does the sec outrule the hipaa laws?

as for security, well, yeah. considering ms is out there i'd be paranoid as h*** as well. i mean, they have to get their ideas from somewhere (apparently not from anywhere near the vicinity of redmond though).

Those who have run their own companies understand this security issue. There are just way too many out there who want to take the "shortcut" and steal from someone else. But Apple has made it part of its DNA and as such has been able to exploit it in their surprise marketing strategies, product launches, etc. Why take the bloom off the rose just because other electronics companies do this? Apple DOES think differently.
As to those who are fired... good riddance. And to others, quit your job if you don't like the way Apple operates... it is NOT your company.
Apple probably has some cell phone policies which other companies should emulate but won't because the employees run the company!

Not just MS, but now they have major cellphone companies itching to know what Apple is up to.

The part of the article that relates to Microsoft knowing about the Mac through security leaks is complete hogwash. It is well known that Steve Jobs showed the Mac to Bill Gates prior to it's release, there are even photographs of the meeting, and Microsoft had a jocular code-name for the Mac, SAND: Steve's Amazing New Device

When your products sell 10% of the market, you need to more than your fair share of press to succeed. The only way to do this is to control the information coming out of your company.

This is a boon to consumer sales, but Apple does sacrifice corporate sales who often need to plan six months or longer into the future.

Apple has crossed the line on this one. They clearly, intentionally, mislead investors in a premeditated fashion that had the potential to do serious fiduciary damage. If Jobs had died, Apple's stock would have tanked. Apple deserves to be fined, and heavily, so that other corporations do not pull stunts like this. This should not be allowed to stand as a precedent.

"Sony and Microsoft discovered the product before it had even launched"

Um, Microsoft was pulled in to develop Microsoft Basic for the Mac. That wasn't a leak that was a partnership.

So this is clearly an issue for stock holders as they are the ones that always make a stink about it. From an individual perspective, I say someone's personal life is there business - afterall, shouldn't you be able to be able to become anything you want on this country and still have a right to privicy. Regardless of what Jobs is to Apple, Jobs himself is not a product or a brand, Apple is and that is what investors are investing in.

As for the secrecy regarding M$, while true that Apple did give the mac to them in 84 - at the time Apple saw IBM as the competition - it was certainly a lesson - and let's face it, a personal blow to SJ himself - that set off the whole thing.

Privacy during times of personal crisis vs. the level of importance to investors or a corporation creates a circular argument.

Jobs said he was sick. Said he would be back in June. He's back.

Everybody and their little brother (and their big brother) copies everything Apple makes. Their only advantage is to develop in secrecy and maximize profit after development by giving themselves a little time. Not too difficult to see that.

any real case can be made about Steve's health "secret" might have made the stock tank. It is quite clear to me that revealing, if not misdiagnosed, information would have caused the stock to tank as well. So, it could be considered in the best interests of the investors that the infomation, correct or not would have been just as destructive.