Apple releases WWDC details

By: Erica Ogg
Topics: Apple

Still three months away, Apple announced Monday some, but of course not all, of the details regarding its annual Worldwide Developers Conference.

Set to be held in San Francisco from June 11-15, the agenda will focus on three key areas: Leopard, the next generation of OS X due out this spring; a Mac immersion track for experienced developers new to the Mac platform; and media and content delivery, which will teach developers how to incorporate videos and podcasts into Mac applications.

Last year's event featured developers from 45 countries and more than 4,000 attendees, said Ron Okamoto, Apple's vice president of worldwide developer relations. This year Apple is anticipating an even bigger crowd, he said.

What kind of surprises, if any, can attendees expect this year? The infamous iPhone is expected to be released in June, but when asked about any more potential iPhone announcements at WWDC, Okamoto would only say, "We've announced it's releasing in June, and we're not saying anymore about it."

Erica Ogg is a CNET News reporter who covers Apple, HP, Dell, and other PC makers, as well as the consumer electronics industry. She's also one of the hosts of CNET News' Daily Podcast. In her non-work life, she's a history geek, a loyal Dodgers fan, and a mac-and-cheese connoisseur.
Follow on Twitter »

9 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by PatDaddy67 February 3, 2010 6:18 PM EST: Taken to the extreme, if a woman were to have this gene and wished to reproduce, she would potentially have to obtain a license from the company in question. Even more extreme, her body is constantly reproducing these genes internally. Shouldn't she have to pay royalties for the privilege? Allowing a company to patent a gene is ridiculous. Patent the process to identify and modify the gene, sure? but the gene is owned by all of humanity.; Reply to this comment


by ToolMangler1 February 3, 2010 10:39 AM EST: The Courts can get around this by simply Giving GOD the Patent rights to the Human Genome. This is a no brainer even if you are an Atheist. It removes ownership of human beings from all but GODs jurisdiction and puts such ownership totally out of reach of mans greedy fingers..; Reply to this comment


by margroks February 3, 2010 10:32 AM EST: Whoa, whoa, whoa. Certainly it's ridiculous for someone to try to get a patent on a gene-something that many people have in their bodies. If they were asking for a patent on some kind of specific gene therapy which they developed then yes, that's reasonable but not to allow a patent on an individual gene itself.

However, there is no reason to suddenly castigate the entire scientific community for it. A majority of scientists have indeed forwarded the bounds of human knowledge and developed medical procedures and medicines which inprove our lives and the human condition each and every day. It's preposterous to make a leap from this to calling all scientists criminals. That is just not true.

Think of the antibiotics and other medicines many of us use when we become sick and they do work for us. Science and the medical field HAVE made the world a far better place for the most part.; Reply to this comment


by Glider2001 February 3, 2010 7:38 AM EST: If someone can hold a patent to a gene, then why not a kidney? Think I'll apply for one.; Reply to this comment


by kenhamlett February 3, 2010 6:59 AM EST: The genes we possess are quite literally common property for any living thing. I don't understand why any gene patent was ever allowed.; Reply to this comment


by thesevenveils February 3, 2010 5:04 AM EST: Monsanto all over again but on a much more large and life entwined scale.
Genes are not an invention, but a discovery. The discovery of gravity, light, electromagnetism the elements, all cannot be patented. Neither should genes.; Reply to this comment


by RoboBlogger February 3, 2010 1:57 AM EST: Maybe not the "Gene" itself but the Patent to a Vaccine for that specific Gene. Other than that, it's totally ridiculous to own a Gene. Who do they think they are GOD? Besides, any Patent over a Human Gene could and probably would hamper a Cure to someone's disease/virus. I wonder, would it be possible to patent any of these words in my comment? Let's see how they like that.; Reply to this comment

by cidaia February 3, 2010 1:38 AM EST

Reclassifying things that are obviously in the public domain as "intellectual property" is a massive violation.

But it's no surprise; scientists and their corporate symbionts have been doing bad things for a long time, and justifying all sorts of violations.

Science used to be perceived as something that was gonna make the world better. Scientists were viewed as heroic or something. What a joke that turned out to be.

Reply to this comment