Slashdot Mirror

First, this story is months old and dates back to late August. Second, contrary to the headline, they're not threatening over the "AppleADay" name but the logo.

Third, as is pointed out every time an incident like this occurs, trademark owners have to take no chances and must enforce perceived violations or risk losing their right to it. There is always the risk that a court somewhere in the world might cite the lack of action in some particular case. But, since it's a "David v. Goliath" article, as the summary put it, it's an excellent story to submit to Slashdot and rile up the natives.

Since the two logos only resemble each other to the extent that they both depict apples, why isn't Apple suing Fruit of the Loom or Vic Fruit. Using the same logic, Red Hat would have to sue Arby's to maintain their trademark.

First, this story is months old and dates back to late August. Second, contrary to the headline, they're not threatening over the "AppleADay" name but the logo.

Third, as is pointed out every time an incident like this occurs, trademark owners have to take no chances and must enforce perceived violations or risk losing their right to it. There is always the risk that a court somewhere in the world might cite the lack of action in some particular case. But, since it's a "David v. Goliath" article, as the summary put it, it's an excellent story to submit to Slashdot and rile up the natives.

This keeps coming up in defense of Apple every time, and it is completely untrue in context like this. Apple have to defend their trademark within the business they operate in, but there is no need going after tiny healtfood companies. Apple is significantly more litigation happy than most companies, and far more than they "need" to be.

First, this story is months old and dates back to late August. Second, contrary to the headline, they're not threatening over the "AppleADay" name but the logo.

So Apple is threatening the small bistro over a logo is not even similar to the Apple logo? This violation is only perceived by Apple's lawyers. No consumer is going to mistake the bistro for being tied at all to Apple, especially since Apple pastes their logo on everything.

First, this story is months old and dates back to late August. Second, contrary to the headline, they're not threatening over the "AppleADay" name but the logo.

Third, as is pointed out every time an incident like this occurs, trademark owners have to take no chances and must enforce perceived violations or risk losing their right to it. There is always the risk that a court somewhere in the world might cite the lack of action in some particular case. But, since it's a "David v. Goliath" article, as the summary put it, it's an excellent story to submit to Slashdot and rile up the natives.

No, I mean carbon, which is unofficially deprecated with 10.5, and which has had plenty of deprecated bits for 10.4, see this .

> Nor does it reflect the Unix based OS that you get with the Mac.

UNIX UNIX UNIX

It might be the fastest and it might be UNIX, but it still has the gayest, most unintuitive, most non-keyboard-centric user interface ever designed. Oh, that and the fact that there is no longer a start/apple menu so all you applications are crammed onto a long bar at the bottom with no text description.

It might be the fastest and it might be UNIX, but it still has the gayest, most unintuitive, most non-keyboard-centric user interface ever designed. Oh, that and the fact that there is no longer a start/apple menu so all you applications are crammed onto a long bar at the bottom with no text description. Fine if you only use a half a dozen apps I guess. w00t.

http://www.macgeneration.com/mgnews/depeche.php?aI dDepeche=4017

click the french numbers, nice large pictures of it there..

Scan of new iMac. So I guess this is real.

here: http://www.macg eneration.com/actu/dossiers/ae2000/photos/cata.sht ml (the page is in french)