The guys over at the RetroMacCast sent us a link to their latest episode, featuring an interview with none other than Rob Janoff, the designer of Apple's old rainbow Mac logo. The interview starts a little less than halfway into the show, and it's cool to hear a voice right out of Apple's past.

They talk about the inception of the logo -- how Apple came to Janoff's firm and what they originally asked for in terms of a design. He actually had very little guidance when first creating the logo, and in fact hadn't seen any of Apple's branding or even heard of the company before he created the now-iconic image. He also talks about how lucky he was in choosing the image -- he saw it as a pretty obvious choice to use a picture of fruit for a company named after said fruit, but like any great logo, there ended up being layers of meaning behind that apple bite (or byte, as he points out).

Nothing really earthshaking in the interview (he hasn't had contact with Apple since, and even he says that the mythology behind the company has much more to do than just the familiar logo), but hey, if you're hanging out today during Memorial Day and need something interesting to listen to while barbecuing, you can tune in and learn a little bit about Apple's corporate history.

As Mike mentioned in the news roundup yesterday, word is going around that the corporate overlords at Apple are planning to build a massive server farm in the state of North Carolina within the next decade or so. How do we know? Because the company is working on getting a few nice tax breaks to go along with the deal, eventually worth about $46 million if Apple fulfills their end of the agreement. Their end of the agreement being a huge investment of a whopping $1 billion (that's over 333,000 Xserves, if that is indeed what they're installing -- and we bet not) into an economy that could probably use it. What exactly will go in there? We aren't sure -- lawmakers say the investment is worth it, and obviously Apple isn't showing their cards.

[Note: the $1B investment figure is not an upfront number, but rather a total investment over the first 9 years of operation. –Ed.]

But the facility, once up and running, will start by employing at least 100 people, so that's a nice start. Google has apparently gone through the same deal with North Carolina recently, though their deal was a little smaller: $600 million investment for a server farm that opened last year.

More backend for Mobile Me? More power for the App Store or a project like it? A giant building full of Cubes running 24 hours a day? Or something we haven't even dreamt of yet?

In a research note to clients, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster suggested that Apple is developing a 7-to-10-inch tablet priced at $500 to $700, perhaps ready for the public in 2010.

According to AppleInsider, Munster's contacts in the supply chain haven't seen a prototype of the device, but are in discussions with Apple to supply components for something at that size and price point.

Munster believes that Apple could adjust the iPhone SDK to allow for multiple display resolutions. Apps like Safari and Mail, he says, would benefit from the additional screen real estate. He also mentions that with the larger screen, more than one traditional iPhone app could be run at once.

As for timing, Munster suggests that the device could be ready next year, and possibly be subsidized by a wireless carrier.

As with most analysis of this kind, this is two parts hearsay, one part "interpretation of conference call statements," and seven parts wishful thinking. In providing technical details about a product that may not exist, Munster is writing checks that Apple might not be able to cash.

Is this something you'd buy? Is it even going to happen? Sound off in comments.

I really didn't have any complaints about the latest Mac OS update. It went smoothly on 3 Macs, and I didn't hear any complaints from friends or associates.

While many people moan about things that didn't get fixed, I'm somewhat concerned about the things that the 10.5.7 update DID fix that I didn't know about.

A bit of background: For about a year I've had a Logitech Webcam. It was designed for the Mac, and was meant to replace the iSight firewire webcam that Apple unceremoniously discontinued.

The Logitech unit, a Quickcam Vision Pro for Mac, has a wonderful crisp image and a nice wide angle view. It is plug and play. That's the problem. As some other users have seen, its internal aperture adjustment sometimes goes haywire, and you have to unplug it, and re-plug it in again to get a picture that is not really, really dark. It's kind of plug and play, then unplug or don't play. Then plug it in again.

Update: Our bad... the date on the MacRumors comment was in late April, and this recycled up into our queue due to an editing mixup. Apologies –Ed.

There's a new iTunes beta version out in developers' hands straight from Apple, and a forum poster over at Mac Rumors found a little something fun in the About screen: a reference to Gracenote's ability to identify Blu-ray discs. Gracenote is the service that IDs your CDs when you import them into iTunes, so you don't have to sit there and type all the track names and artist information in. Apparently Apple is mentioning that not only CDs and DVDs, but also Blu-ray discs, will get information from Gracenote in the latest version of iTunes.

This doesn't mean that Apple will adapt Blu-ray as a standard (though it would probably be about time, don't you think?). But it should mean that the future version of iTunes will include Blu-ray support, so if you happen to have a Blu-ray drive hooked up to your Mac, you'll be able to read or play the discs via iTunes.

It could just mean that Apple has upgraded the Gracenote version in their app, however, and that they have no plans to actually use it -- the text in the About screen could just be a boilerplate cut-and-paste from some required Gracenote documentation that happens to include "Blu-ray." We'll have to wait and see just what shows up in 8.2 when it eventually releases to the public.

This is really wild: what you see above is an example of "viral music" -- it's part of an upcoming music festival that's taking place in Sweden, and it features a circle of iPhones that are both listening to and playing a very abstract kind of "music." Each one is picking up audio from its environment, then running it through a series of software filters to make it sound more musical, and finally playing it back in a rhythm. As each iPhone is picking up the tune from the other iPhones it's playing it back through the same filters, and so on and so forth. All while the software is "judging" each "cell" of sound, to see if it's interesting or loud enough or so forth, and cells will live or die based on that criteria -- in essence, a musical organism.

Like I said, wild. That program is called the "Bacterial Orchestra -- Public Epidemic No. 1," and it sounds like the app will be available on the iPhone soon as well. Of course, you'll have to have a bunch of iPhones with the app in one place for it to work the way it's designed, but at least there's good video of it.

Apple's push notifications sure are neat, but they aren't the brass ring for developers on the iPhone. That, so far, would be background processes. And while Apple has said that background processes would just be too much of a drain on the iPhone's battery, that doesn't mean they don't want them, too.

Ars Technica reports that Apple is still trying to figure out a way for certain apps to do it. There's two options laid out here: one is user-based, in which the user actually approves certain apps to run in the background, with the consequence (if you do choose to enable that) of lower battery lifetime. The second has Apple approving apps for background action, allowing certain developers to run based on limits of "resource usage such as RAM or network bandwidth."

Obviously, there are pros and cons to each plan -- giving the power to the user means they will be able to choose when the battery is drained (on a particularly busy day, for instance, or when the iPhone is plugged in), but it also means that users will have the ability to crash their own phones (allowing too many background processes could cause issues). And of course, while leaving the choice in Apple's hands will make sure background processing is only used in the "right circumstances," we all know how great Apple is at app approval.

Ars concludes on the same point that I would: if background processes are really going to make a difference, they'll likely rely on a future iteration of the iPhone, as the one we've got now is just not built to run apps all the time, no matter who chooses them. Even if Apple is working out a way to run certain apps in the background, they are almost certainly spending more time beefing up the iPhone hardware as well.

Imagine this scenario: you're watching the latest episode of "Mythbusters" on the Discovery Channel when an ad for Nationwide Insurance appears. Are they trying to sell you insurance? Of course, but they're also touting their new Nationwide Mobile (click opens iTunes) iPhone app, which Nationwide policyholders can use to report accidents, start claims, and find local agents or repair shops.

Later, you're watching NBA playoff action and you see an ad for E*TRADE that catches your attention. It's not that you want to lose more money in the stock market, but you're fascinated because the ad is talking about the E*TRADE Mobile Pro app for the iPhone. Banks have been doing iPhone apps for a while, with Chase and Bank of America taking the lead.

Are you beginning to see a trend here? Sure, maybe a handful of ads doesn't make a trend, but more and more companies are delivering apps that provide a mobile solution for their customers, and then advertising that iPhone-based solution to a wider audience on TV. Why? The iPhone, despite being on the market for two years, is still considered to be leading-edge technology, and it has an unparalleled "cool factor". Any company wanting to show that it's cool and on top of current mobile technology is going to jump on the iPhone connection.

I wouldn't expect to see any Microsoft apps for iPhone soon. What apps and related ads would you like to see?

Update: Thanks to the many readers who pointed out that there are two Microsoft apps available: Seadragon Mobile and Microsoft Tag Reader. Of course, I seriously doubt if they're going to tout either of these apps in a TV ad.

Additionally, we've seen a DirectTV ad that shows a customer interacting with the service via his iPhone. They're not promoting the mobile app or the iPhone, just using it in a matter-of-fact way. Interesting.

Microsoft's latest advertising campaign, while more stimulating than the Seinfeld/Gates spots, has one goal and one goal only: sell PCs. Microsoft's endgame, it seems, is to persuade people into purchasing Windows-running PCs by leveraging the fact that Macs are more expensive than PCs.

I'm not going to get into this argument because a) it's been done before, and b) the answer always comes out with just a little bias. In my opinion, the hardware comes out costing the same (with negligible differences) no matter how you run the numbers. What I would rather discuss is how Microsoft is making its attack and what it is actually doing to help Apple.

Miguel Sanchez-Grice, creator of the iCombat app (a remake of the old Atari game), sent us these stats on piracy of his app after writing a blog post about the same thing, and I find them fascinating. Instead of building DRM into his app, he just detected if the player was using a copy that wasn't from the App Store, and then forwarded them onto a web page that he could track. It seems like he equates unique visitors to his Pinch Media site as users (though he doesn't go into detail about exactly where those "Pinch Media New Uniques" numbers come from), and then subtracts legit app sales from those numbers to get the number of pirates. And while he says the numbers are lower than he expected, they seem pretty high to me: there is a substantial number of people out there using cracked apps.

I don't think I've ever fallen in love with an app as quickly as Bebot. Not only is it a pretty darn powerful synthesizer with an interesting touchscreen interface, but that robot. That robot! He makes you want to play something, anything, with those cute little closed robot eyes and that dashing tux and that knowing smile. If you just want to make funny robot noises, that's easy enough, but for the musically inclined, there's a really surprising amount of features under the hood, including analog filters, a delay/looping effect, chorus and overdrive effects, and even an autotune system. Oh, and because of the multitouch screen, you can play up to four waveforms at a time. In the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, this thing can be really impressive.

It's available from a company called Normalware (any app with that robot in it has basically sold me from now on -- there's even a t-shirt of the guy) on the App Store right now for $1.99.

The other day I had the fortune of hanging out with TUAW's own Mike Rose and our old colleague David Chartier in Chicago, and my main fear going into the meeting was that, given what a bunch of iPhone geeks we were, we'd just spend the whole time showing off apps on our iPhones. Not that seeing cool apps isn't awesome, but if you've ever had anyone excitedly show you what an app can do, I think it gets to be a little much. And I'm not alone -- though yes, the iPhone does a lot of things that we have never been able to do before, it is possible to get "app-noxious," a term coined by MSNBC to describe people who are way too excited about what their iPhone can do. Yes, we know already, there is an app for that. Give it a break.

This isn't the first time this phenomenon has popped up, and if you own an iPhone, you probably already know about it anyway -- I was definitely looking for made-up ways to use SnapTell Explorer when I first installed it. So next time you feel the urge to break into someone else's conversation to let them know about this app you bought last night that does exactly what they're talking about, hold your tongue, at least until you're not interrupting.

And of course that doesn't mean that app nerds can't still be nerds about it -- yes, though Rose and Chartier and I didn't spend the whole time showing off apps to each other, we each did bring out phones at least once to show off just how great this new app we just got was.

[via MacDailyNews]

This is a painful review to write, because the SlingPlayer for iPhone had so much potential before AT&T decided to cripple it. One can understand the terror at the thought of a million SlingPlayers draining network bandwidth dry, but in fact, AT&T seems to be violating its own Terms of Service by allowing other smartphones to run SlingPlayer without interference.

OK, so how does the SlingPlayer [App Store link] for iPhone/iPod touch work on a WiFi network? Pretty well. The video can be a bit choppy, but it is quite watchable, and basically gives you a full-featured television receiver (or DVD player if you are set up that way) wherever you have an accessible network.

Set up is pretty easy and does not require a manual. The only pain point is inputting your unique Sling ID which requires typing long strings of upper case letters followed by numbers. This can be skipped if you have a Sling account configured in advance.

In my case I have a SlingBox Pro, connected to a DirecTV HD receiver. The remote worked fine, and it is a transparent overlay so the video shows through. Entering a command results in a 4-5 second wait for it to be executed, but that is understandable considering what is going on behind the scenes. Entering pretty much any command to the remote pauses the video and audio, which again, is understandable but not desirable.

If you have a DVR, the SlingPlayer app will control it, which is a real benefit to users who are away from home and want to catch a program, or play it back remotely.

The loss of 3G functionality is sad. In the old days I used the SlingPlayer on a Motorola smartphone. When traveling, it was easy to catch a newscast or get some ball scores from any location. Now, you have to have a Wi-Fi connection, which seriously limits your options.

Finally, there is the matter of price. It is hard to endorse paying $30.00US for an app that has lost a major feature. Sling charges the same price for versions of the app that do run on 3G. It seems unfair given all that has happened to this app.

It is certainly true that Sling Media is not to blame for the business decisions of AT&T, but the company certainly controls the pricing of the app.

I think there will be a lot of people who want to buy and use SlingPlayer Mobile for iPhone. On the other hand, many people have had their enthusiasm severely dampened by the current situation. Unfortunately, no matter how clever the app, and it IS clever, AT&T, Apple and Sling Media have all been damaged by this drama.

Nothing is forever, and policies can change. All concerned will have to figure out if the decisions made so far with this app are worth the damage to reputations and corporate image.

Note: The Sling web site is running pretty slowly as I write this, and I was surprised to see that the iPhone version of the app is not listed in the support options.

Here are some screen shots of the app in operation: