it off, claim that the rumours were just that, just rumours, and to wait till the big even on 11 January.
…those of you who have claimed that they will buy such a Mac had better put their money where their mouth is.
Oh no, the excuses will fly as to why this is not the Mac they promised to buy.
I know some will say apples being an ass or something. But this is well within their rights. It’s one thing to guess, it’s a whole another thing to leak something. I’m always surprised sites post such information.
But yeah, the mini mac sounds more real now. Good deal.
I don’t think you should be surprized about so many sites covering this particular lawsuit. I didn’t post this tonight because of any sort of outrage over Apple’s behavior, but rather because the reaction is an implicit confirmation of the rumors. In other words, it looks like the headless iMac is a go.
Good for Apple for putting an end to this. It’s not rumors they are publishing, but proprietary information.
But, you have to give Think Secret credit for having balls of steel. On the day they get sued, they publish another confirmation and the specs on the new flash iPod.
…those of you who have claimed that they will buy such a Mac had better put their money where their mouth is.
I’ll buy one if it’s
a) A G5.
b) Using the same internals as an iMac (I’m not interested in buying any rev 1.0 hardware from Apple – if it’s not using iMac guts I’ll wait until the next revision).
c) Has an AGP mounted video card, standard 3.5″ hard disk and standard 5.25″ (or laptop) optical drive.
d) priced around the same as an eMac (if the eMac miraculously gets bumped to a G5, I’ll expect it to be a touch cheaper than that – say US$50 – $100).
Personally, I don’t believe the above is unreasonable – such machines would fly off the shelves. However, I do think it’s unlikely.
you know that such a machine will never exist because it is going to compete with the iMac in that case.
think about this.. Apple wants an entry level machine like their original iMac was, but with out the monitor.. they need to to run OS X well (which the G4 does) and they need it to be usable by people who want to play with the apps… a RAM upgrade like always will fix that.
these machines will be bought by those curious and wanting to add another computer to the home.
Oh come on folks, can’t you see what’s going on here.
All the speculation and buzz being generated by the ‘leaks’ and then the ‘lawsuits’ is great for business. Do more marketing for less…
you know that such a machine will never exist because it is going to compete with the iMac in that case.
Not necessarily. The differentiation could be:
a) The iMac is an All-in-one (some consumers consider this _very_ important).
b) The iMac could be faster (eg: a 1.4Ghz G5 in the pizza box would be slower than an iMac but still faster than, say, a 1.2Ghz G4) Even better would be an iMac speed bump to 1.8Ghz and 2.0Ghz and a 1.6Ghz pizza box.
c) Bundle the iMac with more software (or bundle the pizza box with none).
think about this.. Apple wants an entry level machine like their original iMac was, but with out the monitor..
Which would logically mean that machine should be…an iMac without a monitor ! Just like the machine I suggested.
I still think Apple missed a golden opportunity with the original G4 iMac to cater to both chunks of the market by making the iMac’s LCD an optional module. The enclosure was just screaming for such a thing.
they need to to run OS X well (which the G4 does) and they need it to be usable by people who want to play with the apps… a RAM upgrade like always will fix that.
A G4 does not run OS X “well”. “Tolerably”, perhaps, depending on how much patience you have.
The G4s were left in the dust years ago. Apple tried vainly to soldier on with cherry-picked, overclocked G4s and multiprocessor machines, but they were just too far behind the curve. There is no justification whatsoever for releasing a *new desktop machine* – even at the budget consumer end of the market – with a G4 in it. Now that the technology is bedded in they shouldn’t be any cheaper to make. It would be like Dell bringing out a brand spanking new PC using a Pentium 3. At least the lack of advanced power management features in the current G5s justify their absence from the Powerbooks, but that doesn’t wash for a desktop machine.
these machines will be bought by those curious and wanting to add another computer to the home.
These machines are far more likely to be bought by computing enthusiasts or people who already have computers and want to add another to the home. In which case the relatively poor performance/$ of such a machine would _not_ stack up well to the alternatives. A G4 pizza box simply won’t sell at the price Apple is going to charge because they’re *slow*[0]. (I’d be willing to forego an AGP-mounted video card if Apple weren’t so notoriously stingy with their video hardware (over the last few years, that combined with Quartz Extreme & Co. has been their “forced upgrade” ploy).)
Really, such a machine would mostly target a different demographic to the iMac. Certainly, there’d be a _bit_ of sales cannibalisation from the iMac, but I really doubt it would be anything major.
[0] Conspiracy theorists may wish to consider that this machine – by being underpowered and underfeatured – is deliberately setup to fail, so Apple can go “well, we tried a budget Mac, but no-one was interested”.
Meaningless statement:
“Good for Apple for putting an end to this. It’s not rumors they are publishing, but proprietary information.”
What is really going on:
“[Apple] believe[s] that Think Secret solicited information about unreleased Apple products from these individuals, who violated their confidentiality agreements with Apple by providing details that were later posted on the Internet.”
Who is to say if Think Secret actually violated the law or if a few Apple employees did? (Hint: The word starts w/ law and has nothing to do w/ “Intellectual Property”)
“Conspiracy theorists may wish to consider that this machine – by being underpowered and underfeatured – is deliberately setup to fail, so Apple can go “well, we tried a budget Mac, but no-one was interested”.”
To satisfy such whims could be considered criminal in a publicly held company. Which I guess would actually make it a conspiracy.. but that’s not what you meant, is it?
i can bet that this is a maketing strategy by Apple:)
How is it that Apple can get away with sueing a rumour site??
I really don’t get this. I’m a huge Apple fan, my main machine is an iBook, but this is just crazy! Why are they sueing ThinkSecret, and why not only the actual person(s) who leaked the info?
Apple should take proper care of its NDAs and employees– ThinkSecret has nothing to do with all this. They might as well sue eXpert Zone and OSNews as well for posting such information.
Oh well, I guess every company is allowd to sue the crap out of everybody except Microsoft.
With all this Mac innovation I was just wondering what the latest market share is for Macs v x86 PCs? Any links?
Are Macs gaining share?
Apple doesn’t really have a leg to stand on here. ThinkSecret has no confidentiality clause in a contract with Apple. Apple is going after the wrong people, if they want to plug leaks they need to look at their own staff. ThinkSecret is well within their rights to publish information they garner from their sources. That’s what the First Amendment is for and the DMCA ultimately can’t be used to hinder such. No real trade secrets were released in this case. Pricing does not equate to a trade secret.
The more I hear about Apple’s policies reguarding information, equipment, support, etc, the less I like of them. At times they sound worse than even Microsoft or SCO.
Microsoft copy others …
SCO claims to own Unix
Apple will sue you if you do something they dont like
oh yes and the sun come up …
Having followed Apple for a few years, my experience is that ThinkSecret is about the best rumor site in terms of new Apple products. While all of the details may not be exact about the headless mac or iWork, some of the details probably were leaked, prompting Apple to sue. Some are asking why Apple is going after ThinkSecret, who has every right to publish this information, and the reason is simple: to find out who leaked the information. If Apple knew who leaked the information, they probably wouldn’t be suing ThinkSecret. They’re hoping, though, to get ThinkSecret to reveal sources.
A much better explanation of this idea can be found here:
http://daringfireball.net/2005/01/plugging_leaks
“A G4 does not run OS X “well”. “Tolerably”, perhaps, depending on how much patience you have. The G4s were left in the dust years ago”
This is just totally silly. G4’s still power all the iBooks, Powerbooks and eMacs with great success. My older Xserve has a G4. 512mb memory is the lowest I would run OS X with on a G4…but regardless…the G4 still works great! Common sense here folks please…are you running the G4 with 128mb?
Cnet says that Apple says: “DNA is innovation, and the protection of our trade secrets is crucial to our success.” Is DNA patended by Apple now or did they mean “NDA”?
Would be really cool if the rumours prove to be true. But I don’t think this will raise Apples marketshare significantly, the only thing it’ll do ist killing Eyetech and Pegasos boards. Whether this is a good thing or a tragedy is up to you. I won’t start a flame here
If such a Mac is released I’ll certainly consider buying one, since it surely won’t be slower than my current Duron 1300, which is more than enough for me.
In discussing upcoming products…
All the things I know about Tiger make me MORE likely to buy it, NOT less.
And MORE likely to tell my friends to buy a Mac, because they will LOVE Tiger better than Windows.
Knowing a $500 Headless Mac is coming, means I’m already saving my pennies to buy one. I had already decided AGAINST buying a G5 iMac because it was too much power, and too expensive for the use I would get out of it.
If money were no problem, I’d *LOVE* a G5 iMac.
But, considering I’m living on a budget, my G4 500 (recently upgraded from a 350) will have to hold me until either this headless iMac comes to pass, or I get a deal on a better used unit…
I understand Apple wanting to protect it’s secrets…
But, it’s like Paramount and Star Trek. They go INSANE protecting the script from the upcoming movies from the fans. Like the fans AREN’T going to go see the movie several times just because they know the story, and have seen pictures of the production…. ROFLMAO!!!
Paramount could re-release every Star Trek Movie into the theatres, and even though I’ve got them all on VHS and/or DVD, I’d still go see them on a big screen…
Apple underestimates it’s customers. And it’s fanbase.
As does Paramount with Star Trek.
Someone suggested that Apple just laugh them off as rumors. The problem is that they can’t do that. If they want to claim any trade secret status (now or in the future), they have to make their best effort to plug all leaks. If they just let these things go, someone in the future could reveal something quite devistating (not just a product announcement) and Apple would have a difficult time prosecuting.
Others have suggested that Think Secret isn’t responsible since they didn’t sign an NDA (non-disclosure agreement). While they aren’t under an NDA, trying to get someone to violate their NDA is illegal. If Think Secret approached or solicited for others to violate their NDAs, they are going to have legal problems.
As for the specs of said box, I wouldn’t expect the iMac’s. That’s what is nice about Apple’s position right now. They can sell a computer that is very good that doesn’t have the iMac’s specs. I use a 700MHz G4 with 256MB RAM at work every day and it isn’t sluggish. A 1.25GHz G4 would be more than enough (and more than competitive) with the $500 boxes out there at places like Best Buy.
The issue, as I understand it, doesn’t have to do with ThinkSecret just publishing random rumors sent to them, but for them actively soliciting people who are in the know to send them information to post. There is a BIG difference.
It’s kind of like you asking somebody else to kill your wife. You may not be doing the killing yourself, but you are soliciting another person to do it which get you a trip to prison just as fast as the one who actually does it.
Also, irresponsible rumor sites like this can have a very negative effect on Apple. Since the headless iMac and flash iPod rumors were posted, I have read several articles about investment houses picking up on them and raising financial prospects (based on rumors!). So what if these and others turned out to only be rumors? Well, now apple would be hurt quite substantially because of what products announcements others had come to expect because they read a rumor.
“Cnet says that Apple says: “DNA is innovation, and the protection of our trade secrets is crucial to our success.” Is DNA patended by Apple now or did they mean “NDA”?
Cnet have done some nice selective quoting there, the actual quote is “Apple’s DNA is innovation…” So no, Apple haven’t patented DNA and they didn’t mean NDA.
Like others have said, Apple want the leak not ThinkSecret. If you read the actual court case (sorry don’t have the link, someone will post it no doubt), they pretty much say this in their filing.
Matt
Apple is suing a third party because they have made proprietary information so valuable and release so much information to third parties which have no loyalties to Apple (eg. beta software, the iBook contractor) that they could not control its dissemination. This is Apple’s problem, not Think Secret’s.
Aside from that, the moment you give up your freedom of speech for corporations or politiciaians, you loose your freedom of speech. Lawsuits like this shouldn’t be welcomed (eg. Apple protecting trade secrets) or mocked (eg. they have effectively confirmed such and such). I mentioned loyalty in protecting trade screts earlier, and I meant it. If someone releases something which Apple feels is proprietary, the source which leaked it should loose their credibility with Apple (hence future access to similar information, or perhaps their job). To suggest anything else is to violate the freedoms which we should all enjoy. It should also be noted that while the details of an upcoming computer are irrelevant in the grand scale of things, the use of trade secrets and NDAs may also be used to protect knowledge which should be public knowlege. Does anyone remember the scandal (several years back) over the tobacco companies trying to hide their knowledge that smoking was dangerous to your health? Odd thing that. Some would say that one should be a trade secret and the latter should not. Perhaps, but I have no confidence in the courts making a fair decision — particularly in the fuzzy cases.
Hello everyone,
I’m a professional computer programmer who bought a G4 eMac last year because I was curious about OS-X and Apple in general. It came with 256Megs of RAM and without any thought about it I upgraded it with another 512 Megs of RAM upon removing the new computer from the box.
My 1.25 Megahertz G4 runs OS-X very nicely. It’s perfectly adequate for the needs of the home user and computer hobbiest. I suspect a G4 headless computer that’s quiet, small, and inexpensive will be a blockbuster hit. If Apple is really smart they will give it the capabilities to serve as a media pc in the living room.
Thanks,
I ment 1.25 GigaHertz, sorry.
As OSNews mgmt said in an earlier post, I thought this was worth submitting because it seems to confirm the release of the headless iMac. I have made several posts in the past saying that a box like this was a good idea. Geeks like choice. I have good monitors, and I like putting my boxes on a kvm. Nothing about that makes an emac/imac attractive.
That said, I am very intrigued by the box and will likely buy one. The part I can’t figure out is this. For someone like myself, this box is probably fine. I use mostly GNU boxes, and a few OpenBSD boxes (one windows gaming pc). I want to try out their interface, try OS tools on osx, and try some of the non-x86 gnu/linux distros. A G4 should be plenty. But many of the people that apple will be aiming this at are windows users who do multimedia and gaming stuff. I can’t say from experience, but is the G4 enough for these people? It’s technology has been around for a while.
It just seems to me that since Apple knows this is going to be the first mac for a lot of people, why not give them the best experience possible? Even if it means slim-to-none margins?
That said, I’ll probably get one. I have been curious to try apple’s stuff for a while, but didn’t like the idea of paying $1500 (in order to get a headless machine).
-b
Are you seriously trying to compare an NDA with a software/computer company to a tobacco company trying to withhold knowledge of nicotine addiction?
And why should Apple’s hardware roadmap be public knowledge if they don’t want it to be? Don’t forget that apple competes against every other computer manufacturer in the marketplace, and the more time those competitors have to match what Apple will be offering down the road, the less Apple is able to profit from it’s “innovations.”
Yes, I’m serious. Let’s say it went to court and the tobacco companies argued that most of the content of the files was consistent with public knowledege (ie. nicotine is addictive and smoking is detramental to your health), so it was simply a case of breech of contract. Taken from that perspective, the person who released the files could have easily lost. If there wasn’t so much publicity over the case, the public would have lost too. I know that there are a few hypotheticals in there, but how much of this nonsense goes on without our knowledge?
Like I said. Protecting iMac secrets may be irrelevant. But if we are willing to persecute people for the irrelevant things they say, we should expect them to be persecuted for the relevant things too.
Bogey,
I’ve done various things with my eMac and can maybe answer some of your questions. Games like Warcraft III play perfectly on the 1.25 gHz eMac. Never a stutter and all effects on full.
I’ve even played World of Warcraft on my eMac. It plays ok if you turn the display resolution down to 800×600 but gameplay can get chunky if there’s a lot of action on the screen. But it is playable and if I didn’t have an uber gaming PC the eMac would suffice.
DVD movies play very well.
I’ve also played around with iTunes and it plays shoutcast internet streams, rips and burns music very well.
I’ve played around with creating a home dv movie, importing it, editing it, added special effects and encoded it using the eMac. It actually works very well for this. Yeah a faster machine would do it faster but I didn’t really feel like the eMac ws getting in my way.
Obviously importing and manipulating photo’s from my digital camera work really well on the eMac as well.
If your a Linux fan you will be able to compile SDL on the Mac very easily and once this is installed you can easily compile Linux apps that use SDL, such as MPlayer and they will run also.
Hope that helps
Thanks for the post. That sounds good enough for me. And even good enough for multimedia users.
I have a hard time getting a consistent opinion from apple users. I read some people who say their G3 cranks out OSX just fine, and others who say “G5 is out, don’t buy anything less”.
But, that’s like any computing group. I have a 100Mhz box running apache on OpenBSD 3.6 that does the job just fine. But most x86 people would consider that box as good only for a doorstop.
I hope these headless boxes are available soon. I’ve been itching to try an apple out. Most apple people I know advise against buying ram upgrades w/ the box, instead opting for 3rd party ram. Would you agree?
Of course, as everyone knows, Apple is 1st and foremost a hardware company. As such, they really really don’t want you upgrading their {i,e}Mac computers. They’d much rather you buy a new one when you perceive your current one to be too slow.
This upcoming headless Mac will no doubt have integrated everything (don’t expect any AGP or PCI slots anywhere) and will be difficult to upgrade (except memory). I’m guessing there will be no way to drive multiple monitors with this thing.
That said, we’re at a very interesting time in computing history: computers are pretty much fast enough for people the way they are. The only way to make them slower (and make your customers feel that they need to upgrade) is to bloat your OS (say by, maybe making the whole display into PDF for rendering, or maybe loading the OS up with multiple API’s like Cocoa, Carbon, Java-Cocoa bridge, Posix and also pile up different ways to distribute libs, such as bundles, frameworks, .dylibs, and .so’s).
I wonder if Apple is shooting themselves in the foot. Folks may buy these headless Macs and say, “Gee, this is plenty fast and works great. I’m all set for the next 7 or 8 years I guess.” Maybe the better question is, I wonder if Apple has any choice in the matter about shooting themselves in the foot.
Regardless, if the specs are open on these boxen, and I can run PPC Debian on one, I think it might be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
Bogey,
I wanted my RAM here when my computer arrived. Since I hadn’t seen the machine yet and was unable to find specs about the RAM used in the machines, I ordered a stick of RAM from crucial.com. They have a RAM configurator and guarantee their ram to work. Really though, it seems to be standard DDR-333 ram.
Probably not of interest to you but maybe to other eMac wonderers. The RAM is very easy to install, there’s a little door on the bottom of the machine that gives you easy access to the empty RAM slot.
On another day I took the machine apart and replaced the 40 gig HD with a 120 gig one. This is a very involved job and shouldn’t be done by someone afraid to take a lot of things apart. The oem drive in there was a Seagate.
Overall I was very impressed with the internal mechanical design of the eMac.
Just a thought…..Apple depends on a fairly small segment of the computer industry. A large number could be classified as fanatics or at least highly enthusiastic…
The rumor mill and rumor sites are a huge part of the Apple ‘experience’. Apple doesn’t do the normal product roadmaps that are publicly released like other companies. This combination is pretty much responsible for the creation of the Apple Rumor Mill…..
I personally, as a Mac owner, have found the rumor mill to be yet another entertaining aspect of being a Mac owner. The swirl of rumors is kinda what keeps my excitement up about the Apple products and keeps an eventual upgrade on my mind.
If Apple wants to go destroy that, well that’s their perogative. I just think that it will have an adverse effect on their business. I personally do not think the information released would have a detrimental effect on their business.
Also, my understanding is that patents and copyrights are the way to protect their products and inovation, not ‘trade secrets’. But then Apple has to actually protect their patents, copyrights, and trade secrets or they can be invalidated. It could just be a smoke and mirrors to provide the image of protecting those trade secrets so their competitors can’t capitalize on them.
Anyway, I think Apple should just back up a couple yards and give a second thought to whether they really want to try and put an axe into the huge hype/marketing machine that is the Mac rumor mill.
– Kelson
I have a hard time getting a consistent opinion from apple users. I read some people who say their G3 cranks out OSX just fine, and others who say “G5 is out, don’t buy anything less”.
I’m running OS X on a PowerBook G3, 500 MHz, AGP ATI Rage “M3” with 8 MB vid memory, it was sluggish with 256 MB or memory. Now it’s somewhat better with 384 MB, but still sluggish. You get used to it I suppose.
A while back I had Debian installed with IceWM and (with 256 MB) it was very quick and responsive, but also still slow with loading big apps like Mozilla. Running Gnome it was noticeably faster than running OS X, but still not great.
[mandatory plug]
Of course, BeOS on my rickety old 400 MHz PII still blew the doors off of anything I’ve tried since.
[/mandatory plug]
Most apple people I know advise against buying ram upgrades w/ the box, instead opting for 3rd party ram. Would you agree?
Apple’s are known to be finicky about the hardware you put into them. However, as long as you’re careful to get exactly the correctly spec’d memory, you’ll be fine.
I used to fix pcs for many people when i had time and i saw that noone knew what mac is. People know words like pentium and windows but they never heard about apple. And then when they go to some big store to buy a pc , they would buy something what they know, something with big number at the end and also not many stores have macs. I think this 500$mac is a wrong move , some marketing would do more good. This product will not appeal to enthusiasts because it will not be powerfull performance wise an will probably not be best buy for money and the target group will not know about this 500$ macs and will buy something they know what their friends/relatives use or something what is advertised in tv or something sold in walmart. But until then they remain some elitist social symbol and nothing more.(except xserves which are quite appealing). Btw i ran World of Warcraft on my old athlon 2800+ with ti 4200 with bout 60 fps at 1024×768, so the gaming crowd will not be very impressed apart from the fact they dont know what “apple” is.
NDAs and this lawsuit have no effect on freedom of speech. Why? Because they are optional – just like the private information that Apple would give you under such an NDA is optional for you to have. If you want to know this private information, you have to promise not to reveal it to the public. If you do not want to make that commitment, you do not get the information.
More importantly, how far does free speech go in the corporate environment? While you might think this is harmless rumor spreading for the Apple Fan Club to read, what about when someone wants to post the source code to the Quartz rendering engine that Apple owns? Both are revealing secrets that Apple is legally allowed to protect. What if, rather than going to a rumor site a couple weeks before the product is to be announced, a person went to a competitor 6-9 months before and helped them create a counterpart before Apple could complete their work? This instance might be harmless cool knowledge meant for the Apple fan base, but this exact same stuff could easily be detrimental to Apple – and unless Apple acts against all these cases, they can’t act against ones that would hurt them.
Are companies protected without trade secret laws? You bet they are! They have copyrights and patents. Copyrights are always in effect, and patents should be in place before outside sources come along. As for an employee releasing details to a competitor prior to the patent application. Maybe trade secret laws should come into effect there, iff it involves violating a patent which would have been applied for down the road.
As for NDAs: try rejecting these contractual muzzles. Chances are pretty good that you will end up unemployed and unemployable. I do not see why these critters are really needed in the first place. In the few cases where secrecy is essential (eg. with the disclosure of personal information), it should be taken care of at a legislative level). Other than that, I would suggest that a society where contracts are allowed to override freedom is pretty much a totalitarian state. The only thing which changes are your lords.
Apple is wrong here. Thinksecret is akin to a news organization, and as far as I know, they are protected by law (in the US and theoretically at least), and don’t even have to reveal their sources.
Apple would be within their rights to sue the employees that leaked the info – they are within their rights to sue their employees, since they broke their ndas.
I hope some organization like Civil Liberties Union will help thinksecret out.
This is just another example of a frivolous lawsuit (4/5 of frivolous lawsuits are filed by companies NOT individuals).
Read the lawsuit more carefully. They’re not going after thinksecret themselves. They’re just issuing a subpoena to find out the source of the leak.
Quote: “All the speculation and buzz being generated by the ‘leaks’ and then the ‘lawsuits’ is great for business. Do more marketing for less…
”
Exactly. I’ve said it before and i’ll keep damn well saying it – Apple are a bunch of litiguous bastards. Great products, shame the company behaviour and antics leave a lot to be desired. I’m really hoping that some of the lawsuits that have been launched against Apple really hurt them badly. What goes around, comes around and if you play with the fire long enough you’ll get burnt.
Apples problem is with its employees who are leaking the information, and they should get off their fat, lazy asses and find those people and sue them. Not sue a rumour site that gets the end result. Has Apple registered these as trade secrets? Yes or No? If no, they have no bloody case. It’s no good saying it’s a trade secret after its leaked, if it wasn’t registered legally as one prior to release, and again, the case is against those leaking the information, not receiving it.
The judge in cases like this should see the cases for the pure utter bullshit that they are and throw them out quick smart, and better still fine these sorts of companies for being litiguous bastards and wasting the courts time. Period.
Dave
I hope tort reform takes place under the Bush administration! From what I understood from the latest new story, the current administration wants to limit class action lawsuits so that they would have to be filed under federal law, which would severely limit lawsuits in states such as California, Alabama, Texas and a few others with liberal consumer laws.
This is probably being driven in part by Steve Jobs ego as some of his thunder may be tempered a bit. Apple has done some really silly suits and practices in the past. I remember when they were threatening magazines of dropping them from their pr lists if the magazine printed articles revealing imperfections in Apple hardware. Apple never admits to mistakes and tries to bludgeon down any revealing info.
A G4 does not run OS X “well”. “Tolerably”, perhaps, depending on how much patience you have.
Don’t make a general statement and pass it of a facts while using subjective terms. A G4 is slow according to you.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I hope they release a PowerBook G5, or even an upgraded G4. The PowerBooks haven’t been updated for a while, and the iBooks are now catching up. Maybe, (I am hoping), we shall see a new PowerBook soon.
I agree with most other people on here, in saying that they shouldn’t be suing ThinkSecret, but rather the employees/persons who are leaking the information. I would never dream of leaking information out of our company, because it would not only cost you your job, but would probably make it very difficult for you to get another job.