
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Haaze.com / Breeplypapy / Published News</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 07:11:08 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Apple MacBook Air, Mac Pro, and Mac Mini rumor control]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apple-macbook-air-mac-pro-and-mac-mini-rumor-control</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apple-macbook-air-mac-pro-and-mac-mini-rumor-control</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 07:11:08 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Breeplypapy</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apple-macbook-air-mac-pro-and-mac-mini-rumor-control</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Hardly a week goes by without some widely disseminated rumor about an Apple product winding its way around the Internet. Typically it's about future versions of theiPhone oriPad, but with the impending release of Apple's OS X Lion operating system update, there's been a surge in rumors about the MacBook Air laptop, the small form factorMac Mini, and even the full-size Mac Pro desktop. As we've always cautioned, these rumors are usually based more on wishful thinking than on hard fact (although in recent years, supplier leaks have become an invaluable resource for insider info on upcoming Apple products). Case in point, you can almost do a daily counterpoint of blog posts about how the next iPhone is going be physically identical to the iPhone 4 versus equally strident blog posts about how the next iPhone will have a radically different design. We've summed up some of the most prevalent current Apple computer rumors below, covering the MacBook Air, Mac Mini, and Mac Pro (the MacBook Pro and iMac were updated in 2011 already, so they'll most likely remain as is for now) along with a quick gut check on each one. (Credit:Sarah Tew/CNET)MacBook Air With the late 2010 second-generation refresh, the thin MacBook Air has gone from niche curiosity to a fast-growing part of Apple's laptop mix, thanks especially to the handy 11-inch version and its reasonable $999 starting price. The latest rumor making the rounds is that Apple has been working on a black version of the Air. These reports originate with a MacRumors.com post, which stated, &quot;Over the past week, we've received several anonymous tips claiming that at least some models of the next-generation MacBook Air will be be available with a black finish.&quot; From that single source, the story quickly ricocheted around the Web, even making its way to outlets such as The Atlantic and the Huffington Post.  Related links &amp;149' Apple MacBook Air fall 2010 review &amp;149' Apple Mac Mini spring 2010 review &amp;149' Mac OS X Lion coming in July for $29.99  &amp;149' A black MacBook Air or just a wish list   Of course, about 7 hours after that original black MacBook Air rumor surfaced, MacRumors ran the other way, publishing an e-mail from a purported Apple employee, which read in part, &quot;We tried to powder coat the Air's [sic] (and Pro's [sic] for that matter) in black as a test run...The coating looks good and holds up well, but it also soaks up body oils, making the palm rest look pretty gross. Ultimately that is the reason that the top brass (Jobs) killed the idea...it was just too easy to make the computer look like crap.&quot; Also in the &quot;nay&quot; category, this alleged leak from 9to5mac.com: &quot;A reliable source has told us that they haven't seen any black in the new MacBook Air materials.&quot; Beyond the new color options, or lack thereof, the other longstanding MacBook Air refresh rumors concern a CPU upgrade to Intel's second-generation Core i-series processors (sometimes called Sandy Bridge) and the inclusion of a Thunderbolt port, like the ones found on current MacBook Pros. These updates, which seem likely, if not guaranteed, may well come with the release of the OS X Lion update, which is coming sometime in July. While the proposed hardware updates seem perfectly reasonable, keep in mind that the last MacBoor Air refresh was in October 2010, which would make this a nine-month life cycle for the current models, so an updated Air may come at some point after the OS X Lion update.  (Credit:CNET) Mac Mini The diminutive Mac Mini feels somewhat like the first-generation MacBook Air did: a niche product with a small but dedicated user base. First spotted on micgadget.com, the latest Mac Mini rumors say the system will also get Intel's second-generation Core i-series processors and a Thunderbolt port. That means these systems would use Intel's decent-for-video integrated graphics, instead of the current Nvidia graphics (which may even make the $699 Mac Mini less expensive). This seems as likely as not, but given that the Mac Mini isn't on a regular refresh/redesign cycle, a new version certainly isn't a sure thing for the OS X Lion release date. One wished-for upgrade we haven't even seen a rumor abut this time around is a Blu-ray drive, which would make the Mac Mini a much more useful home theater machine.  (Credit:Apple) Mac Pro Yes, Apple still makes traditional desktops. The Mac Pro is a throwback to the glory days of hulking desktop towers, with the highest-end models running twin six-core Intel Xeon processors. Once again, micgadget.com is the lead source for update rumors. The site claims that the Mac Pro is getting a redesigned chassis, which may also include a version that is rackmountable, perhaps replacing the current $2,999 &quot;Server&quot; version of the Mac Pro. A Thunderbolt port is also part of the speculation, but the most interesting rumor is that the new Mac Pro will have a previously unseen Intel processor (perhaps the not-yet-released Xeon E5), along the lines of the exclusive Intel CPU from the original first-generation MacBook Air. This presumes that none of the current Intel Sandy Bridge processors is suitable for the Mac Pro, at least at the higher-end configurations. In these rare cases, it's usually a timed exclusive on a particular new CPU, rather than a custom-made part, which would be cost-prohibitive. One disturbing part of the Mac Pro rumor dump is that they will lose the handy ability to hot-swap hard drives without shutting the system down. It's worth noting that nearly all these Mac Pro and Mac Mini rumors can be traced back to a single micgadget.com post, so no matter how many times they've reverberated through the online echo chamber, there's really no independent corroboration. That said, the Pro hasn't had a serious redesign in some time, and is considered a high-end specialty product at this point' most desktop-shopping consumers gravitate toward the all-in-one iMac.  As always, Apple's official position is that it won't comment &quot;regarding rumors and future products,&quot; as we were told when inquiring about some of these rumors. Your best bet is to hang around until the still-unspecified July release date of OS X Lion to see which, if any, of these updates actually happen.  <br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Senators seek curb on digital download taxes]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=senators-seek-curb-on-digital-download-taxes</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=senators-seek-curb-on-digital-download-taxes</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 07:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Breeplypapy</dc:creator>
<category>Politics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=senators-seek-curb-on-digital-download-taxes</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Some Americans would pay less for digital purchases from iTunes, Amazon.com, and other online stores in the future, if a bill that two U.S. senators introduced today becomes law.The Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2011, written by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and John Thune (R-S.D.), hopes to curb taxes that single out digital goods and services.The new bill prohibits state and local governments from taxing products that do not apply to similar tangible items, preventing unnecessary taxes on consumers for using digital products. (See CNET's earlier report on a similar &quot;iTaxes&quot; bill introduced last year in the House of Representatives.)&quot;While I understand why states and local governments are looking for new opportunities to bring in revenue, the fact of the matter is that taxes discourage both product usage and innovation,&quot; Wyden said in a press release today. &quot;It would be a mistake to crush the U.S. growing digital goods and services industry before it has an opportunity to reach its full potential.&quot;Thune said the bill &quot;would provide clarity and uniformity in the taxation of digital goods&quot; and that it would be &quot;good for consumers and job creators alike.&quot; Kelly William Cobb, from Americans for Tax Reform, told CNET that the new bill &quot;ensures that if states want to tax your downloads, elected officials will be held responsible for that vote.&quot;&quot;No state lawmaker should be looking to raise taxes right now, but quietly behind the scenes, bureaucrats at state Departments of Revenue are enacting taxes on digital goods with zero accountability or public awareness,&quot; Cobb said. &quot;Wyden-Thune puts a stop to it and ensures the public knows when government wants to raise their taxes.&quot;Tax issues surrounding the Internet have been a theme of Wyden's throughout his time in Congress, starting with the Internet Tax Freedom Act of 1998, which he co-authored. The act was signed into law in an effort to endorse the commercial, educational, and informational potential of the Internet, putting a temporary moratorium on taxing access to the Internet and e-commerce.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Why Microsoft is taking on Google in Europe]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=why-microsoft-is-taking-on-google-in-europe</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=why-microsoft-is-taking-on-google-in-europe</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 07:10:18 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Breeplypapy</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=why-microsoft-is-taking-on-google-in-europe</guid>
<description><![CDATA[At first, it's a bit jarring to see Washington-based Microsoft press its unfair competition claims against California-based Google in Belgium. But Microsoft picked Europe as the latest venue in its fight with Google for the simple reason that it's more likely to get quicker action from European regulators who've been more prone to reel in dominant companies.Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith disclosed the filing with the European Commission in a blog post last night. Microsoft is alleging that Google is unfairly competing in European markets by rigging its search algorithms, ranking its own services higher than rival products, and impeding access to YouTube content, making it harder for alternative search engines to find videos.Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith(Credit:Microsoft)There are plenty of reasons for Microsoft to press its case in Europe rather than the United States. To start, Microsoft filed its complaint there because European regulators have already opened an investigation into Google's conduct. In addition, Microsoft has learned from its own battles with European regulators that the burden to prove anticompetitive conduct is often lower in Europe than in the United States. That's particularly true with the kind of case Microsoft is hoping the European Commission will bring.&quot;Microsoft has a much better shot at this in the European market,&quot; said Herbert Hovenkamp, a professor of antitrust law at the University of Iowa College of Law. In Europe, companies with dominant market positions have a duty to share technical data that rivals need to compete. So when Microsoft alleges that Google won't share technical data to help it examine and index information on services such as YouTube, it may very well find favor with the European Commission, Hovenkamp said.Related links&amp;149' Microsoft to file antitrust complaint against Google&amp;149' Has Google learned Microsoft's antitrust lessons&amp;149' EC launches antitrust probe against GoogleIndeed, Microsoft ran afoul of this very regulation when it prevented open-source software developers access to interoperability information for its Windows server software. After years of wrangling with the EU regulators, the company agreed in 2007 to provide the data that European laws required it to disclose.The standard for data sharing for dominant companies in the United States is far less cumbersome. &quot;In the U.S., this is an extremely difficult case to bring,&quot; Hovenkamp said, because those standards are set by federal regulatory agencies, not much-broader antitrust laws. &quot;There is no such agency or dealing obligation with respect to the computer industry or the Internet,&quot; Hovenkamp said.Microsoft will also have an easier time in Europe branding Google as a dominant company. That's important, because European law ratchets up the standards under which dominant companies conduct business. According to one of the foundational cases for European competition law, Michelin v. the European Commission, a dominant company bears &quot;a special responsibility not to allow its conduct to impair competition on the common market.&quot;There's no statute in European law, nor is there one in the United States, that sets a market share watermark above which a company is determined to be dominant. But European regulators have generally branded companies as dominant when their share hits 60 percent of a defined market, according to Hovenkamp. In the United States, that standard typically kicks in at 75 percent. That's important, because Google's share of the search market is 95 percent in Europe, but just 75 percent in the United States, according to NetApplications.com.European search engine market share,February 2011(Credit:NetApplications.com)What's more, U.S. trustbusters so far have investigated Google only when the company has made investments or acquisitions that have triggered antitrust inquiry. Neither the Justice Department nor the Federal Trade Commission has opened a broader investigation into Google's conduct. Some of Google's smaller rivals have suggested a coziness with the Obama administration--the president cited the company as a symbol of American innovation in his 2011 State of the Union address--as a reason why regulators have yet to initiate a formal probe.If Microsoft can prevail on European regulators to force Google to share data there, an American investigation becomes less important. That's because Microsoft will be able to use any information European regulators might compel from Google to compete with it globally. And that's especially important in the United States.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
