There's a loud buzzing this morning, and it's not just the hangover from late-night celebrations of the Yankees' pennant win; quite a few tech and Mac sites (we heard it first from Edible Apple, although it's really everywhere now) are reporting on week-old remarks from the New York Times executive editor, Bill Keller, that were supposed to remain off-the record -- and of course are now playing on video all across the web.

If you look at the transcript of his chat, or the 8:20 mark in the video, you'll see him refer to delivery of journalism to mobile platforms, and then he mentions the "impending Apple slate."

Is this a simple moment of wishful thinking for Keller, or is it linked to the presumptive starring role that daily newspapers would play on the hypothetical Apple wundergadget? I can't wait to find out.

Read on to see the video.

Well, looks like we weren't the only ones wondering about the two big questions of the day -- the New York Times sat down briefly with Steve Jobs post-event this morning and found out the whys and wherefores on the following:

• Why doesn't the iPod nano take still pictures? Jobs says that the tiny teensy CMOS sensor in the nano isn't up to the quality standards needed for stills; it's too thin. "The sensors for doing a still camera... they are just way too thick to ever fit inside the Nano."
• What about a camera for the iPod touch? The product path for the touch, apparently, is that it's a great gaming device and it's the lowest investment option for getting access to the App Store; given that, the push was to get it down to a price point everyone could afford instead of adding new features like a camera. "So what we were focused on is just reducing the price to $199. We don't need to add new stuff - we need to get the price down where everyone can afford it." Not to say it won't ever happen.

So much for my idea of a firmware update to the nano enabling still images down the road.

Do you remember the teaser ads for the iPhone 3G? Two uniformed guards carried a locked metal crate through a labyrinth of secure tunnels, keycard points at every door, and monitored by security cameras? Turns out the real Apple isn't too far from that, according to Brad Stone and Ashlee Vance at the New York Times.

They cite former employees and analysts who all agree that Apple, as Gene Munster put it, "a total black box." Apple, in an effort to guard their company's secrets until the day they're launched have instituted a culture of fear among employees: Loose lips sink ships.

Apple's campus is, according to the article, "a maze of security doors" where employees must swipe their badges and enter codes on numeric keypads -- presumably not only to restrict access, but to serve as a record of who was where if any information does leak out. Many work areas are monitored by closed-circuit TV. According to one unnamed employee, "workers in the most critical product-testing rooms must cover up devices with black cloaks when they are working on them, and turn on a red warning light when devices are unmasked so that everyone knows to be extra-careful."

I've worked in high-security areas before for the U.S. military, and the big difference between the military and Apple is fear. Lots of fear. A secure military workspace is comfortable, but formal: If you catch a glimpse of something you shouldn't, it's not a big deal, just forget what you saw. Apple employees on the other hand, according to the article, are petrified of losing their job, being sued, or both.

In Apple's quiver is another piercing arrow: Misinformation. Piper Jaffray's Gene Munster relates a story of how a high-ranking Apple executive lied to his face about having "no interest in developing a cheap iPod with no screen." Cut to a few weeks later, and Apple releases the iPod shuffle. Lying business executives are nothing new, and shouldn't be surprising in the least. But while many companies cultivate productive relationships with the media, Apple's is mostly antagonistic. "They don't communicate," Munster said.

Why bother? The thrill. Sure, they're protecting their intellectual property, but it's all about the thrill. They can create these spectacles where they literally unveil a new product in front of a salivating audience -- including Apple employees -- who have never seen anything like it before. It's thrilling. Apple's business hinges on creating products that excite and creating that excitement surrounding them.

They've found a secret formula that works. In the words of Steve Jobs, "there is no theory of protecting content other than keeping secrets."

"The problem, of course, is that there are many smart people in the world, some with a lot of time on their hands, who love to discover such secrets."

Building a native app that aggregates and spruces up the content of a single news organ's website is all the rage, although it seems like overkill in some cases -- personally, I enjoy curating my own reading list with good old Instapaper, which also offers the advantage of clearing out most of the graphical cruft and leaving nothing but yummy text. Still, if you like having all the news that's fit to print in the palm of your hand (yes, the 2.0 version of the NY Times app is quite nice), there are two new choices of single-site apps (SSA) for your reading pleasure.

In the right corner, weighing in at four sections, it's the Wall Street Journal! Yes, the official newspaper of American business (whatever's left of it) has an iPhone app, and according to Silicon Alley Insider it's pretty good; the app lets you cache content for offline reading (similar to the NYT app), and offers audio and video content from the paper, along with stories and rich media from sister sites like Uncle Walt's hangout AllThingsD.

Most notably, using the iPhone version of the WSJ -- which is free -- you can read most or all the content from the daily paper... which, via the WSJ.com website, is not free (most full stories require a subscription). There's no way to know how long this workaround will be in place, but for now it's a great way to get access to the paper's stories.

And, in the opposite corner, weighing in at one home page and sporting a killer left hook, it's the Huffington Post! The HuffPo iPhone app has been in soft-launch mode for the past month and was just updated to version 1.1, quashing bugs and improving performance. It's not as polished as some of the other SSAs yet, but it gets the job done. The app is free.

If you have a preferred single-site app for news, let us know below.

Considering that it's turned out to be one of the most successful products in consumer electronics history, the volume of nay-saying on the iPhone has been constant and ongoing -- many dismissed the phone when it came out, when it was announced, and even when it was just a glimmer of a hint of a rumor. Now the New York Times Sunday Magazine (and the accompanying blog The Medium) is featuring Virginia Heffernan's tale of hesitancy, anomie and frustration under the surely-not-meant to-draw-online-traffic headline "I Hate My iPhone." Interestingly, just pages away, the paper profiles several successful iPhone developers in a story about the App Store gold rush.

Heffernan's criticisms of the iPhone swing between the rational (the challenge of adapting to the on-screen keyboard, AT&T's mediocre coverage) and the surreal (dislike of the device's "tarty little face" and how it "kept aloof from the animal warmth of my leather wallet"). In fairness, she does admit that she's not thinking particularly clearly. In the end, she returns to the AT&T store where the sales rep seemed to know that she was a troublesome case, and swapped out her iPhone for a Blackberry.

It may be heretical to admit it here, but it's true: the iPhone is not for everyone... excuse me, they've come to take away my fanboy badge, this will take just a second. There, all done; I'm back.

Yes, if you're looking for a high-speed texting and email platform because you live your life in text messaging, the iPhone's keyboard will frustrate you; if you don't care about the incredible universe of apps, the first-rate media player and the best mobile browser, you'd be better off with a Blackberry and a permanent keyboard.

Yes, the iPhone's phone is probably its weakest offering, and the AT&T network has bigger dead zones than Anthony Michael Hall; if you can't tolerate the intermittent dropped call or fuzzy audio (or my personal top annoyance, the "I'm on 3G and my phone just doesn't ring" issue), and you want to focus on the phone, get a free RAZR or shiny Samsung.

In my personal transition from the Blackberry to the iPhone, I found plenty of gotchas and things that took adjustment (#1 is not being able to keep an IM application running in the background, #2 is having to cycle through the home screen to switch apps, and #3 is not being able to easily copy URLs or phone numbers for use elsewhere), but I'm still finding new and enjoyable things about the iPhone every day; my Blackberry was staid and predictable, a useful tool but not a spark of innovation or a way for me to accomplish things I never could do before.

I know there are thousands of unhappy iPhone users, and thousands more who haven't upgraded to the 2.x firmware, visited the App Store or explored one-tenth of the capabilities of their mobile computing platforms. When I saw a family friend a few weeks ago, a lady of a certain age, she was surprised and puzzled when I asked her where she synced her not-that-new iPhone ("I don't understand. If I want to put music or apps on it, I have to connect it to a computer? I have my grandchildren put photos on the phone for me!"). The iPhone isn't for everyone, and there's no judgement in that; you aren't obligated to love it, want it or find it useful. Forgive us, still, if we think that many of you (NY Times columnists excepted) will love it once you try it.

[Hat tip to Apple 2.0]

Opera Software CEO Jon Stephenson von Tetzchner said in a New York Times interview yesterday that its engineers have developed a version of the Opera web browser that works on the iPhone, but Apple has rejected it for the App Store because it competes with Safari.

This isn't unprecedented: Apple rejected an app called Podcaster possibly because it duplicates functionality in an upcoming version of the iPhone software. Podcaster was (for a time) available via ad-hoc distribution before that, too, was shut down.

Daring Fireball's John Gruber suggests that Apple rejected Opera because the browser included its own JavaScript interpreter, something forbidden by the iPhone SDK developer agreement.

Opera makes two flavors of its mobile web browser: Opera Mini for most mobile phones, BlackBerry, Palm, or Windows Mobile; and Opera Mobile, a more featured version for Symbian and Windows Mobile. A beta version of Opera Mini for Android is also in development.

Update: Gruber used his massive Rolodex over the weekend to determine through an unnamed source that the app may not have even been submitted to the App Store. Huh.

Apple's Mac OS X 10.5.5 update (and Security Update 2008-006) fixes a critical DNS vulnerability that could allow attackers to trick victims into visiting malicious Web sites using what's known as a "cache poisoning attack." We wrote about the vulnerability in August.

Although Apple's release notes say BIND was updated "to address performance issues," the update also delivers the promised address port randomization that protects users from such cache poisoning attacks. The original patch offered protection for Apple's servers but did not completely protect client systems.

Apple's updates fixed flaws in several applications and system components, including some that attackers could use to run unauthorized software on a user's computer.

[Via IDG.]

Apple Senior Manager Wei-han Lien let slip that teams acquired with the purchase of PA Semi are working on an ARM-based processor for the iPhone, and possibly other devices, according to The New York Times.

While not a huge surprise, as Steve himself said that's what the former PA Semi staff was working on, the question was still "what kind of processor?"

ARM variants can be customized to meet the needs of very specific devices, including supporting the multi-touch screen, or QuickTime playback. Electronista suggests that this supports earlier hints that Apple licensed the architecture from ARM under a secretive arrangement in late June.

Lien updated a section of his LinkedIn profile to describe what he was working on. (The NYT has a screenshot.) Oops. The profile, as you might expect, has been changed.

I was just as much a naysayer as Dave was when the service first came out (and for the record, I haven't used it all either), but apparently there are lots of people who do use Apple's "Complete My Album" service in iTunes -- the NYT says that it has become a prime selling tool, especially for bands and labels that pre-release singles from their album in a digital format. A whopping 52% of Lil Wayne's latest album sales on iTunes were sold through the "Complete My Album" feature. That means half the people who bought the album on iTunes had previously purchased one of the singles, and clicked through that way to buy the rest of their music.

And though neither Dave or I use "Complete My Album," that's a good sign for consumers, and a nice wake up call for the record industry -- the days of playing a song on the radio to up album sales are over. Digital releases are what sells music, and though "Complete My Album" currently only works on music previously purchased in the iTunes store, Apple could very easily extend that to all music in iTunes -- if you like a song that you've downloaded as a free single from the artist's website, it's just as easy to find music of theirs to buy in iTunes the same way.

We're done with a world where radio airplay determines what sells at the record store. These days, consumers are the ones who tell record makers what they want to buy -- it's already in their iTunes playlists.

A few days ago I mentioned that the Time Reader Beta would soon be open for Mac users, but I had no idea how soon it would actually appear.

Today the New York Times has released the Mac beta of their Times Reader. For those that don't know, the Times Reader is a stand alone app that tries to marry to best aspects of reading the Times on the web with the high quality typography and readability one finds in the physical paper.

As many Mac users have bemoaned, the Times Reader is built upon Microsoft's Silverlight technology allowing them to develop the app for both Windows and OS X.

While the Times Reader for Mac is in beta it is free, though once it leaves beta it will only be available via subscription. Check out the Frequently Asked Questions for more answers, and our gallery showing screenshots of the install process and of the app itself.

I'm not Wall Street wunderkind but it doesn't take Warren Buffet to know that Apple's stock has been performing well. It would seem that, at least according to the New York Times, Apple's performance coupled with Google and RIM has lead to many mutual funds seeing extraordinary growth this year. Many funds are glad they didn't sell all their Apple stock when it seems that it just couldn't go any higher (how high can it go? I have no idea, but since I don't own any Apple stock it really matters little to me).

Forbes is playing it safe with the Macworld predictions this year. Everything you've ever heard rumored about Apple in the last five years? Yeah, it's all here in their Macworld speculation guide. From the sub-notebook, to the iTablet, all the way to the Beatles, an Apple car, and even the old Apple gaming device, they cover pretty much all the bases.

In a way, it's good, because at least it means that Forbes has exactly no idea what's coming at the big event. Don't get me wrong-- I'm sure we'll still see it leaked a few days ahead of time by the Washington Post or the New York Times. But at least now, before the holidays, they're as clueless as everybody else.

So what is coming to Macworld? At this point, I would be surprised not to see the sub-notebook, and as we said in last week's Talkcast, it would be nice to see an update to the mini and/or the Apple TV. But let's face it: we won't know what Steve is going to talk about until he actually stands on stage and talks about it.

Here's a quick link over to today's New York Times article on phone unlocking, which raises a couple of interesting (not to say off-base) points. First, Nokia claims that the current "Open to Anything" ad campaign is not directly aimed at the iPhone... right.

Second, writer Cyrus Farivar characterizes the 1.11 bricking situation thusly:

Apple has tried to thwart the practice [of unlocking] by updating the operating system software, which rendered any updated and unlocked phone useless. But rogue programmers were quickly back at it, and they say they have created software that makes it possible to break the newly updated software lock on the iPhone...

This has been discussed in various venues, but in my humble opinion the 1.11 update was in all likelihood not a deliberate attempt to disable phones; rather, the brickage was an unfortunate side effect. Farivar's phrasing implies an intent on Apple's part to "render phones useless" that may not have been there.

As of Friday, Apple will have released five major updates to Mac OS X since its introduction in 2001 (unless you want to count the public beta. Nit-pickers). In Monday's interview with The New York Times, Steve Jobs said this pace will continue:

"'I'm quite pleased with the pace of new operating systems every 12 to 18 months for the foreseeable future,' he said. 'We've put out major releases on the average of one a year, and it's given us the ability to polish and polish and improve and improve.'"

That's a lot of innovation in a short amount of time. Considering the changes between 10.0 and 10.5, can you even imagine what 10.9 will look like? Steve also says that the Mac platform appears to have gained momentum with buyers, which should come as no surprise to our readers. Is the Mac reaching a tipping point with switchers and new customers? Maybe the upcoming earnings report will offer some clues.

The school district in Union City, NJ doesn't have the resources of more affluent suburban districts, according to an article in Monday's NYT (free registration req.). What it does have is a large population of students who speak Spanish at home and who need a new approach to bilingual education. The solution? iPod to the rescue. Kids in ESL classes get pop songs and lyrics (in English) on the iPods to kick-start the language learning process. The program has been so successful that parents are requesting the iPod-enabled classes and more iPods are on the budget for next year; meanwhile, the kids in the iPod language classes are described as "Pod People" by fellow students.

Interestingly, the school has an extremely strict ban on student-owned iPods on the premises, confiscating several each week (to prevent distraction and cheating). Clearly the iPods wield a double-edged set of white headphones. Got your own iPods in education story? Let us know below.