With the end of the year comes the cavalcade of best and worst lists, just in case you didn't know what was best and what was worst over the course of the year.

Apple made glassdoor.com's list of "50 Best Places to Work," placing 19th. It scored a 3.8 out of five, and 90 percent of employees approved of the job that CEO Steve Jobs was doing. 303 employees completed reviews at the site, contributing to its score. (The reviews themselves are interesting to read, incidentally, if you have a few minutes to kill.)

On the other hand, Apple made Fortune magazine's list of 21 Dumbest Moments in Business for the year, twice -- but the second time really wasn't its fault.

The first head-smacker, at number six, was for the approval (and subsequent removal) of the "I Am Rich" iPhone application. "The real losers?" Fortune asks: "The eight suckers who bought it."

The second blooper, number 19, actually goes to CNN and Bloomberg for two false stories about Steve Jobs' health. Bloomberg accidentally released an obituary on August 28, and retracted it the same day. In a similar gaffe, a post on CNN's iReport site falsely claimed that Jobs had suffered a heart attack. CNN took down the post -- but not after Apple's stock dipped 10 percent in 10 minutes. Ouch.

[Via Macsimum News and MacNN.]

The BBC reported today that a TV ad for the iPhone has been banned in the UK by the government's advertising standards watchdog group for being misleading.

The Advertising Standards Authority received 17 complaints about the ad above, which showed web pages, the Maps application, and mail attachments loading in fractions of a second. The group said that the ad "led viewers to believe that the device actually operated at or near the speeds shown," the BBC story read.

The ASA said after reviewing the complaints, "Because we understood that it did not, we concluded the ad was likely to mislead."

Apple argued that the claims in the spot were "relative rather than absolute in nature," comparing the 3G speeds to the speeds of the first-generation iPhone. Nevertheless, the ad cannot be run on UK airwaves again in its current form.

One of the complainants was a man named Roger Browning, who said in a post at The Guardian that he complained about the advertisement as retribution for a bad customer support experience he had with O2.

Apple has run afoul of the ASA before, with a claim in August that the iPhone could view "the whole Internet." Since the iPhone doesn't support Flash and Java, the agency decided the ads were misleading, and yanked them off-air.

[Via MacDailyNews.]

Yesterday, our buddy David Chartier at Ars and Sam Oliver at AppleInsider both publicized an issue that's been burning up the support boards for a while now: iTunes video rentals and purchases in HD are flagged for HDCP control, and in cooperation with the new Mini DisplayPort connector on the MacBook and MacBook Pro unibody models, those movies and TV shows are refusing to play back on non-compliant external displays.

In this case, 'compliant' means HDMI or recent-vintage DVI, but even monitors or TVs that support HDCP may not properly negotiate with the DisplayPort connector to give iTunes and QuickTime the all-clear signal (if so, quitting and relaunching iTunes once the display is hooked up may clear the playback hold). Equally annoying: HDCP is only supposed to apply to 'high-value' digital streams, meaning standard-def purchases and rentals on the iTunes store should be out of scope... but some reports indicate that both the HD and SD instances are flagged, blocking playback on anything but the laptop's internal display or a straight-thru HDMI connection. Argh!

While Apple TV users with unconventional output setups have been dealing with this aggravation since the beginning of the year, MacBook and MBP owners have largely steered clear, even as the HD content on iTunes became available for playback on the laptops. Now that the hardware and software have come into sync on the unibody models, Apple's compliance with HDCP -- a necessary but appalling condition of the content companies that deliver the HD movies and TV shows -- is beginning to close out the 'analog hole' and cause real aggravation for laptop owners with legitimate use cases. Talk about a bag of hurt.

Some of you might remember the music event in September. Not only did Steve Jobs give us new iPods, but he also promised that Apple would be releasing new in-ear headphones in October. If anyone hasn't noticed, it's now mid-November, and there's no sign of the new headphones anywhere.

Has Apple simply abandoned the release of these new headphones? If history repeats itself, then we might get these sometime next year. When I contacted Apple's sales staff, they told me that there is "no set release date." You can check out the In-Ear Headphones store entry by clicking here; someday you might even be able to buy them for $79 US .

The responses to the blog post were largely in support of my thesis: that losing FireWire from the MacBook is a big deal and a potential (or actual) deal-breaker for many, many users. This was to be expected, as people who are upset about FireWire's disappearance are more likely to respond to an article sharing that sentiment. On Twitter, however, when we just asked, "Is the lack of FireWire on the new unibody MacBook a deal-breaker for you, yes or no?" the data was less skewed.

A majority of the Twitter users that responded to our poll said "no, it is not a deal-breaker." Many commented that the loss is disappointing, but ultimately it won't prevent them from buying a new MacBook. Still, more than one third of the responses were "yes, this is a deal-breaker." Many users are considering putting off upgrading altogether; others expressed discomfort with being forced to buy a MacBook Pro (either the new units, or the now heavily-discounted older units).

A note to concerned future MacBook Pro users: you can get an inexpensive cable with FW400 on one end and FW800 on the other -- no adapter needed, just a new cord for your camera or audio device. Be warned, however, that the presence of a FW400 device in the chain will drop the speed of any FW800 devices to the older standard.

Reader David sent Steve Jobs (or sjobs@apple.com) an e-mail, expressing his disappointment by the lack of FireWire on new MacBooks. The response (which David forwarded and we verified had the correct mail-header information), is pretty interesting...

Thanks to what appears to be a character encoding problem on a French version of the Apple website, the MacBook announcement -- meant to say "perfectly designed" in French -- came out reading "perfectly dumb" (or as one of our tipsters said, a more vulgar version of "perfectly poopy").

That wasn't the only problem: according to Macenstein, a Macgeneration article noted that the announcements were replete with spelling and grammatical errors. (Link is en français.)

The pages have since been updated with better grammar.

Unfortunately my decade-old high school French can't tell me what about the grammar is wrong, but hopefully our commenters can let us know by leaving a comment.

Thanks, Bertie and Fabrizio!

It's been a couple of months since I first posted my thoughts on the iPhone App Store review process and called for greater objectivity, transparency, and consistency from Apple. Apple's review process has become the meme of the moment this week. Here's a quick run-down of some of the big (and less big) stories out there at the moment:

Engadget
Ryan Block, with the help of Geek Lawyer (and TUAW buddy) Nilay Patel, looks at the App Store review system and finds it lacking. (Full disclosure: I had a very minor hand in this post.)

Joy of Tech
Here's Joy of Tech's hilarious take on the App-Store review process. (Thanks, Jonathan K!)

Mobile Chat
The authors of Mobile Chat are offering refunds, as they can't tell if or when they will ever be accepted to the App Store with a functioning product.

LateNiteSoft
Here's a thoughtful essay about the "Cruel Economy of the App Store." It's really a terrific read.

Macworld
Don't ascribe malicious intent to what can be explained by incompetence and too-rapid growth of the App Store, suggests this Macworld writeup.

The Associated Press reports that Steve Jobs and other senior executives have settled a stockholder lawsuit claiming they mishandled stock option awards.

Insurers representing Jobs and Apple's board will pay Apple, Inc. $14 million, which tidily covers almost $9 million in attorney's fees and expenses. The settlement puts to rest a series of suits related to Apple's options backdating scandal.

Apple had no comment on the matter.

The settlement and the suit behind it is a little complicated: In a traditional stockholder lawsuit, the stockholders must prove that the stock price was negatively affected by the actions of the defendants. Since accounting problems that follow options-backdating scandals frequently don't affect stock price, the lawsuit is called a "derivative lawsuit."

In a derivative lawsuit, shareholders sue company leaders individually on behalf of the company, claiming they caused harm to the company's interests. The executives settled with Apple and its shareholders, offering the $14 million in exchange for dropping the suit. The money comes from the insurance companies, as the executives had policies in place to cover them in case they had to pay up. Got all that? There's a test at the end.

The settlement received preliminary approval in Federal district court on Monday. A final settlement hearing is scheduled for October 31.

[Via Valleywag.]

Recently, TUAW has received numerous tips about near random iPhone boot loops that force users to restore their units. This forum thread suggests that these reboots may be due to the iPhone's onboard watchdog system.

The iPhone has to create a new Application Map whenever you load or unload apps to the system. Should the time to create that map exceed two minutes, the phone enters an endless boot cycle.

The solution proposed on the thread isn't of much general use -- it requires jailbroken shell access. You may want to limit the number and scope of Apps you load to your phone (i.e. cut down on those tip calculators and sudoku apps that we know you're secretly addicted to) to achieve the same, stable results.

Fewer apps mean a shorter time to generate that map and a better likelihood that your phone will work with greater reliability.

Thanks, Goran

When a developer submits a "Pull My Finger" application, you've kind of got to expect it's going to be rejected. iFartz was rejected. Ibrate was rejected -- and that one was even raising money for breast cancer research. Today, over at Mac Rumors, I read about "Pull My Finger"'s rejection for limited utility. Right at the bottom of the rejection letter was the name "Victor Wang".

Mr. Wang has become a near legend for his rejection letters, usually long, delayed (I suspect he's second- or third-tier in the review process) and for aesthetic reasons that leave developers blinking with surprise. While "Pull My Finger" would probably not meet "Koi Pond" levels of user reach (here's our look at Koi Pond), it could have a solid audience. It's a simple, stupid joke app (notice how I'm not pulling punches here) but it's the kind of simple, stupid joke app that a lot of people would download and use because people like simple, stupid joke apps.

I've complained about this before, so apologies to everyone who has heard this point -- the next post is just a wee bit below this one, feel free to scroll -- but until Apple offers developers a firm set of guidelines, developers will continue to be ticked off by seemingly arbitrary rejections like this one. Apple is clearly refusing applications that fail the sniff test -- and yes, I know that's a little more apt a metaphor than this application deserves. "Pull My Finger" is tasteless. Apple should have rejected it for that reason, rather than pulling new reasons out from thin air.

Apple needs to step forward, and do so soon, with a clear set of guidelines that explain to developers exactly what to expect when they press that "submit" button for their new app. Developers shouldn't be wasting Apple's time with unpublishable software. Apple should not be wasting Developers' time with a secretive and arbitrary review process.

Update: The app's author has set up a plea-page

Is Apple's oldest NYC retail store causing agita for its well-heeled neighbors in SoHo? AFP and Dow Jones are reporting that the SoHo Alliance, an umbrella community organization, has complained to city officials and Apple execs about a litany of issues with the popular outlet. Crowds outside the store (sometimes overnight) have blocked streets and left trash behind, to the frustration of nearby residents.

The recent Jonas Brothers in-store concert may have been the final indignity for alliance director Sean Sweeney. "This concert attracted thousands of young teenage girls who screamed incessantly on the street for hours for their idols, blocking traffic, injuring one resident in the crush, and inconveniencing scores of other people and businesses."

I suppose there's a price to pay for being busy and popular. Considering that the immediate vicinity of the store is home to scores of restaurants, bars and high-end boutiques, it's surprising that Apple is the biggest quality-of-life offender in the area, but maybe it's time for some of the bigger draws to move to the 14th Street store instead.

[via Cult of Mac]

An Apple Premium reseller in the UK sent us these photos of an Apple recycling information mailer they received: but the mailer itself was sent in a decidedly non-green way.

From photos the reseller sent, it appears the mailer consisted of two sheets of standard A4-sized paper. Those sheets of paper were placed inside a large, yellow clasp envelope. That envelope was then placed inside a corrugated cardboard box. The box was then mailed to the UK from Switzerland.

While all of these materials are recyclable, it seems like a little bit of a waste to send what could have fit in an everyday DL-sized envelope (that's about the size of a number 10 envelope for us Americans) in ridiculously oversized packaging. Plus, it probably would have saved them a bundle on postage.

Apple has been making a concerted effort to reduce its environmental footprint: not only with the program mentioned in this mailer, but for everything from iPhone packaging to how it makes its displays. Surely this isolated incident isn't representative of the company as a whole, but still. Sheesh.

On Monday, a group of Apple technical staffers filed suit against Apple alleging that the company denied them overtime pay and meal compensation. Both the pay and meal compensation are required by California state law. The suit also claims that many Apple employees are subjected to working conditions that are similar to indentured servitude.

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, David Walsh, was an Apple network engineer from 1995 to 2007. He stated that he was often required to work more than 40 hours a week, miss meals, and spend evenings and weekends on call without any overtime pay or meal compensation. [Author's personal comment: this is not unusual in the tech industry]

Walsh alleges that Apple deliberately classified Walsh and others as management employees so that they would not receive overtime compensation as required by California law for hourly employees. The class action suit also seeks to include the staffers at Apple Stores as plaintiffs.

Should the plaintiffs win, Apple could be required to revise its compensation practices and pay retroactive compensation to many present and past employees. Apple has not responded to the complaint.

Thanks to Charles for the tip!

iPhone Atlas is reporting that Apple has a way to blacklist and remotely remove applications from your iPhone. According to the post, the iPhone will remotely "phone home" and check a posted blacklist of bad applications. These speculations are based on a URL found on Apple's site with references for a blacklisting mechanism:

https://iphone-services.apple.com/clbl/unauthorizedApps

Jonathan Zdziarski, an iPhone hacker, says nothing has been blacklisted as of yet. However, the mechanism is there, and the iPhone could call in on occasion to see what has been blacklisted. Zdziarski says that Apple could have the ability to shut down applications you've purchased from the App Store.

While this may sound like a privacy violation, our sources tell us that Apple has put this tool into place as a security measure to shut down rogue apps if needed, and it could simply be a proof of concept that hasn't yet been implemented for actual takedowns. We're not convinced that this is new, considering that the only entry in the unauthorizedApps list is dated "2004" and is clearly a test entry.

[via Engadget & Macrumors]

How often does Apple admit a mistake? It's a once-in-a-blue-iMoon occurrence, but now that Ars Technica is reporting the contents of an internal Steve Jobs all-hands email regarding the MobileMe launch challenges we can add one more instance to the tally board. Jobs apparently acknowledges that trying to rush the MobileMe migration while pushing iPhone 3G hardware and iPhone 2.0 software out the door (not to mention the iTunes App Store) may have been too much to bite off at once.

The money quote from the letter (yet to be confirmed by TUAW sources) is here:

"The MobileMe launch clearly demonstrates that we have more to learn about Internet services," Jobs says. "And learn we will. The vision of MobileMe is both exciting and ambitious, and we will press on to make it a service we are all proud of by the end of this year."

Ars also notes that MobileMe management will now be centralized under iTunes exec VP Eddy Cue, who will be leading the charge for all Apple internet services across the board. We've all been through the MobileMe ups and downs during the first weeks of the service; it's nice to know (belatedly) that Apple top brass is clued in.