Headline Feeds
The biggest news in the Apple-focused blogosphere this week is the rumor that retail 
powerhouse Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) might be prepping to sell a US$99 iPhone -- that's right, an iPhone for less than 100 bucks.
In other hot news, Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) been flirting with virus-checking recommendations, and finally, after weeks of delay, Apple is almost shipping its new in-ear headphones.
Something Wal-Mart This Way Comes?
The Boy Genius Report first broke the original Wal-Mart rumor -- that the retail behemoth could be selling iPhones in the future -- and later Genius followed up with more detail, namely that the $99 iPhone 3G would have only 4 GB of storage and still come with a two-year service contract with AT&T (NYSE: T).
"We're not putting our stamp of approval behind this one just yet as the tipster isn't listed in our BGR's Guide to respected Ninjas handbook, but it does make you think, doesn't it?" The Boy Genius reported.
Most commenters seemed to like the idea, though H.N.I.C. simply noted, "HUH?"
"I don't know why they canceled the 4gb. If WalMart gets it, it'll become the Razr of the next few years," commented christexaport. Some commenters took issue with their identities as iPhone owners. "This sucks!!!! So much for being 'the guy with the iPhone' They should offer the 4gb in a shi**y brown so everybody knows who these cheap bastards are!!!!" commented Pissed off Plumber. Another key question comes back to storage. Is 4 GB enough? On the MacRumors.com post on the subject, reader fleshman03 noted, "Who has only 4gb of music? I don't know many college students who fall in that range. Maybe High School students? Plenty of us shop at Walmart too. (As much as we hate it.) Now add a movie or two and 3.5gb is nowhere near enough storage. I had a hard enough time going from a 32 gb iPod to a 16gb touch. When I bought the iPod, I didn't think I'd ever touch 15gb, let alone 32. I now have over 60 gb of movies ..." While most consumers probably don't have 60 GB of movies, does a 4 GB make much sense? "Obviously it's just a rumor, and short of Apple releasing another form factor at another price point, one way Apple could get to that price point is by reducing the memory," Raven Zachary, founder of iPhoneDevCamp and a contributing analyst for The 451 Group, told MacNewsWorld. Even though the price of 4 GB of memory is falling, Zachary doesn't believe Apple could make much of a profit on a $99 iPhone, though he said Apple could take it as a loss leader to increase their market share as a long-term plan. "Most applications are less than 10 MB, so you could easily fit more than a 100 apps -- and the phone can only have 148 apps at any given time," Zachary explained. "Two gigabytes of memory for applications is sufficient for the vast majority of users," he added, noting that the bigger issue may be if there is a significant market out there of people whose primary hesitation is that the current iPhone is $200 and not $100. So even if 4 GB is plenty of space for most users, will they even sell? "Four-gigabyte iPhones were a bust before, and Apple phased them out -- not sure why they would go back to this model," Ken Dulaney, a vice president and mobile and wireless analyst for Gartner (NYSE: IT), told MacNewsWorld.
"But I would say the 4 GB model, without some service price action, would not do all that well," he said.
In a wonderfully fun turn of events, the Mac-focused blogosphere enjoyed a storm of Apple virus-focused coverage. It all started innocently enough -- some worker bee deep in the heart of Apple merely went about the task of updating a support document on the company's Web site. The page in question encouraged "the widespread use of multiple antivirus utilities so that virus programmers have more than one application to circumvent, thus making the whole virus writing process more difficult." It was originally posted last year and seems to have languished in obscurity until Apple updated the list of anti-virus solutions. That update sparked the notice of some tech news sites and blogs, which trumpeted headlines like "Apple Recommends Virus Protection Software!" As the brouhaha hit its peak, Apple simply removed the support document altogether. "We have removed the KnowledgeBase article because it was old and inaccurate," Apple spokesperson Bill Evans told Cnet. And then he also gave Cnet what could be interpreted as a conflicting statement: "The Mac is designed with built-in technologies that provide protection against malicious software and security threats right out of the box," he said. "However, since no system can be 100 percent immune from every threat, running antivirus software may offer additional protection."
Sure, tight slacks, jumbo shrimp and Mac viruses may well exist, but they're rare, and they probably only lurk in the sort of questionable porn sites that require special video engines users have to download and install. "I go to the 'DARK & DANGEROUS' places when I surf the internet, and my Mac is merely 'annoyed' so far ... but even with excellent security, the bad guys trashed my 2 year old Dell (Nasdaq: DELL) 2 years ago. I spent almost enough on security (& service calls) for the Dell to buy the Mac! So yes indeedy, the Mac is 'safe out of the box,'" commented pennwood18 on the Cnet News post. Many commenters wanted to turn the conversation into a Mac vs. PC (or really, a "PCs suck") thread, but many came back to the central point: that few Mac OS X viruses exist in the wild, making the software unnecessary for most users. "Anti-Virus software on the Mac is a wast of time, money and speed. You see, AV software run in the background and consumes CPU cycles and Memory scanning for something that does not exist. And while yes there is a chance it might one day, but until that day comes you would have wasted all that resource. Imagine if every Mac user used an Anti-Virus software since the release of Max OS X. Look how much wasted energy would have been consumed -- anyone from the Greenpeace hippy land around?" noted AppleProLeo. Still, commenter afterhours brought up an interesting point: that Mac users have a moral obligation not to spread viruses onto their PC-using friends -- even if the virus won't run on Mac OS X. "Why do you get a vaccine for polio? It's not widespread. But it's smart preventative action. ... Windows will implode in its own right, we don't need to help it along by playing Typhoid Mary," afterhours wrote. So is there any one correct explanation of this whole issue? Maybe. "It was Apple just putting some legal butt covering out on their Web site. Some employee must have thought, 'We can't tell people not to have [any] antivirus software, that's just crazy talk,'" Mel Beckman, an independent network and Internet security consultant, told MacNewsWorld. "The truth is that Macs simply don't need antivirus software. They are well-enough protected and they come secure out of the box," he said. "You don't put Band-Aids on unbroken skin," he added.
Finally, Apple is almost shipping the new high-quality In-Ear Headphones it mentioned way back in September and said would ship in October. Instead of "coming soon" plastered on Apple's product page, the new headphones can be ordered with a ship date -- albeit a vague one: "Ships: 2-3 weeks." Apple says the $79 headphones boast separate, high-performance drivers -- a woofer to handle bass and mid-range sounds and a tweeter for high-frequency audio. It's all designed to help ensure accurate, detailed sound across the entire sonic spectrum. In addition to the music, the new headphones have a built-in mic for audio recording on the latest iPod touch, nano and classic -- but they aren't fully compatible with the iPhone and the inline volume control. Without any reviews yet, the consensus is great hope for audio quality and usability for iPod owners. As for iPhone owners, it's mostly disappointment. "That is really disappointing that the iPhone is not supported. I was pretty stoked to use these as my go-everywhere headphones with my iPhone. I guess I will have to wait ..." commented macuser333 on the AppleInsider.com post on the subject.
Sparking Massive Sales?
You Need Virus Protection - Or Maybe Not?
'Mac Virus' an Oxymoron?
Moving On
Talkback: 
