MacCast 08.16.2006

Written by: Adam Christianson

Categories: Podcast

Download today’s show here! podcast-mini2.gif
MC20060816.mp3 [28.7mb 01:02:32 64kbps]

A podcast about all things Macintosh. For Mac geeks, by Mac geeks. Show 154. Apple says Steve is healthy, stop worrying. Seagate promises 120GB “iPod ready” drives by the end of the year. Mac Pro RAM confusion causing issues. Apple secretly updating MacBook Pro logic boards? Apple claiming ownership of all things “POD”. Latest Apple rumor round-up. Apple updates Boot Camp to 1.1, adds new features. OS X Intel kernel released as Open Source. MacCast One Minute Tip #20 – System Preferences. Update on D-Link DSM-G600 NAS Mac compatibility. My thoughts and impressions on seeing the MacPro. Fixes issues with loss of sound in some multimedia files. How to change the default application for a file. A discussion of the different Intel processors and Macs. What are all these extra “dot” files on my non-Mac volumes? Fixing issues with Quicktime streaming playback.

New music, Love Games by Superphones.

Strange things are afoot at the Circle-KBill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure (1989)

Shownotes: HTML or OPML
Subscribe to the Podcast Feed or Get the MP3

There are 11 comments on MacCast 08.16.2006:

RSS Feed for these comments
  1. Rob R. | Aug 17 2006 - 02:43

    Another great show ! thanks Adam.

  2. The Hatter | Aug 17 2006 - 05:27

    Love the new inline Flash player, Adam – that’s so much cooler!

  3. Chris (Amateur Traveler podcast) | Aug 17 2006 - 10:43

    Construction sounds? Didn’t you use to record many of your shows in the middle of the night? Just when are they doing construction? :-)

  4. macFanDave | Aug 17 2006 - 12:20

    For crying out loud, Adam, we’ve been through this before! Are you trying to be a troll?

    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.

  5. atomizer | Aug 17 2006 - 09:59

    In that case, the Beatles should have won their suit over Apple infringing on their name and trademark and the iTunes Music store should be shut down. That is totally ridiculous. And should also win their suit over Apple and other companies using their methods of transferring data. I can see Apple protecting the “iPod” brand, but “Pod”?? come on, that’s way too generic. Why should Apple get special priority over the “Pod” trademark when there are other companies who deserve the right or even more so?

  6. Mike Talmadge | Aug 18 2006 - 07:41

    I love APPLE as much as the next Apple fan but it is quite obvious they (apple lawyers) play a little favoritism. I can name off a good amount of names of company and products they have changed names of and the ones who have not change, one of them being the largest trade events for the APPLE community! (What company puts out that magazine…APPLE right? Nope it is “IDG”)

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

  7. macFanDave | Aug 18 2006 - 10:01


    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.

  8. Mike Talmadge | Aug 18 2006 - 10:45


    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)?

  9. macFanDave | Aug 18 2006 - 08:32

    I’m sorry, Mike, I did not finish my thought in post #7. I meant to add that after realizing the damage that was caused by not diligently staking out the Mac trademark, they did not want to repeat the mistake with the iPod brand.

    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!

  10. Mike Talmadge | Aug 19 2006 - 04:44


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

  11. Timotheus | Aug 20 2006 - 04:16

    Regarding adding 802.11aa as opposed to 802.11n, personally, I’m happy with what I’m getting from 802.11g, and I wouldn’t buy any Pre-n or Draft-n equipment. At a minimum, I would wait for the spec to be final, the interoperability to be hashed out, and a shootout of all the major brands, (Linksys, Netgear, D-Link Etc.) from PC Magazine, that verifies that interopilibility has been achieved.

    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…)