I would be quite suprised to see 802.11n implimented in Macs, before the standard is ratified.

One other thing worth noting…

The 5.8 Ghz band has less penetrating power, (ability to propigate past walls and other barriers) than the 2.4 Ghz band.

although it is useful for preventing your signal from spilling out into the parking lot, (for a business…)

Your last paragraph sums it up for me! Smart man.

Some of the things that used the Mac prefix, may have not been up to Apple’s standards and, thus, may have damaged the image of the Macintosh.

I don’t know the rules, but I sure hope Apple’s legal department does. One thing that goes unmentioned is exactly how vigorously Apple is pursuing these companies. Perhaps it is just a formality to fire off a cease-and-desist letter, but if the company says it is confident that no confusion exists or it has been using the name since before the iPod existed, Apple might end the exercise.

I’ve had opportunities to get involved with intellectual property law, but was advised by those in the field, “Turn and run the other way!” It’s situations like this that made them give such advice!

It is not just Mac, it is iPod and POD too. iPodNN, podmania, PODSPLUS the list goes on. The point is:

1. What are the rules?
2. And why do only some get picked on (for the lack of a better word)?

I have a feeling that the fact that all kinds of things are named MacThis and MacThat means that they did not move decisively enough in the early days of the Mac that they lost the right to exert any control over the syllable “Mac.” Did Adam get permission to call this podcast the MacCast? I think not.

One man’s bullying is another man’s due diligence.

Yes, the trademark law does say you must protect your trademarks, but it does not say how you must do it.

If you don’t aggressively guard your trademark, you will be in a very weak position when a real infringement occurs. If Apple lets the TigerPOD and the ProfitPOD slide, a real infringer will argue in court that they are being singled out and that Apple is being arbitrary in enforcing its trademark rights.

It remains to be seen whether these other products have been named in order to glom onto the coolness of the syllable “pod” that Apple pioneered with the iPod. I know you like the David vs. Goliath paradigm, but you do a disservice to your listeners by always assuming that “David” is always good and innocent, and that Apple is always the cruel, heartless, greedy “Goliath.”

The iPod is the single most valuable trademark Apple has had since Mac. They owe it to the shareholders to vigorously defend this property.