Is that normal is the US?

I thought most contracts had an early termination costs which represents the rest of the installments? Certainly in Australia that is the case - sometimes as explicit handset/plan items (where you pay the remaining handset installments) but sometimes as a single bundled cost (where you pay a percentage break-cost like 50%)

I'm genuinely curious why?

You don't really have a hope of being able to hear the different between any of the audio chipsets under any typical circumstances, hence why they don't bother spec'ing it. For any serious audio work, you wouldn't be using an analog output anyway and in most cases wouldn't be using a standard consumer laptop.

Audio impedance is a reasonable question but ipod drives are not (officially) user-replaceable so you will never get an answer on that.

Perhaps if you have special requirements, you just aren't Apple's target market ??

Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer peripherals, mobile phones, consumer electronics and related accessories, and demonstration of products relating thereto

Hmmm ... they were 2 separate thoughts

Thought #1: Apple have ALREADY had issues with confusion via authorised resellers
Thought #2: Apple do not want people tricked into fake Apple stores but unfortunately trademark is just about the only way of protecting against this

It should have been relatively clear (but maybe wasn't) that I was not suggesting trademarking store design was to stop misuse of other trademarked properties like the Apple logo. The point was Apple already has issues with brand confusion and should not let another area of brand confusion creep in - that is, they should ensure current trademarks are enforced and implement trademarks on other current/future brand specific areas.

Because it is not joint wear but a symptom of prior joint damage.

Serious runners run within their limits and typically run with good form ... Exercise runners are more prone to 'over-train' relative to their ability and are typically in worse shape than serious runners (eg. more body weight, poorer running form, less conditioning of muscles and ligaments).

Hence, exercise runners are more prone to do damage that will later develop into osteoarthritis.

I think there is reasonable evidence that amateurs in most sports have higher injury rates than professionals, despite the professionals undertaking physically more demanding activities.

Likewise, plenty is evidence that knees (and joint in general) do not just "wear out" as you correctly suggest.

Come on ... almost no-one (if anyone) has even the first point ...

It's a specific arrangement of vertical glass panels from floor to door height across the full frontage of the store and supplemented by horizontal glass panels from top of the door to the ceiling and 2 narrow panels either side of the store front.

Cantilevered shelves along the walls are pretty rare. Flush-mounted video screen less so and tables are pretty much the common one (although they need to running solely front to back which is quite a bit less common).

And other items include the VERY specific lighting which is extremely uncommon.

As pointed out, it is the COMBINATION of 6-8 very specific things ... not just having any type of glass front, tables, video screens and shelves which would be stupidly generic.

Firstly, FYI its a trademark not a patent. And definitely not applicable in Australia.

Secondly, the aspects that are trademarked have nothing in common with our phone stores ... they are the combination of very specific glass frontage features, the lighting pattern, cantilevered wall displays, location of video displays, etc, etc

The general layout of tables and display isn't really what it being trademarked despite the beat-up in the article summary.

Completely not the point of the article ...

It's not about slection of speed to get somewhere, but instead about how people optimise for whatever average speed they select

Spot on ...

Same social stigma as driving 100mph everywhere ... you may have the energy, ability and preference to do it - but safety (not jealousy) suggests moderation in many situations is the social norm

I think there is a more subtle point to the study ...

Energy expenditure for walking above 2m/s (7.2kph / 4.5mph) increases quite dramatically and for above 3m/s (10.8kph / 6.8/mph) you physically need to be running.

In the transition (between 2-3 m/s) it seems to be more economical to access the low energy walking at low speed supplemented by whatever limited running is needed. For example, to average 2.5 m/s (9kph or 5.6mph) it is better walk half of it at 2m/s and run half at 3m/s rather than power-walk or slow-jog at 2.5 m/s consistently.

Point of the study is that people tend to naturally optimise this ... or conversely i would argue that people are poor at judging speeds and have to increase/decrease to make the time limit - it would be interesting to repeat but give people a pace-indicator and see if people still maintained alternating speeds or changed instead to a steady pace.

Obviously the title is stupid and really should been focused on how WELL people optimise their energy output not whether people do.

All good and well but what is a snowballs chance of surviving there?

5 months at most absolute most under the best 'snowball' conditions

Approximately how long an all renewables energy system would last perhaps? Or is that too skepitcal ?

Yes they are certainly covered against direct fraud - definitely can not claim to be an apple store.

But in many countries (and mine, Australia, is one of them) there have certainly been instances of resellers copying the look and feel of a store in a deliberate attempt to allow naive consumers to be confused into thinking it is an official Apple store. There are no direct claims so it is not fraud.

One solution is to eliminate those resellers - but grey market channels and non-resellers are always a problem.

I think the US system truly sucks but it is also EXACTLY what the trademark system is in place for .. Fortunately for the rest of the civilized world we have better consumer protection laws in place that directly cover practices that deceive and confuse - more so than the FTC would encompass.

Perhaps, stronger and more uniform Trade Practices Acts would be a better start?

Yes it is in the context of the trademark application ... Have a read of it

It covers a very specific COMBINATION of Apple's glass frontage design, lighting and shelving NOT THE BASIC LAYOUT ... it is a combination that you would not stumble upon unless you were DELIBERATELY trying to pass yourself off as an Apple store.

Your local games shop is not pretending to be an Apple store (and certainly does not have that specific combination of elements) so is not covered my the trademark - no drama !

Having said that I am certainly no fan of Apple but do understand they want protection against obvious fraudsters who try to pass themselves off Apple stores.

No ... and I can be polite and courteous in a discussion

So somebody should be able to set up an exact replica of an Apple store?

Previously there was nothing stopping resellers from doing exactly that, slapping Apple logos all over the place and dressing staff in apple branded clothes.

You can understand why Apple do not want people tricked into fake Apple stores but unfortunately trademark is just about the only way of protecting against this.