http://nytimes.com/2005/03/21/technology/21apple.html

Registration still required.

For the BILLIONTH time. Steve Jobs is NOT going after the rumor sites to shut them down. He is going after the people that signed NDAs who leaked the information and are legally liable for doing so. WHEN are people going to get this straight? There is a HUGE difference between posting rumors and posting information from an illegal source.

Steve should try to find who is leaking the information internally. Rumor sites do not have the money to hire expensive lawyers to defend themselves against a multi billion dollar corporation like apple. Legal fees are the sort of thing that would bankrupt a small operation like thinksecret. There is more than one way to go after the internal leaker, and this is the way that makes apple look like a bully. I don't like it because this is something Microsoft would do.

I've never understood the logic that the rumor sites help spur interest and discussion. Wouldn't the actual release, where everyone can see the actual product, be the best point to spur discussion. Without these 'unveilings', Macworld ends up being a ho-hum event (why bother watching the keynote if you already know that there's an iPod shuffle and mac mini on the way?) And all the pre-talk that arises about the new products only leads to disappointment when some rumored feature (or some un-mentioned feature that people start hoping it has doesn't come to be) doesn't make the cut. "What do you mean, no iPod dock in the mini? This is a joke, right! Who the h***'s going to buy this without a dock! I'm getting a Dell!!"

And its not like there's any lack of discussion before MWSF about what might or might not be released. h***, fake photos shot in elevators are enough to get 10 pages of chatter going on new iMacs alone.

"He's in the fashion business ... He has to have a new hit every quarter or he goes out of business."

Surely he can't mean that Apple will literally go out of business if they present another Cube next quarter. Maybe he means Jobs and his charisma will go "out of business", i.e. be less effective, if he doesn't have a hit every quarter.

Kinda reminds me of all the FUDdites who told me McDonald's would go out of business if they started making their burgers to order rather than pre-loading them with all the works. What a shock, just a few years ago McDonald's started making their burgers to order (just as Wendy's and Burger King already had), and they're still the nation's largest fast food chain.

Could we scrap the "if they do X they'll go out of business" hyperbole, please?

Apple lawsuits [are a] surprise [to the] few [people] who [actually] know [Steve] Jobs [personally]

is how I read it.

Wiggum, if two companies had obtained trade-secret info from a leaker that was illegal for that leaker to share, and one was a huge publishing giant and the other was a web site run by a kid still living at home, you'd go after the kid every time. It is FAR easier for Jobs to find out who the leaker is (which is ALL THEY WANT, btw) from a "little cog" than try to extract it from a "big cog."

Wiggum, if two companies had obtained trade-secret info from a leaker that was illegal for that leaker to share, and one was a huge publishing giant and the other was a web site run by a kid still living at home, you'd go after the kid every time. It is FAR easier for Jobs to find out who the leaker is (which is ALL THEY WANT, btw) from a "little cog" than try to extract it from a "big cog."

Well, to look at it another way. The likelihood that a huge publishing giant would (a) care about Apple secrets, and (b) get the information past their editorial staffs without them going "Wait, you got trade secret information here, we can't print this". Part of that whole 'responsible' journalism that they theoretically would be bound by. Of course, the huge publishing giant wouldn't have room on their pages for Apple gossip, when there's Michael Jackson hoopla here, Martha Stewart there (OMG! Did you see that sweater she was wearing when she left prison!). h***, Robert Blake got off so easy. His was going to be another OJ trial, and then he just got swept to the side by MJ and martha, most people didn't even know his trial started until it was over.

"He's in the fashion business ... He has to have a new hit every quarter or he goes out of business."

Surely he can't mean that Apple will literally go out of business if they present another Cube next quarter. Maybe he means Jobs and his charisma will go "out of business", i.e. be less effective, if he doesn't have a hit every quarter.

No, actually the problem is Steve's own doing. At this point, people expect any keynote or presentation he's giving, there's going to be a WOW factor. And hits hard to WOW the crowd if they all know what's coming. Do you remember how much bawling people did when he first did a keynote without the "oh, and one more thing". And how bad he got creamed (and not in a good way, if you know what I mean!) at a couple of those expos when Apple didn't announce anything of note (well, OK, the dalmation iMac was something of note, just not sure the note they were hoping).

If the speculation alone were really worth "tens of millions" in press then Jobs would be a colossal moron to intimidate rumor sites. I have also noticed that even Macnn and other "mainstream" Mac sites often drop a note or two about a rumor. Funny, they don't get attacked. It really is about the NDAs and I wish Apple had a better way to deal with it. All a lot of dirty business all the way around.