There's a historical reason in tech for products with camel case, like QuickTime or WordPerfect, as Crain, channeling New Scientist lays out: Often, spaces had to be dropped in programming languages, so capital letters were used in compound words to make them easier to read. That's fine, but in today's world, I agree very much with this sentiment:

In my considered opinion, the juxtaposition of majuscule and minuscule in a personal name may be safely indulged as a prerogative of the human being, with all his individual strangeness, but to extend the same license to the fruits, literal and figurative, of human labor is another matter.

Now, we have brands and products like TiVo, NVIDIA*, iEverythingapplemakes, BlackBerry, eXpo, eBook, eMachines, iRiver (it's iriver, oops), PlayStation and way, way more that insist on being special through forcing you to stretch your pinky finger over to the shift key at odd intervals, following their rhythm, dancing to their tune. It's a form of control.

Historically, Crain says, word spacing didn't really become standard for the modern world until the 13th century, after disappearing for a millennium. So camel case, he says, "is regressive — in fact medieval. It harks back to an era when reading was effortful, public and loud - like a visit to a contemporary shopping mall." Yep, that's the point. [NYT]

*I hate all caps, too, unless it's an acronym.

Engadget says a credible tipster suggests it currently runs Windows CE and has a resistive touchscreen, but Android and capacitive upgrades (and different screen sizes) are likely. A March 2010 arrival is rumored, as is T-Mobile's involvement. Interesting, but definitely still an undercooked rumor at this point. We'll let you know when we hear more. [Engadget]

[In my home we are] all Apple. Apple uses the best technology for their [computers]. Apple says to their customers: if you buy a computer from us you can be sure we have selected the best technology inside for you. That is their promise to consumers. Their promise to consumers isn't we've selected the best technology for you with the exception of what Intel allows us to use. That's not their promise. And that's why Apple uses the best technology where they want whenever they want. And that's why I'm all Apple! At home it's just Macs everywhere. It's Nvidia's technology in all of them but I use Macs. My son has two Macs, my daughter has a Mac, there's an extra Mac just in case and my wife has a Mac. It's just Mac, Mac, Mac! Because I know it's got the best stuff inside.

That's quite an enthusiastic endorsement. So enthusiastic that he crosses the ultra-fanboy territory and gets into the "I've my hockey knee pads here and I'm ready to perform iphonelingus on you if you pick me as your tablet provider, Apple" danger zone. [Shufflegazine—Thanks Ron]

They Call It "Open" For a Reason
One of the more excellent aspects of Snow Leopard, actually, is its full-scale deployment of OpenCL 1.0—Open Computing Language—a framework that allows programmers to more easily utilize the full power of mixes of different kinds of processors like GPUs and multi-core CPUs. (Much of the excitement for that is in leveraging the GPU for non-graphical applications.)

OpenCL lives up to its name: It is a royalty-free open standard managed by the Khronos Group, and supported by AMD/ATI, Apple, ARM, IBM, Intel, Nvidia, among others. Interesting thing about this open industry standard is that it was developed and proposed by... Apple.

What Is a Standard?
By "standard," we're talking about a format, interface or programming framework that a bunch of companies or people or organizations agree is the way something's going to get done, whether it's how a movie is encoded or the way websites are programmed. Otherwise, nothing works. A video that plays on one computer won't play on another, web sites that work in one browser don't work in another, etc. With increased connectedness between different machines and different platforms, standards are increasingly vital to progress.

Standards can range from open (anybody can use them, for free) to open with conditions (anybody can use them as long they follow conditions X, Y and Z) to closed (you gotta have permission, and most likely, pay for it). Some companies view standards strictly as royalty machines; others don't make much money on them, instead using them to make sure developers do things the way they want them to. Apple falls into this latter category, by choice or possibly just by fate.

Kicking the Big Guy in the Shins
Of course, OpenCL isn't the only open standard that Apple's had a hand in creating or supporting that actually went industry-wide. When you're the little guy—as Apple was, and still is in computer OS marketshare, with under 10 percent—having a hand in larger industry standards is important. It keeps your platform and programming goals from getting steamrolled by, say, the de facto "standards" enforced by the bigger guy who grips 90 percent of the market.

If you succeed in creating a standard, you're making everybody else do things the way you want them done. If you're doubting how important standards are, look no further than the old Sony throwing a new one at the wall every week hoping it'll stick. Or Microsoft getting basically everybody but iTunes to use its PlaysForSure DRM a couple years ago. Or its alternative codecs and formats for basically every genuine industry standard out there. To be sure, there is money to be made in standards, but only if the standard is adopted—and royalties can be collected.

Web Standards: The Big Headache
The web has always been a sore spot in the standards debate. The web is a "universal OS," or whatever the cloud-crazy pundits call it, but what shapes your experience is your browser and in part, how compliant it is with the tools web developers use to build their products. Internet Exploder shit all over standards for years, and web programmers still want IE6 to die in a fiery eternal abyss.

Enter WebKit, an open source browser engine developed by Apple based off of the KHTML engine. It's so standards-compliant it tied with Opera's Presto engine to be the first to pass the Acid3 test. What's most striking about WebKit isn't the fact it powers Safari and Google Chrome on the desktop, but basically every full-fledged smartphone browser: iPhone, Android, Palm Pre, Symbian and (probably) BlackBerry. So WebKit hasn't just driven web standards through its strict adherence to them, but it has essentially defined, for now, the way the "real internet" is viewed on mobile devices. All of the crazy cool web programming you see now made is made possible by standards-compliant browsers.

True, OpenCL and WebKit are open source—Apple's been clever about the way it uses open source, look no further than the guts of OS X—but Apple is hardly devoted to the whole "free and open" thing, even when it comes to web standards.

All the AV Codecs You Can Eat
The recent debate over video in the next web standards, known collectively as HTML5, shows that: Mozilla supports the open-source Ogg Theora video codec, but Apple says it's too crappy to become the web's default video standard—freeing everyone from the tyranny of Adobe's Flash. Apple says Ogg's quality and hardware acceleration support don't match up to the Apple-supported MPEG-4 standardized H.264 codec, which is tied up by license issues that keep it from being freely distributed and open. (Google is playing it up the middle for the moment: While it has doubts about the performance of Ogg Theora, Chrome has built-in support for it and H.264.)

Apple has actually always been a booster of MPEG's H.264 codec, which is the default video format supported by the iPhone—part of the reason YouTube re-encoded all of its videos, actually—and gets hardware acceleration in QuickTime X with Snow Leopard. H.264 is basically becoming the video codec (it's in Blu-ray, people use it for streaming, etc.).

Why would Apple care? It means Microsoft's WMV didn't become the leading standard.

A sorta similar story with AAC, another MPEG standard. It's actually the successor to MP3, with better compression quality—and no royalties—but Apple had the largest role in making it mainstream by making it their preferred audio format for the iPod and iTunes Store. (It saw some limited use in portables a little earlier, but it didn't become basically mandatory for audio players to support it until after the iPod.) Another bonus, besides AAC's superiority to MP3: Microsoft's WMA, though popular for a while, never took over.

FireWire I Mean iLINK I Mean IEEE 1394
Speaking of the early days of the iPod, we can't leave out FireWire, aka IEEE 1394. Like OpenCL, Apple did a lot of the initial development work (Sony, IBM and others did a lot of work on it as well), presented it to a larger standards body—the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers—and it became the basis for a standard. They tried to charge a royalty for it at first, but that didn't work out. It's a successful standard in a lot of ways—I mean, it is still on a lot of stuff like hard drives and camcorders still—but USB has turned out to be more universal, despite being technically inferior. (At least until USB 3.0 comes out, hooray!)

Update: Oops, forgot Mini DisplayPort, Apple's shrunken take on DisplayPort—a royalty-free video interface standard from VESA that's also notably supported by Dell—which'll be part of the official DisplayPort 1.2 spec. Apple licenses it for no fee, unless you sue Apple for patent infringement, which is a liiiiittle dicey. (On the other hand, we don't see it going too far as industry standard, which is why we forgot about it.)

That's just a relatively quick overview of some of the standards Apple's had a hand in one way or another, but it should give you an idea about how important standards are, and how a company with a relatively small marketshare (at least, in certain markets) can use them wield a lot of influence over a much broader domain.

Shaping standards isn't always for royalty checks or dominance—Apple's position doesn't allow them to be particularly greedy when it comes to determining how you watch stuff or browse the internet broadly. They've actually made things better, at least so far. But, one glance at the iPhone app approval process should give anybody who thinks they're the most gracious tech company second thoughts about that.

Still something you wanna know? Send questions about standards, things that are open other than your mom's legs or Sony Ultra Memory Stick XC Duo Quadro Micro Pro II to tips@gizmodo.com, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line.

In July 2008, NVIDIA publicly acknowledged a higher than normal failure rate for some of their graphics processors due to a packaging defect. At that same time, NVIDIA assured Apple that Mac computers with these graphics processors were not affected. However, after an Apple-led investigation, Apple has determined that some MacBook Pro computers with the NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics processor may be affected. If the NVIDIA graphics processor in your MacBook Pro has failed, or fails within three years of the original date of purchase, a repair will be done free of charge, even if your MacBook Pro is out of warranty.

[The Apple Blog]

It's for unspecified 15 and 17-inch models, but our unibody 15-incher said it didn't need the update, so it's probably for previous-gen models confirmed to have bad graphics cards. [Apple via ars]

It does provide a bump over the cheaper GT 120, but as Rich Brown says, it only pushes the Mac Pro's gaming performance from "mediocre" to "acceptable." And this is on his $3499 review machine.

Obviously there are way cheaper and more powerful Windows alternatives for gaming, especially if you build your own, but the option for an even awesomer (if pricier) graphics card from Apple, like a Radeon HD 4870 X2, would be nice. We know the Mac Pro isn't built for gamers, but still. Let's hear your best "Macs suck for gaming" comments below anyway. Be clever, people! [Crave]

Again, nothing's confirmed just yet, but preliminary testing has shown users who artificially set the MacBook Pro's cooling fan to 3,000rpm eliminate the screen burn-in issue we told you about earlier this week.

One MacBook Pro user, posting a reply in the Apple Support Forum, said the fans are intended to run at 2,000rpm until default conditions, and then spool up to 3,500 when high-temperature conditions kick in. You know, like what happens when you're using a GPU like the Nvidia 9600M.

That said, the MacBook Pro is having a little trouble getting it up, so to speak, and remains at about 2,050rpm when the temps rise to the point where the screen begins to flake out. That's bad.

What's good is this seems like a simple software fix, at least from the sound of this latest discussion. [Slashgear]

Complaints run something like this: When the more powerful Geforce 9600M is switched on, the display is ravaged by green lines and other weirdness, which gets worse as the card appears to heat up. Switching to the integrated 9400M cures the problem, as does restarting (at least temporarily). Another user notes that the problems flare up doing gaming, but calms down when they're "doing lower-performance stuff" which also seems to point to a heat issue.

This is actually the third run of MacBook Pros to be allegedly affected by defective Nvidia graphics cards with heat problems: The previous generation was packed with Nvidia cards that Apple determined were suffering from its notorious material defect that caused cards to fail at a "higher-than-normal" rates. The current generation of 15-inch MacBook Pros also had video problems (the ominous "black screen of death") which Apple also acknowledged, though no definitive blame was ever placed on faulty cards. (Although the Inquirer will readily tell you the cards are in fact, defective.)

Are these graphics cards, in fact, bad? It's too soon to tell—and very possible we're just hearing from a tiny, tiny but vocal minority that's been afflicted—especially without definitive word from Apple. I'd say, as I did before, that given the not-so-distant past, it doesn't look very good for Nvidia, whatever the actual case may be. [Apple via Engadget]

Mac Mini
The new Mac Mini, available now, is heavily redesigned inside and in the rear, though its body is pretty much identical to the old ones. It comes in two configs ($600 and $800), both based on the 2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo with Nvidia GeForce 9400M integrated graphics. Adam wants you to note that the $200 step up might not be worth it. [MORE]

iMac
The 24-Inch iMac comes down from $1800 to $1500, pushing the 20-Inch iMac down $300 itself to $1200. Despite having the same look they've had since August 2007 (not a problem for me but some people want new freshness), they also have better specs: The super-sick $2,200 iMac has a 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor and a 7200rpm 1TB drive (though you still have to pay extra to max out RAM at 8GB). [MORE]

Mac Pro
The new Mac Pro now starts at $2500, down from $2800, but has Intel's Xeon "Nehalem" quad-core chipset and 1066MHz DDR3 RAM for superfast memory access. It comes standard with the fast Nvidia GeForce GT 120, but you can choose an ATI Radeon HD 4870 for even more graphical juice. It's coming March 9. [MORE]

Jesus points out that Apple's keyboard just got smaller—all except the price that is. The larger one will still sell, for now, too.

Time Capsule
The new Time Capsule also looks the same on the outside, but inside it's doubled up its Wi-Fi router power with dual-channel 2.4GHz and 5GHz 802.11n for managing more network traffic. The cooler innovation is "guest networking," which lets you create a virtual Wi-Fi hotspot for guests that is walled off from the rest of your network. [MORE]

In our case, it simply didn't fix the MiniDisplay Port to Dual-Link DVI distortion problems, but according to Apple's forums, it opened up a whole new bag of hurt for some people:

I downloaded the update today and regret that I did. The problem for me is now worse. I cannot use my external samsung 22inch monitor on extended desktop mode, only mirror mode, and that is not helpful to me. In extended mode it goes black for extended times, flicking on occasionally to remind me that its there still.

If you already installed in the update, has it borked out on you? [AppleInsider]

Tom's Hardware is pointing to an Nvidia source that confirmed Apple was the first to receive Ion test units, and said that Apple most certainly had an Ion-powered Mac Mini in the pipe. Apple Insider is more inclined to believe it's for the Apple TV, since a move to Atom would be a step up from its aging 1GHz Intel Crofton proc.

Both products make the most sense for a low-power, low-cost processor, but a dual-core Atom 330 running at 1.6 GHz would certainly be a step down from the Mini's current Core 2 Duo at 1.83 and 2 GHz, so I would place my chips in the Apple TV stack. The Nvidia 9400M would bring a nice boost to the Mini's paltry HD video capabilities however, and OS X config file snooping has turned up evidence for a 9400M-powered Mini recently (doesn't mean it will also use an Atom processor).

Or maybe they'll simply combine these two fairly confused product lines into one dimunitive full OS X machine (please) that's perfect for the living room. Tom's source says the new Ion-powered product will hit around March. We'll see about that. [Tom's Hardware, Apple Insider]

I'm a sucker for any Apple keynote, whether I'm in the stands with the press or F5'ing away at my browser like most of you. There's a certain hypnotic timing to them, a clean presentation and a controlled, meticulous unveiling process that makes even the less exciting products seem monumental in scope.

During today's last Apple Macworld keynote, not having been there, I actually forgot at times that Steve Jobs wasn't presenting with Phil Schiller taking his place instead. Indeed, from the text/content alone, I wouldn't have even noticed. The presentation style was intact—from the clean slides to the dramatic structure, it was an Apple keynote, even if it wasn't Steve's Apple keynote. But I want to know, do you feel the same way?

From our original Macworld 2009 rumor roundup, here's the rundown on how all the rumors panned out.

Came True:
iLife and iWork '09 (with iWork in the cloud)
DRM-Free iTunes
17-inch Macbook Pro

Didn't Come True:
New Mac Mini
Updated 30-inch Cinema Displays

Didn't Come True Stretches:
iPod Touch Jumbo/XL/Pro/Netbook/Thing
iPhone nano
Home Server
Snow Leopard Availability
New iMacs

Seeing as many of the rumors were an admitted wild shot at best, we'd put the real rumor batting average around .400, even if it's closer to .266 on paper.

The 17" MacBook Pro is basically a supersized 15" with an Air no battery bottom, which is at the least aesthetically pleasing. But with no battery compartment there is now no way to easily change Ram or Hard drive. So have your #00 Phillips ready.

The unibody construction makes the machine feel much more compact when picking up and overall condenses the already thin casing. It does indeed feel heavier than any other MacBook model but that's to be expected from a 17" casing. The trackpad has also been updated to the same no physical button pad found in the other MacBook models and even though the 17" MacBook Pro is bigger the trackpad has not grown.

The 17" Glossy LCD looks crisp as it did on the previous version but the new black plastic border makes colors pop just as it does on the 15" Pro and 13" MacBook. For some reason apple is only showing the regular glossy LCD model today so we can't yet report on the new anti-glare model.

Overall the new 17" MacBook Pro with unibody construction is nothing we haven't seen from the other models in the MacBook line. With the 15" MacBook Pro look and the Air's no battery bottom the new 17" MacBook pro can now stand proudly inline with its smaller siblings.

I tried downloading Radiohead's Bodysnatchers in an area providing 3 bars of 3G reception. With no fanfare, I was able to enter the iTunes store without a Wi-Fi hotspot and purchase the song.

So far, so good. No firmware updates needed or anything!

Then the download stalled for a moment. Then the iPhone pulled that classic "you're on 3G, oops, you're really on EDGE" maneuver. I wondered what would happen. Would the download stall and wait for 3G? Or would it slowly trudge on?

It trudged on. I guess that's both a good an a bad thing. While I was able to download the song, it took me nearly 10 minutes to grab the 3.7MB file. Wilson Rothman ran the same test from nearby and was also booted to EDGE, though the download only took him about 5 minutes.

Overall, I'm glad that truly wireless iTunes downloads are here. Hopefully more and better 3G coverage will make them live up to the generally pleasant iTunes experience. [Gizmodo Macworld 2009 Coverage]

While EMI is already offering DRM-free music on iTunes, they represent only 10% of the music market. With "the big three" on board, a majority of iTunes' music could be DRM-free. But the new pricing options may be the real cost of it all to consumers. While catalog titles will now start at 79 cents, the studios will be able to price music above 99 cents (to undisclosed amounts)—though CNET's source says that all music will eventually return to 79 cents.

So while it sounds like Apple finally caved to the music industry, at least consumers may get something decent out of it. Hopefully we'll hear about it all today at the keynote. [CNET]