The entire Mac press is all excited about a new Apple product that hasn’t been revealed by Apple, but has been sneakily unveiled by unnamed sources talking to a publication with a poor track record regarding Apple rumours.

Apple will launch their new Apple TV in time for the last quarter of 2012, with sources in Japan telling SmartHouse that 3 sizes are being planned including a 32″ model and a 55″ model.

That of course makes perfect sense, given that Apple makes a 3.5-inch, 4-inch and 5-inch iPhone, along with a 7-inch, 10-inch and 13-inch iPad, right? Oh. And, as Adam Banks noted on Twitter:

Yeah, and how Apple, a computer company, makes only one computer monitor, but obviously would make 3 TVs

Also, Apple loves entering markets with slow device turnover and that scrap it out in price wars, as evidenced by the _____, _____ and ______. Therefore, like the aforelinked publication, I have no doubt whatsoever that Apple will next year offer the iTV in small unicorn, medium unicorn and MEGA UNICORN sizes, for three times the price of a competing TV, kick UK broadcaster ITV in the face, and not, in fact, continue sneakily working its way into the living room through revisions to the existing Apple TV and iCloud (as an affordable but surprisingly powerful media hub, games console, and rental service), because that would be a totally stupid suggestion.

UNICORNS ALL THE WAY!

ZDNet, reporting on how Apple argues Samsung could avoid infringing on its iPad and iPhone designs:

Samsung could avoid infringing on its iPhone designs by not making rectangular phones; not putting the screen on the front of the phone; adding “substantial adornment” to the fronts of their phones; and not having bezels around the screen.

Apple’s suggestions for a non-infringing tablet include, again, a non-rectangular shape, front surfaces that are not flat and that have substantial adornment; avoiding making the tablet thin; using thick rather than thin frames around the screen; and introducing a “cluttered appearance”.

Sounds an awful lot like “maybe you should make the same kind of shit you were creating before you decided to rip off our products, assholes”.

I know I’m not in the majority on this, but I still believe Apple has a point. Its suggestions are ridiculous, but if the iPad and iPhone designs are so obvious, why did no-one bring one to market before Apple did?

It’s also worth noting that Samsung in particular appears to be bearing the brunt of Apple’s anger. Perhaps, as The Verge showcased earlier this year, that’s in part down to Samsung also:

• Ripping off Apple’s packaging
• Ripping off Apple’s device photography and positioning
• Ripping off a bunch of Apple’s iOS icons

In the long run, I’ll be amazed if Apple wins anything. I suspect lawsuits will continue to be flung in every direction and end in a flurry of cross-licensing and bile. I also suspect Apple’s design is so simple and now so ubiquitous that courts will end up siding with rivals that there isn’t any other way these kinds of devices can look and still be workable. But, as noted, this doesn’t really let Samsung off the hook, because it’s gone further than any other company, crossing that line from inspiration to plagiarism.

Hat tip: David Meyer.

ZDNet:

In 2010, 84% of Mozilla’s $123 million in revenue came directly from Google. That’s roughly $100 million in funds that will vanish or be drastically cut if the deal is either not renewed or is renegotiated on terms that are less favorable to Mozilla.

I think it would be a huge pity if Mozilla was forced to scale back dramatically. Firefox has become a bloated shadow of its former svelte self, but the organisation has driven plenty of innovation on the web (even if it has a somewhat extremist stance on support—or the lack thereof—for some patented tech, such as video formats, while happily ignoring long-time support for formats like JPEG).

But if Mozilla is heavily reliant on Google for funding when Google itself is being squeezed by the likes of iOS apps circumventing a lot of browser use, leading to Google pushing rather harder for Chrome marketshare than it otherwise would be, that’s not a good sign. And it’s another warning that any organisation shouldn’t rely too heavily on another for its income, especially when that other is a direct rival.

The Next Web says Tesco is rolling out a free Wi-Fi service in its UK Tesco Extra stores, powered by O2. The chain offered a statement:

So far, customers have been using it to read product reviews and compare prices while they shop.

This being the same Tesco which argued with a Guardian journalist writing down prices in September:

You’re not allowed to do that. It’s illegal. […] It’s illegal to write things down and you can’t take any photographs, either. If you want to check the prices, take the item to the till and pay for it there. The price will be on the receipt.

A manager clarified the latter point:

Look, it’s company policy, you’re not allowed to do it

So: left hand/right hand, change of heart, Tesco Extra only, or Tesco oddly saying “well, you can use an iPhone to check prices, obviously, but if you write anything down, we’ll kick your face off?

ZDNet‘s Mary-Jo Foley:

Back in September, there was controversy as to whether Microsoft planned to allow “Desktop” (non-Metro) apps to run on Windows 8 ARM-based tablets. But I was told they would, and, indeed, the Softies and partners showed off the Desktop app on ARM tablets at the Build conference.

This was, by some parties, considered a very bad idea, given that Windows apps would run like crap on a tablet, but anyway.

However, if my Windows Weekly co-host Paul Thurrott is right, Microsoft has rethought that plan and is leaning toward cutting the Desktop from Windows 8 ARM tablets. That would mean only Metro-style apps would be supported on that platform.

This is a big ‘if’, given Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer’s massive hard-on for all things Windows.

If Microsoft does do away with the Desktop App on ARM, it also would mean — unless Microsoft also changes its strategy for x86/x64-based Windows 8 tablets — that Windows 8 will be different on different hardware.

It would also mean that it would be bloody stupid to call it Windows 8, in the same way it wouldn’t make a great deal of sense to call iOS ‘Mac OS X’. But, you know, Ballmer.

In January (Wired):

Whatever device you use, now or in the future, Windows will be there

And last month (Business Insider):

We are in the Windows era — we were, we are, and we always will be.

Foley, again:

I don’t hate the idea that Microsoft might pull the plug on the Desktop App on Windows 8 ARM tablets. In fact, I think it’s the right thing to do if Microsoft and its partners want to position ARM-based Windows tablets as more of a true iPad competitor.

It’s precisely the right thing to do, not least because the Metro interface is pretty good and, crucially, not a half-baked iOS rip-off. It offers something different. But, as stated earlier:

Windows 8 will be different on different hardware

On tablets, it won’t have Windows. It won’t really be Windows. And a great deal of people who use Windows don’t even like Windows—the name is roughly synonymous with “ARGH! YOU PIECE OF JUNK! WHY DO YOU KEEP DOING THAT? ARGH! I’M GOING TO THROW YOU OUT OF THE WINDOW! NO! HANG ON! I’M GOING TO CHOP YOU UP AND FEED YOU TO WOLVES!”

To that end, Microsoft, why not cut the cord entirely, and present your next-generation tablet system as something truly new, rather than a system shackled to the past?