In this modern age of information, it's easier than ever to see what people think of a product, whether it be a new lawnmower, a console game, or an App Store app. But it's also easier than ever to try and tweak public opinion, and while there are many official avenues that will accept anonymous opinions, there aren't so many that will help you weed out the legit from the not-so-much.

App Store reviews have been controversial from the beginning -- while they can be helpful for buyers, you often have no idea just who's leaving comments or what their real agenda is. Njection, the makers of Nmobile (which we played with a while ago) are having a huge problem with what they're calling "sockpuppet" reviews on the App Store.

Someone (they believe this person is in cahoots with their competitor) is posting bad reviews on their app and trying to trash them and their product elsewhere (including in a comment here on TUAW). And unfortunately, as they say, they don't really have much recourse against this behavior -- they've appealed to Apple, who've replied that they'll leave comments up, unless they're offensive or extremely false. Apple's own guidelines for reviewing apps asks that the reviewers deal with apps on their own merit rather than attacking competitors, but that seems to be more of a recommendation than a firm rule.

Njection says the comments have kept consumers from trying out their apps, though it seems difficult to actually track how many people haven't tried your app (and why). It'll be interesting to see if Apple makes other changes to the review system if this sort of thing rears its ugly head more often. At this point, it seems devs just have to deal with it by doing damage control when necessary and making their app good enough that "sockpuppeting" doesn't strongly affect public opinion.

When I was faced with the decision of buying a MacBook Pro or waiting, I immediately took the leap of faith without knowing if Apple would be releasing a new unit within the next few weeks or not. As it turns out, I was wrong and Apple did release a new MacBook Pro. However, I did not suck it up and go on ... I went searching for some answers as to what you can do if you are in the same situation. In this post, I'm going to tell you what I found out.

When you purchase a new product from Apple (either through the online store, or though a brick-and-mortar store) you have 14 days to return the product. With this 14-day policy, Apple also gives you price protection. From my understanding this covers both pricing decreases as well as new products coming out.

When I took my MacBook Pro to the Apple Store, they immediately looked at my receipt and asked if I wanted a new one. I thought, "This can't be this easy, can it?" There is a caveat with replacing your old machine with a new model: the Apple Store might charge you a "re-stocking" fee. This is a 10% fee based on the initial purchase price. I questioned them about this and they told me that I would be getting an upgraded product. However, I was able to get my re-stocking fee waived after talking with the manager for a little while.

The Bottom Line
If you bought a MacBook/Pro/Air in the past 14 days and want to upgrade to one of the newer models, it definitely wouldn't hurt to call up your local store (or Apple online customer service at 1-800-MY-APPLE) and talk to them about returning. Don't be surprised if they tell you about the restocking fee, they told me the same story until I took it into the store. Unlike most computer companies, Apple does try to make the situation right, and most of the time, you come out on top of the matter.

Additional Resources

• Apple Retail Site
• Apple Return Policy

Security researchers at Corsaire have published a PDF whitepaper discussing best practices for securing Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard in a networked environment. The whitepaper is free.

"While the default installation provides a relatively secure system, it may not always meet organizational security requirements. This guide is aimed at users in environments requiring stronger security controls in their operating system, making full use of the protection features offered by Mac OS X 10.5," the whitepaper says in its introduction.

"It may also be of use to System Administrators wishing to enforce an organization-wide desktop security policy."

The guide also discusses key security differences between Leopard and Tiger, and builds upon previous guides for those operating systems.

A direct link to the PDF is available here.

All the Leopard news might have made you forget about the iPhone, you know that other thing Apple does. Fret not because the iPhone is back is making headlines again thanks to a new policy in Apple Stores. The NY Times reports that Apple is no longer accepting cash for iPhones; if you want to buy an iPhone you'll need to use a credit or debit card. Also the limit of iPhones purchasable in one visit is now 2, down from the previous limit of 5.

Apple says this new policy has been enacted to combat resale of the iPhone.

Since I've owned a variety of regular mobile phones and smartphones over the last couple of years, I wasn't surprised to see fine print during the iPhone activation process which warns users that AT&T won't offer their insurance policy on Apple's darling new gadget. I've been on nearly every major mobile phone network in the US - Cingular, T-Mobile (and VoiceStream), Verizon and Sprint - and not one of them covered smartphones with their policies. In fact, if you were upgrading an existing AT&T account and swapping out your old phone that had an AT&T insurance policy on it, you too were warned that the policy would be automatically removed from your account. Gee, you'd think these companies don't trust us with small, easy-to-drop expensive electronics. Who knew?

To help remedy this lack of a contingency plan for the iPhone, I decided to call a few insurance companies in the Colorado area to see if they could cover it. What many people might not know is that these companies typically cover electronics like mobile phones and even notebook computers, often at prices far cheaper than extended warranty plans from manufacturers and retail stores. While I'm not entirely familiar with how fast actin' or comprehensive this kind of coverage is from every provider, I do know that mine - State Farm - will cover both hardware failure and accidental damage (though accidental damage will cause my premiums to increase, while an incident like theft will not).

Back to getting coverage for your shiny new phone, however, the summarized rundown I got from calling three of the big general insurance providers (Allstate, Geico and State Farm) is that attaching a clause to a renter or homeowner insurance policy specifically for covering an iPhone would add only $5-20/year to a policy. Keep in mind these were estimates based on a $600 iPhone, and it appears that you can't simply ask these guys to insure a phone; you need to have some kind of a primary policy with them first, then attach this specific clause. Surprisingly, every representative I spoke with knew exactly what an iPhone was, and a couple of them asked me whether I was happy with mine.

As far as coverage through companies like specialized electronics or computer insurance providers is concerned, I had a much harder time finding anything substantial. Most of the companies I spoke with didn't have policies in place, and only Safeware confirmed that they were "seriously considering" introducing iPhone coverage. They do, however, cover other smartphones, and a quote for a BlackBerry Curve (a $400 smartphone) was $65 for a year, covering accidental damage, loss and theft. A downside, however, is that repairs for damage have a turnaround time of 7-10 days, with no loaner options available. If being without a phone is a primary concern, the loner option included in AppleCare for iPhone might be a good 'plan b' to consider in combination with one of these insurance policies.

Ultimately it's a good thing to at least have insurance options in addition to AppleCare, since Apple doesn't cover any sort of accidental damage. Since insuring an iPhone through one of the larger companies seems to be so cheap, it's basically a no-brainer to pick up at least some kind of a policy. If y'all have other ideas or options for insuring your shiny new iPhone, please enlighten the rest of the class with a comment.

For some time now, Apple's hush-hush policy on public communication has been the focus of much debate. The discussion escalated, however, with the debut of the Masked Blogger, an Apple employee blogging under the radar (or directly in the middle of it, depending on your perspective). Today, John Gruber linked a couple of interesting posts on the subject, one from Chuck Von Rospach (a recent ex-Apple employee), and another from Dave Winer. The more interesting of the two is Chuck's post, where he discusses at length Apple's policies on communication, the fact that the company and its employees actually *do* communicate and blog (though without affiliation), and why Apple's lack of a blogging-specific policy doesn't matter in the grander scheme of things.

Chuck's essential point is that Apple's employees do a lot to communicate and interact with the public - they just do it over traditional systems (like email lists) for the purposes of helping and solving problems. Further, 'blogging' is just one more way of communicating (albeit a new and hyped one); it isn't an end-all solution for these purposes.

While I think Chuck makes some great points about the focus of blogging and the importance of considering it as a tool for a company like Apple, I still think the company could use one, especially in light of one of its many facets as being closely involved with creative media (see: iLife, which they even brag about on TV). While blogging doesn't have to become a public focus for the company, it certainly wouldn't be difficult to fire one up, and having a blog or two for anything from pimping new products (see: the Google Blog) to offering an easily accessible forum for discussion couldn't hurt (after all, not everyone likes checking in on forums or having one more email list to organize), and they could capitalize on a popular and buzzing new medium. The blog(s) could be treated with a formal touch (like many company-focused promotional blogs) or have a more personal touch from a company-sanctioned individual, like the Scobelizer. Of course, being powered by iWeb, or having a corporate Photocast (or podcast!) couldn't hurt either.

Ultimately though, I think one of the good points Chuck makes about how well (yet quietly) Apple's employees actually are communicating is the true Achilles' heel of the idea of an Apple blog to begin with: most of the communication efforts of Apple's employees are quiet or under the radar - right where the company wants them to be. Apple, like most of its products, has a very shiny, polished exterior, which is exactly the kind that does not lend itself to opening the holes and flaws that blogging would puncture, no matter how personal or cute they may seem. One only needs to glance at the company's quiet handling of problems like battery recalls and MacBook RSS to see what I mean. Apple may be a purveyor of some of our favorite creative and communication tools, but donning a more personal side by *using* them just doesn't seem to be in the cards.