Slashback is back from vacation with updates on the Apple switch to Intel,a now-fixed glitch in the recent release of Debian 3.1, a hyper-efficient Honda, and the real numbers on online music networks. Read on for the details.

Nora writes "IBM developerWorks has posted an open source Slimline Open Firmware (SLOF) download intended to aid the development of operating systems and virtualization layers for PowerPC-based machines. One thing that's kind of neat about it is that it is under a pretty liberal "BSD-like" license -- something I have not often seen IBM do. If I am not much mistaken (and please correct me if I am), this license makes it compatible with both GPL'd and BSD'd projects, among others. And in the interest of full disclosure, I'd like to add that I *am* affiliated with the developerWorks site."

Silas asks: "It's about time to trade up my Samsung A500 (a robust flip-phone that has served me well) to a new cell phone, and I'm looking for recommendations. I'd like something pretty no-nonsense that does the basics very well (sound quality, intuitive button placement and UI, compact physical design -- no camera, and no annoying ringtones) but I'm also ready to start connecting my phone to other parts of my life. In particular, I'd like to find something compatible with iSync on Mac OS X Tiger for addressbook and calendar stuff, and I wouldn't mind trying out the bluetooth madness for proximity login/keychain auth, etc. I've also had the ability to connect my Powerbook to the net through the phone with Sprint PCS's Vision program and a USB cable from The Shack, and preserving that capability would be nice, but is less important in a world of hotspots, and I'm fine with switching carriers. Any help is much appreciated, even if it's just brand/category generalizations."

inventgeek writes "With the recent announcements Apple has made regarding its operating environment, Inventgeek.com has a mod that seems rather fitting. They have converted a Mac G3 to an Intel P4 System capable of running Windows or Linux. Full how to is available on there site for those brave enough to bask in what many say could be Apples greatest folly, and a blow to Linux." Update: 06/08 17:53 GMT by T : A few further Mac-OS-X-on-Intel notes, about the new Intel development kit from Apple: Readers jimboman78 and shooflot sent in, respectively, links to (mostly positive) comments on the front page of Accelerate Your Mac and a more skeptical but equally preliminary description at Think Secret.

DLWormwood wonders: "As a long time Mac developer, originally as a hobbyist and then a professional, I'm feeling pessimistic about the future of the platform now that Apple is embracing Intel and abandoning the few remaining 'Mac' technologies (like the PowerPC and OpenTransport) left to the platform. With the high likelihood that these new Macs will offer a full speed version of Virtual PC and (what I think is) the almost assurance that some clever hacker will make 'X for x86' run on commodity hardware, I'm doubting the willingness of most IT and development houses to even give the Carbon and Cocoa APIs a first glance. (If it wasn't for the poor past performance of VPC, I would not have gotten my first Mac programming job.) Can anybody with a more optimistic view think of a scenario where a modern development house will do Mac development in an age where the help desk will just say either 'switch boot to Windows/Linux' or 'run Virtual PC?'"

bonch writes "A study by NPD Group shows that iTunes ranks #2 in popularity of music downloads, rivaling services like Limewire, Kazaa, and iMesh. The #1 service was still WinMX, but NPD believes this proves to the music industry that legal downloads can work, and that iTunes provides an economically viable alternative." From the article: "According to NPD, about 4 percent of Internet-enabled households in the nation used a paid music download store in March."

An Anonymous Reader wrote "InsideMacGames has posted a response to the news of Apple using Intel processors from both original Mac game developers as well as people who work on porting Windows games to OS X. Some negative and positive feedback is expressed, though it seems there's more uncertainty than anything else at this point. Can the fear of a Wine-like VM solution gutting the biz be balanced by faster CPU speeds?" From the article: "We think Apple's move to Intel is great. For one thing, it demonstrates that Apple is really serious about giving Windows-based computing head-to-head competition. For another, it lays the groundwork for the future of personal computing in a digitally connected home. And, for another, it's going to narrow the gap between the release of a game on Windows and the release on Mac -- maybe to zero."

Deep Fried Geekboy writes "John C. Dvorak is pretty quick off the blocks with a response to the news that Apple intend to switch to Intel processors. Thankfully, he doesn't gloat about having called this one correctly, but says that the move is likely to hurt Linux, as OSS developers increasingly target the Mac. Since it now turns out that Dvorak was apparently not smoking crack when he predicted the Apple move, could he be right on this one too?"

rohanl writes "Apple has responded to recent criticisms from the KHTML developers by providing a live CVS repository (including all history) of WebCore, JavaScriptCore and the newly open sourced WebKit, public mailing list, irc channel and bug database. Details at the new webkit.opendarwin.org"

Tenken writes "Looks like Apple has finally made available a PC version of QuickTime 7. It seems to perform on par with the Mac release, though the H.264 decoding for hi-def trailers will probably see much more optimization before QT is officially released. The main reason to upgrade is to check out the new hi-def trailers which you can find at the QuickTime site. There are 480p and 720p versions available for the few hi-def trailers, though I'm fairly certain there were also 1080p clips online a few weeks ago."

Steve Jobs announced at the WWDC keynote today that Apple is switching to Intel processors. MacNN has live coverage. The bottom line is that Mac OS X for the last five years has been running on Intel, the switch is expected to be complete in two years, and Rosetta will allow PPC apps to run on Intel-based Macs, transparently. If you're using Xcode, it is small changes and a recompile; otherwise, you might be seeing a lot of work ahead of you. You will be able to order the 10.4.1 preview for Intel today.

6031769 writes "ZD Net are reporting a rumour that Steve Jobs will announce Apple are going to move to an Intel chip base at their worldwide developer conference today. Still just a rumour, but could this be the masterstroke Apple have been promising or is it a blind alley?" Lots of submissions about this one, but no one knows for sure - there have been stories about how AMD is hurt by this - but I think my favorite debunking of it is the piece by John Gruber on Daring Fireball.

Kelly McNeill writes "MacDailyNews has an editorial which summarizes reports from various research groups that analyzed the number of computer users affected by viruses. The conclusion was that 16 percent of all computer users are not affected by viruses because they use Macs. The lack of viruses on a Mac is commonly known, but the interesting thing is the fact that the results finally provide the first set of conclusive numbers which illustrate the Macintosh's install-base. So far only "market-share" statistics are commonly published for the public and do not convey install base. (If for example 2 people are using computers and one replaces his 2x in a 3 year period and the other only does once, market-share dynamics dictate that one demographic has 75% market share while the other has only 25% -- even though install base is still 50/50.)"

rdarden writes "After you get your dough from the recent iPod settlement, why not recycle your old iPod at an Apple retail store (US only). Starting today, that worthless hunk of environmental unfriendliness can be turned into a 10% discount on a new iPod (purchased at the same time)."

telstar writes "According to C|Net, Apple has officially decided to drop IBM, and will use Intel processors starting in their '06 line of systems. This change was rumored last month. The announcement is expected Monday at Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference in San Francisco, at which Chief Executive Steve Jobs is giving the keynote speech." From the article: "Apple successfully navigated a switch in the 1990s from Motorola's 680x0 line of processors to the Power line jointly made by Motorola and IBM. That switch also required software to be revamped to take advantage of the new processors' performance, but emulation software permitted older programs to run on the new machines."

demonbug writes "Anandtech has an article up comparing performance of dual G5s to AMD Opteron and Intel Xeon workstations. The article also takes a look at performance under Mac OS X versus Linux. It provides an interesting look at some of the strengths and weaknesses of the different CPUs." From the article: "This article is written solely from the frustration that I could not get a clear picture on what the G5 and Mac OS X are capable of. So, be warned; this is not an all-round review. It is definitely the worst buyer's guide that you can imagine. This article cares about speed, performance, and nothing else! No comments on how well designed the internals are, no elaborate discussions about user friendliness, out-of-the-box experience and other subjective subjects. But we think that you should have a decent insight to where the G5/Mac OS X combination positions itself when compared to the Intel & AMD world at the end of this article."

An anonymous reader writes "A court has conditionally approved a settlement in a class action suit brought against Apple Computer by several consumers who claim their iPod batteries did not live up to the company's representation, according to AppleInsider. The tentative approval was handed down by the Superior Court of California for San Mateo County and covers all consumers who purchased a first-, second-, or third-generation iPod model on or before May 31, 2004 and experienced 'battery failure.' According to the published settlement notice, 'battery failure' is when 'the capacity of an iPod's battery to hold an electrical charge has dropped to four hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the Third Generation iPod, or five hours or less of continuous audio playback, with earbuds attached, with respect to the First Generation iPod and the Second Generation iPod.' The deadline for filing a claim is September 30, 2005."

Sabah Arif writes "We've all heard of Apple's Newton, the portable handheld device under John Sculley's rule at Apple that debuted to big media attention and much fanfare but never managed to take a strong footing in the marketplace. The same handhel that went on to be 'Steve'd' when Mr. RDF killed the project after taking control of Apple. That's the extent of knowledge most of us have with regard to Apple's first handheld device. OS Opinion sheds light on the early days of the pocket Apple." From the article: "Apple in the late eighties had become stagnant. The Macintosh had become Apple's cash cow like the Apple II that had preceded it. To protect the Mac, Apple was hesitant to start or pursue any project that might compromise the company's revenues. Several people in the corporation were weary of this approach, and began to look at the future of computing. One of those people was Steve Sakoman."

Kelly McNeill writes "The last time Apple and Sirius met up to discuss the possibilities of integrating satellite radio into the iPod, Steve Jobs turned down the offer. However, new reports show that the two companies are talking again. Kelly McNeill submitted the following editorial to osOpinion/osViews, which suggests the partnership is not to integrate satellite into the iPod but rather to make Sirius's original content for the future version of iTunes that will sport new podcasting capabilities."

FreshlyShornBalls writes "The New York Times is running a story that I think needs to be seen by everyone on both sides of the on-going Macintosh vs. Windows debate (i.e. just about everyone who posts on Slashdot): Some ground rules for the Windows vs. Mac War." From the article: "Last week, I wrote about some of the changes Microsoft has in store for the next version of Windows, which is slated for the end of 2006. Interestingly, very few of you responded to that column, probably because so much may change in the next 19 months. But a few of you fired off diatribes about how I'm either a Microsoft 'shill' or an Apple 'apologist' (or maybe it was the other way around). It's not just me, either; it's a running sardonic joke among tech columnists that you can't even USE the word 'Apple' or 'Microsoft' without getting hate mail from somebody or other."