New MacCast soon, I promise.

Written by: Adam Christianson

Categories: Podcast

I know, I know. You are all waiting to hear the MacGeeks response on the Apple Intel news and it is coming I promise. I just finished up the show notes for my Apple Intel response show and it’s 12:45 AM on Friday morning. I really need to get some sleep, so I will most likely be posting a new show tomorrow. I will also probably record a second show over the weekend just to catch up on all the other news, feedback and listener questions I have piled up. I hope the double dose of the MacCast will make up for the lack of a mid-week show. I was going to record on Wednesday, but that morning my trust old B&W G3, which served me well for 6 years, decided it was time to retire. So, I got a shiny new 20″ iMac G5 and I’m sure we’ll talk about that too. In the meantime I need your help. In case you were not aware yet, friend of the MacCast Mike Talmadge at who makes the iPed stand received a cease and desist letter from Apple. Seems they are concerned we are all not smart enough to know the difference between an iPed stand and an Apple iPod. Read, Apple threatens company over usage of ‘iPed’ name over at iPodlounge to get caught up. After I heard about this, Mike and I had an interview and I will be filling you all in on what he had to say. Until then Mike would like to hear from you. Please send your thoughts, opinions, words of encouragement and alternative names for the iPed (just in case) to Mike was an early listener and supporter of the MacCast, so I would appreciate it if you could take a moment to help me return the favor.

There are 13 comments on New MacCast soon, I promise.:

RSS Feed for these comments
  1. Rick | Jun 10 2005 - 06:55

    Hey Adam, you are going to love your new iMac. I just got one and It has blown me away. The 20″ screen is … well you just need to watch some of those H.264 HD trailers on it and you will be wetting your pants. I do a ton of work in Indesign and Photoshop so I am dying for more ram than the standard 512, but I talk with my boss today and I hope he will approve more ram and order it for me. Anywho – it is always a sad day when computers pass to the other side – but hopeflully you will seek comfort in your new shiney friend!

  2. macFanDave | Jun 10 2005 - 09:25

    I have already written to some forum that I thought this was a stupid move, even though I generally support Apple’s aggressive legal maneuvers. Even if someone got confused and Googled iPed instead of iPod, Thought Out’s site clearly points to the iPod. It is obviously a product that is an accessory for an iPod and not a competitor.

    However, someone brought up a good point that indicates that Apple may have no quarrel with the iPed, per se. The letter is a formality that indicates that Apple is diligent about its trademark. Suppose someone were to introduce a hard-drive-based MP3 player and called it a “MyPod” and then Apple sued. If Apple tolerated the iPed, the makers of the MyPod would complain that Apple is selectively enforcing its trademark and a judge might doubt Apple’s commitment to its iPod moniker.

    It’s unlikely, but I think it’s a procedure that Apple was compelled to do.

    It’s probably a blessing in disguise, because, despite its cleverness, iPed is a terrible name. I heard Adam mention it on the MacCast and had to check it out, since I couldn’t figure out what it was. Also, I was not the only one who made the unfortunate connection to pedophiles.

    With the proliferation of iPod accessories, I’d go with something more obviously descriptive. iPedestal would be a plainer, safer and more self-explanatory choice.

  3. mike | Jun 10 2005 - 10:54

    “iPedestal would be a plainer, safer and more self-explanatory choice.” That was the original name see the site for the definition, although already TRADE MARKED by

  4. Sully | Jun 10 2005 - 11:00

    Whoa! Jobs and Apple need to get a grip! Right up there with anything stupid that ever came out of Microsoft. Something as harmless as this should be a non issue.

  5. Alan | Jun 10 2005 - 01:43

    Right on Sully!

    Yet another example of Apple’s predatory, arrogant, and mean spirited business practices.

    Like I always say: “If you can’t beat ’em, beat ’em”.

  6. Craig Patchett | Jun 10 2005 - 02:37

    Hey, while everyone’s waiting for the next MacCast check out my podcast walk-through of itunes 4.9 at complete with screenshots!

  7. Paul D. Spradling | Jun 10 2005 - 05:14


    I don’t understand why this is “another example of Apple’s predatory, arrogant, and mean spirited business practices.”

    Do you not think we users will benefit from Intel CPU’s?
    I mean come on, the PM is at Dual 2.7GHz and the PB at 1.67 G4.
    Doesn’t a Dual Core 3.2Ghz CPU or a Xeon or a Pentium M 2.13 CPU sound good for you Mac?

    Also wouldn’t you love to run WINE?

  8. maccast | Jun 10 2005 - 06:35

    Chances are an updated version of Virtual PC would offer the same features as WINE. I guess as a free(open source) option WINE would be nice, but the average user won’t be able to get WINE installed and configured.

  9. Alan | Jun 10 2005 - 06:00

    I was referring to the iPed cease and desist issue.

    Regarding the use of Intel chips: Next year when Stevie Steel Eyes announces that Apple is dropping support for PowerPC based systems as a cost-cutting measure to shore up the losses from the collapsed iPod market, I’m sure he’ll frame the news in such a way that we’ll all be handing him our wallets with sympathetic smiles on our way to the garbage dump to drop off our recently purchased G5s.

  10. maccast | Jun 10 2005 - 09:41

    Alan, care to backup your theory on why you believe the market for the iPod will collapse in the next year? I can understand the market maturing and simply leveling, but I seriously doubt it will collapse. Also, I am sure Apple will not drop PowerPC support. As proof look at the fact that it took 3 years before they dropped boot capabilities for OS 9 and even today, 5 years later, they still support OS 9 apps with Classic.

  11. Paul D. Spradling | Jun 11 2005 - 12:15

    I agree with Adam on this one Alan.

  12. GreenAlien | Jun 11 2005 - 06:47

    Regarding iPed. I can understand Apple’s move to protect their iPod trademark. The iPed sounds far too similar and must benefit from the millions Apple spends on advertising the iPod. It’s also sometimes hard to remember that not everyone finds this so obvious – not everyone is a Mac or tech geek.

  13. Alan | Jun 12 2005 - 06:17

    I mean Apple’s dominant position in the music player market will collapse.

    The high quality (yet low profit) of iTunes is the only thing that allows Apple to continue dominating the market with their overpriced and under-featured (yet high profit) music players. I predict that this imbalance will breed a strong competitive response and that when this happens, Apple’s market share will tumble overnight. They’ll finally be forced to compete with better products at slimmer margins. The result being that revenues from iPod sales will dry up dramatically.