MacRumors

ifoAppleStore reports on news out of Germany [Google translation] that Apple has canceled the grand opening of its planned Frankfurt retail store just two days before the event. The reasons behind the delay are currently unknown beyond suppositions that some aspect of the store's construction was not able to be completed in time, and there has been no public announcement of a revised opening date, although reports suggest that it will not occur until January.

As first reported by the iFun.de Web site, the opening has been pushed back to some date in January 2010, most likely because the store wasn't finished to Apple's rigorous standards. The street-level store was installed in an existing building, but it was heavily remodeled to include Apple's standard architecture. Early this morning the store's Web page was changed to say the store would open "soon." It only explained, "We're putting the finishing touches on the final touches."

Apple currently offers retail stores in Munich and Hamburg, with the now-delayed Frankfurt store planned to bring an official Apple presence to Germany's fifth-largest city at the heart of what is considered to be the country's second-largest metropolitan area. Apple has been including plans for rapid expansion of its international stores as part of a revised retail strategy, and recently opened its first two stores in France as part of the push.

The New York Times covers a new, wide-ranging report from research firm IDC outlining its technology predictions for 2010. Among the firm's predictions for Apple are the release of an Apple tablet computing device and the achievement of a 300,000-application milestone for iPhone and iPod touch applications.

IDC predicts that by the end of 2010 there will be over one billion mobile devices accessing the Internet. While increasingly sophisticated smartphones will represent a substantial portion of the growth, Apple's "iPad" tablet device is also seen as a game-changer for the industry opening a new high-growth market for mobile devices.

The long-rumored Apple touchscreen tablet computer, or iPad, will arrive in 2010, IDC predicts. It will be more of an oversized iPod Touch, with an 8-inch or 10-inch screen, than a downsized Macintosh. With its larger screen, IDC says, the Apple tablet will be ideal for watching movies, surfing the Web, playing online games, and reading books, magazines and newspapers. It will be general-purpose, unlike Amazon.com's single-purpose Kindle reader. The Apple offering, Mr. Gens says, "could deliver a real kick in Kindle's butt."

The research firm also sees mobile devices continuing to "exert a powerful transformational force" on the computing industry as they evolve to become viable competitors to traditional computers as users' primary machines. That evolution will occur hand-in-hand with an explosion in the market for mobile applications, which IDC predicts will triple the number of available iPhone and iPod touch application to 300,000 from the 100,000+ applications currently available in the App Store. Similar growth is predicted to occur for Google's Android platform, as well as the popular netbook market.

Magazine publishers seem to already be getting on board with the concept of a media tablet even based on just the possibility that Apple will enter the market in the near future. The latest concept design comes from Time Inc who developed this design prototype to show off their plans:

The ultimate design is planned to run on "whatever tablet Apple or any[one] else has up their sleeves" according to All Things Digital.

We've heard reports that magazine publishers are not standing still on the possibility of a tablet. Earlier reports indicate there are industry-wide efforts to team up to prepare for the launch of the much rumored Apple tablet. Publishers are worried that if left to its own, Apple may quickly dominate the industry like they have with iTunes music distribution.

Dow Jones Newswires reports in a brief note that AT&T's lawsuit against Verizon regarding Verizon's recent ad campaigns targeting AT&T's 3G coverage has been dismissed.

AT&T Inc. (T) on Wednesday dismissed its lawsuit against Verizon Wireless and its recent "There's A Map For That" campaign.

AT&T had already suffered a legal setback when a judge rejected its request to pull the ads last month, which the Dallas carrier argued inaccurately suggested inferior network coverage. The court ruled that Verizon Wireless's ads, which showed maps comparing coverage, clearly talked about third-generation, or 3G, coverage.

The court's rejection of AT&T's request for a restraining order barring Verizon from airing ads using map-based comparisons of 3G coverage had slated a December 16th date for arguments in the suit, but AT&T has apparently decided not to pursue legal remedy regarding this issue.

Digital Daily also reports that Verizon has dropped a related lawsuit against AT&T, suggesting that the two companies may have come to a mutual agreement to drop their legal battle in what has been seen by many as a waste of time and money and a generator of bad publicity for the companies.

Computerworld notes that unauthorized Mac clone manufacturer Psystar has stopped offering its line of PC hardware with Mac OS X preinstalled in the wake of a settlement agreement with Apple. All models are currently listed as "Out of Stock" on the company's website, although it continues to offer its Rebel EFI software solution to enable customers to install Mac OS X on their own, marking a shift in its business tactics in response to Apple's legal challenges.

Psystar has not given up its fight, however, as it has vowed to appeal a federal court judge's ruling in favor of Apple in its copyright infringement suit against Psystar. Under the terms of the $2.7 million settlement, Psystar is not required to make financial payments until all appeals have been heard.

"We will take the case up with the Ninth Circuit," said Psystar's chief attorney K.A.D. Camera of the Houston firm Camera & Sibley LLP. In an interview late Tuesday, Camera said Psystar will file an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit over a Nov. 13 summary judgment by federal Judge William Alsup, who said Psystar violated Apple's copyright as well as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) when it installed Apple's operating system on the clones it sells.

"We think that Judge Alsup got it wrong," said Camera. "The effect [of the settlement] is to allow the case to be heard by the Ninth Circuit," he continued, and characterized the settlement as "extremely favorable" to Psystar.

While the current case in California centers on Psystar's inclusion of Mac OS X Leopard on its systems, a second lawsuit is also pending in Florida, where Psystar has claimed that Apple is in violation of antitrust laws by limiting use of Mac OS X Snow Leopard to Apple hardware. That case is unaffected by the recent decision in the original California case or by the settlement agreement between the two companies.

Still pending in the California case is Apple's request for a permanent injunction that would formally prevent Psystar from offering Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. The court will hear arguments on that request on December 14th and will then decide whether to grant the injunction, and if so, whether it will extend only to systems with Leopard pre-installed or whether to include Snow Leopard-based systems and even Psystar's standalone Rebel EFI software.

ifoAppleStore reports that Apple is considering commercializing its new iPod touch-based EasyPay retail store checkout system. The move comes as the company, which had intended for the system to remain proprietary, has been "deluged" with inquiries from parties interested in adopting the technology.

Since the debut of the iPod POS, inquires have been coming from all directions, including from end-user small businesses, larger chains and system integrators. Until now, Apple's response has been that the iPod POS is a proprietary product, unavailable for sale.

But now, tipsters say, Apple retail executives have asked the retail store business specialists to collect contact information from anyone who inquires about the iPod touch system, apparently to create a database of potential customers if Apple decides to commercialize the product.

The EasyPay system is composed of an iPod touch running custom point-of-sale software housed within a hard plastic shell integrating the device with a barcode scanner and magnetic stripe reader, as well as a rechargeable battery to power the auxiliary hardware. Apple began rolling out the new devices to its retail stores earlier this month, replacing the previous Windows CE-based systems used by its employees.

Earlier today, we reported on a preliminary settlement between Apple and Psystar regarding the former's lawsuit over copyright infringement by Psystar in selling PC hardware preinstalled with Mac OS X Leopard. Engadget now reports on a new court filing outlining the settlement agreement that sees Psystar scheduled to pay approximately $1.34 million to Apple and a like amount in attorneys' fees.

The agreement covers payments related to five claims made by Apple for which the court ruled in its favor earlier this month. In return, Apple has agreed to drop an additional half-dozen claims primarily related to trademark infringement and not addressed in the earlier judgment. Financial payments are also not required to be made by Psystar until all legal appeals have been processed.

Now, considering Apple and Psystar are currently engaged in pretty much the exact same case in Florida over Snow Leopard, we'd say that this agreement isn't much more than a way for both sides to save money and move on to that fight: Apple's already won the bulk of its case against Psystar in California, and spending money to litigate trademark claims we thought were weak when we first read them doesn't really buy Steve any leverage he doesn't already have, while Psystar probably needs to scrimp all the coin it can right now.

Still at issue is the permanent injunction requested by Apple that would explicitly prohibit Psystar from selling computer hardware with Mac OS X preinstalled. Psystar's court filings indicate that it is prepared to shift the burden of Mac OS X installation to the consumer and instead refocus its business on selling hardware and software to enable that process. Whether such an arrangement will be considered permissible is in significant doubt and will certainly be addressed in future proceedings.

Fudzilla claims that Intel is planning on launching three Arrandale-based processors on January 3rd, 2010. These Arrandale processors are based on the advanced Nehalem architecture first introduced into desktop Macs earlier this year, and should represent a significant performance improvement over the Core 2 Duo processors that are currently found in Apple's MacBook Pros.

The three new processors will be branded under the "Core i5" and "Core i7" names and range from 2.4GHz to 2.66GHz with prices ranging from $225 to $332 in quantities of 1000. While Fudzilla describes their TDP (thermal design power) of 35W as "not so attractive", it matches up with the current high-end processors used in the MacBook Pro. This means Apple could use these processors in a new MacBook Pro update.

These new mobile processors are said to eventually also come in low-voltage variants that will also make them suitable for ultra-thin notebooks such as the MacBook Air.

MediaMemo reports that Google is looking to enter the business of offering paid television content, a move which would add a new competitor to Apple's iTunes Store TV offerings. Google's service, however, is reportedly planned to utilize a streaming delivery method via YouTube rather than the download model used by Apple.

YouTube already lets users watch a smattering of TV shows for free, with advertising. Now it envisions something similar to what Apple and Amazon already offer: First-run shows, without commercials, for $1.99 an episode, available the day after they air on broadcast or cable.

Sources say the site's negotiations with the networks and studios that own the shows are preliminary. But both sides seem optimistic, since models for such deals already exist. No comment from YouTube.

One possible question with Google's plan is whether consumers will accept streaming delivery over the more familiar download delivery generally favored for paid content. While executives have cited studies showing that most purchasers of downloaded TV content watch each show only once, convincing the public to rely on streaming video for the same $1.99 they have traditionally paid for downloadable content may not be easy.

But the networks and studios, which control pricing, will want to sell the streamed shows at the same price as downloads; they fear that offering them at a different price will force them to go back and rework their existing deals.

Another tactic possibly under consideration is for Google to offer less popular TV shows that are currently unavailable through other digital outlets, providing the company with additional flexibility in its pricing model.

Computerworld reports on a motion filed in federal court yesterday by unauthorized Mac clone maker Psystar noting that it has reached a partial settlement with Apple over the company's copyright infringement case filed against Psystar in 2008.

The settlement, which requires Psystar to pay Apple an as-yet-unspecified amount of damages, would not be awarded until Psystar has exhausted all appeals.

"Psystar and Apple today entered into a partial settlement that is embodied in a stipulation that will be filed with the Court tomorrow," Psystar's motion of Monday began. "Psystar has agreed on certain amounts to be awarded as statutory damages on Apple's copyright claims in exchange for Apple's agreement not to execute on these awards until all appeals in this matter have been concluded. Moreover, Apple has agreed to voluntarily dismiss all its trademark, trade-dress, and state-law claims. This partial settlement eliminates the need for a trial and reduces the issues before this Court to the scope of any permanent injunction on Apple's copyright claims."

Apple last week requested a permanent injunction preventing Psystar from selling non-Apple computers with Mac OS X preinstalled. In its motion filed yesterday, however, Psystar argues that its Rebel EFI software released last month that allows consumers to perform their own OS X installation on Psystar's or other certified non-Apple hardware should not be included in any injunction awarded by the court.

By excluding Rebel EFI from any injunction, Psystar seems to be conceding Apple's copyright victory, and that it can live with a ban on preinstalling Snow Leopard. If that tactic works, Psystar's plan appears to be to shift the responsibility of installing Mac OS X onto customers. Psystar would presumably sell Rebel EFI to customers without a corresponding copy of Mac OS X, require those customers to obtain a copy of the operating system elsewhere, and then use the utility to install and run the purchased copy of Snow Leopard.

Psystar spelled out its argument for letting it continue to market Rebel EFI, and presumably Snow Leopard-ready computers that, with Rebel EFI's help, could be configured to run Mac OS X.

With Apple having already won a judgment against Psystar for copyright infringement, Psystar's tactic of shifting the burden of OS X installation to the customer appears to be its new primary strategy for attempting to remain in business. More information is scheduled to be filed with the court later today.

Earlier this month, reports surfaced reviving claims that Google is in the process of developing its own smart phone based on its Android operating system. Gizmodo today follows up with new claims of Google phone prototypes running a new version of Android beginning to appear on Google's campus. The existence of the device is called a "certainty" by the report's source.

Over the next few weeks, Google Phones (most probably in early, prototype form) will flood the Mountain View campus. They'll don large LCDs while running a new version of Android -- either Flan or the version of Android beyond it -- which our source spotted running on Google's handset as well as a laptop. (Whatever the software was, it most certainly wasn't Chrome OS, we were assured.)

In another interesting tidbit, the "trusted source" claims that the Android operating system seen so far in such devices as the original T-Mobile G1 through to the new Motorola Droid is not the "real" Android. Exactly what, however, the "real" Android offers is unknown at this time.