Thanks Ted.

So, Mac OS X Server license is $499. I need to buy one of these licenses for each instance of Mac OS X Server running in a guest VM?

Why can I not run Mac OS X in a guest OS? This license is only $29.

I'm interested in running Mac OS X Server.

1. Is there a Citrix or Terminal Services for Mac so multiple users can connect concurrently to Mac OS X Server and get a desktop?

2. Is there a VMWare View for Mac so I can run multiple instances of Mac OS X desktop?

Prohibit the practice of locking phones to a particular carrier. I bought an original iPhone directly from Apple without any subsidies. I should be permitted to use the phone with any carrier without having to "hack" the phone. People who pay full price for a phone to avoid any service contracts should be entitled to use the phone with any carrier.

It's a MOBILE device after all and people should not be locked into paying roaming charges if they want to use their phone when traveling outside of their home area.

Only Apple sells devices capable of playing iTunes protected content. Nothing "fair" about that.

I'm still no fan of DRM, however, one of my primary concerns is that I don't want to be limited in the devices I can play back the content. With the proliferation of DivX capable devices from multiple manufacturers this may be a reasonable compromise.

Rhapsody has two subscription services.

1. To Go: Listen to music anytime, anywhere -- including on your portable player.
2. Unlimited: Listen to music anytime, from your PC or web browser.

"To Go" is a download to supported devices that you can play off line. "Unlimited" is streaming.

I have an unlimited account. I believe the app would be for the "unlimited" subscription service, not "To Go".

Reasons the app may be permitted:
-Nothing in AT&T's service agreement prohibits streaming audio.
-There are already streaming audio and video apps in the App Store (such as Simplify, Last.FM, CBC Radio, YouTube, VoIP clients, etc)
-This does not change the usability of the iPod function as Rhapsofy Unlimited is streaming only

Reasons the app may be rejected:
-Steve Jobs wants to be a douche bag
-The rhapsody app doesn't support adult ratings for explicit content
-The rhapsody app doesn't follow the Apple style guides or tries to use undocumented features
-The rhapsody app crashes

@Mark

Some (like the RIAA) argue I don't own the music on my computer, but rather am only licensed to listen to it. Simplify allows me to listen to music residing on my computer that I'm licensed to listen to.

This is the same with Rhapsody. So long as I keep paying my subscription fees, I'm entitled to listen to anything in their music library on-demand.

I still do not fully understand why the location where the music resides should be a differentiator with Simplify vs Rhapsody.

It should not matter where the music resides. The bottom line is that I'm licensed to listen to the music and other on-demand streaming applications exist in the app store. Apple is going to have to come up with a better excuse.

@ Mark
Oh it's a threat to iTunes and because of that Apple won't mess around. They will deliberate long and hard to find any reason to reject it. However, I think there is enough precence for a Rhapsody Unlimited service to be approved.

For example, Simplify lets me stream my music library (residing on my Mac or PC) over the Internet to my iPhone. From a UI perspective, it's actually quite similar to that found in the iPod app with the exception that Simplify plays streaming content where the iPod app doesn't. I can browse my content by artist, genre, album, etc.

Rhapsody has two subscription services.

1. To Go: Listen to music anytime, anywhere -- including on your portable player.
2. Unlimited: Listen to music anytime, from your PC or web browser.

"To Go" is a download to supported devices that you can play off line. "Unlimited" is streaming.

I have an unlimited account. I believe the app would be for the "unlimited" subscription service, not "To Go".

Reasons the app may be permitted:
-Nothing in AT&T's service agreement prohibits streaming audio.
-There are already streaming audio and video apps in the App Store (such as Simplify, Last.FM, CBC Radio, YouTube, VoIP clients, etc)
-This does not change the usability of the iPod function as Rhapsofy Unlimited is streaming only

Reasons the app may be rejected:
-Steve Jobs wants to be a douche bag
-The rhapsody app doesn't support adult ratings for explicit content
-The rhapsody app doesn't follow the Apple style guides or tries to use undocumented features
-The rhapsody app crashes

I'd like to see Boxee focus more on media management and less on content.

Content is locked to particular regions so let third-party developers create this support. Boxee should focus on the core of media management and playback.

The biggest draw for me is how Boxee manages my media library. When I browse my local content it shows information like titles, cast, an plot. It does not feel like I'm browsing folders and files.

Boxee still doesn't recognize the meta tags on my video files. This means I cannot use Boxee to manage or browse family videos of my trip to Egypt.

I've been waiting too long for Apple to announce HW updates for the Apple TV. I'm right on the edge of Apple TV's limits. I can't wait to see additional device support.

How much are people willing to pay for content without commercials?