You like to think that Apple and Dell have as much in common as the U.S. and Iran, but the PC business is a lot different. These days, many of the products you buy, from these and other PC makers, have lots of parts in common. Many are even built in the same factories in Asia.

Whether it’s memory, hard drives, Wi-Fi or other peripheral interface components, and now even processors and the associated chipsets, they may indeed sourced from the same companies. Talk about convergence.

When it comes to batteries for their notebooks, for example, both Apple and Dell get parts from Sony. That ought to be a good thing, because Sony is supposed to be one of the good guys among electronics makers. However, the latest battery call, involving 1.8 million iBook and PowerBook batteries built between 2003 and 2006, appears to result from the very same defect that previously afflicted 4 million Dell notebooks. It appears to result from tiny metal impurities inside the batteries that are supposed to prevent overheating. Apple reported nine such cases, and fortunately there were no serious injuries. In the case of Dell, there were a couple of reports of minor fires caused by this product defect.

Of course, we were all laughing at Dell, particularly because its sales and profits have nosedived, but it now appears they are innocent victims in this case, or at the very least, they are as guilty as Apple and other PC companies who used these Sony parts. Or we can place the blame squarely in Sony’s lap, which may be more apt.

This, of course, isn’t the first time, nor do I fear the last, where lithium-ion batteries overheated. Both Apple, Dell and other computer companies have had other recalls over the years. In fact, I recall when Apple released its first PowerBooks with PowerPC chips over a decade ago. I ordered one of them, the infamous 5300ce, about which the less said the better. The original intent was to use lithium-ion batteries, but in the wake of reports that a few early production units had overheating or smoldering batteries, they switched to nickel hydride, I believe. It worked well enough, but battery life was noticeably inferior.

More recently, there have been problems with some MacBook Pro batteries, where they won’t charge completely, fail or simply deform. Now to me deformation sounds like a heat-related issue, but Apple is simply replacing these batteries only if they’re needed. There’s no general recall. My 17-inch MacBook Pro hasn’t had any problems of this sort, and it’s possible the cause is different from the one that generated this general recall.

Now I should think that a company that makes products that can overheat or even cause fire should be more careful about testing process, and it’s also true that Sony has apparently adjusted its manufacturing procedures to eliminate this particular error.

But is there some generic problem with the lithium-ion process that can cause even the occasional failure of this sort? There are lots of possible answers, but maybe no solutions yet, except perhaps to standardize the manufacturing of these batteries, so that production lines don’t have to be changed constantly to meet different requirements.

In fact, Apple, Dell and other notebook makers are part of a new OEM Critical Components Committee, part of the IPC (Association Connecting Electronics Committee), which is supposed to work on not only a standard for notebook and handheld devices, but a set of safety specifications. This should, in theory, prevent situations of this sort from recurring.

It might even encourage work on new battery technologies that are not as susceptible to such serious sideeffects, and may even deliver longer life.

In the meantime, the best thing to do is check the page I’ve linked earlier in this article to see if your iBook or PowerBook is affected. If it is, contact Apple and make arrangements to for a battery exchange, and, for now, use your notebook’s AC adaptor, even if that proves inconvenient. Even though the number of overheating incidents is very small compared to the number of batteries in the field, it’s better to be safe than sorry.

And you don’t need to fear for much harm to Apple’s bottom line. It is expected that Sony is going to foot a fair part of the bill to fund the recall from both Apple and Dell.

Related Articles:

• Is Your Mac.com Address An Endangered Species?
• The 10.6 Report: Time for Apple to Drop PowerPC Support?
• Just Another Mac Hardware Reliability Rant
• The Mac Clone Controversy Rears Its Ugly Head
• The Leopard Report: It’s All About Customer Satisfaction

All right, you know the spin. Apple’s “Top Secret” slide at the WWDC keynote means there are a number of super-significant Leopard features that’ll remain under wraps, because they don’t want Microsoft to copy them for Vista.

Of course, common sense argues against that story, since Microsoft is an Apple developer and would get its copies of beta versions of Leopard as quickly as anyone else, if not quicker. Besides, taking 10.5’s features and somehow grafting them into Vista in some form or another is well-nigh impossible at this stage. Microsoft can hardly manage to finish its existing work as it is.

So is there some secret truth that Apple is withholding from us, to dole out in baby steps between now and Leopard’s scheduled release date next spring? It may not matter one way or the other, because Apple made us curious, and, naturally, the bloggers are having a field day with this, suggesting possible new features for the next great version of Mac OS X.

There’s talk of a new Finder and other interface enhancements. Developers may have some fascinating capabilities to tap into so they can build their killer apps. Consider the possibilities.

So, just what is Apple working on, and will it be even more important than the few features they’ve already let us in on?

My friends, don’t get too carried away by all this. That “Top Secret” label is just some marketing nonsense and probably not a whole lot more. It also gives Apple lots of options, because they don’t have to postpone delivery of Leopard to finish a feature they never promised in the first place.

Indeed, some folks are already criticizing Apple for not delivering enough compelling new features in the Leopard Preview, and a few are suggesting that they probably won’t bother to upgrade. Talk about shooting from the hip. But I’m sure they’ll be patiently watching Apple’s site to see how Leopard information expands over time, so they can get a full picture of just what Apple is withholding from us.

Even worse there are the conspiracy theories, that Apple is poised to end support for all manner of older Macs that can now run Tiger with decent performance. That appears to mean the remaining line of G3 Macs, including PowerBooks that shipped before 2001, iMacs that shipped before 2002, and iBooks that came out before October, 2003. In the scheme of things, these computers seem relatively new, although, by the spring of 2007, you might regard them as a somewhat long in the tooth.

In light of all this, it’s time for a reality check. First of all, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the G3 consigned to the museum by Apple, despite the fairly recent vintage of the last iBook that contained that processor. While some of you will tell me that you’re perfectly happy with the way Tiger runs on a G3 Mac, the graphics processors on most of these models are certainly not up to the task of rendering its most potent special effects.

The new Core Animation feature, for example, may not operate on most Macs older than two years, at least according to what Apple is now saying.

As far as those features Apple is keeping close to the vest, I can see several reasons for this. One is simply that they aren’t ready to show off yet. As you recall, there was an application crash during the WWDC demonstration. Imagine components that crash regularly or aren’t fully functional, or both, and you will get the picture. There are no doubt elements of Leopard that are in early stages of development and will require weeks or months of work before they are even ready for developers to examine.

The situation also gives Apple an escape route. Microsoft, in contrast, over-promises and under-delivers. Some important Windows Vista features, such as the new file system, had to be dispatched along the way. That has to be embarrassing.

With Apple, if something isn’t promised in the first place, and problems are encountered getting a new capability to run reliably in time for Leopard’s release, Apple can simply put it on the backburner. Those features can be rolled in during a maintenance release or just kept on hold for Mac OS 10.6.

Of course that won’t stop the speculation about which features didn’t make the cut, and I always welcome your ideas about what they might be.

But, for new, you probably don’t have to worry about what the Top Secret label really means. You’ll find out soon enough; that is, if there’s anything worth finding out.

Related Articles:

• The Mac Myth Report Revisited!
• Is Steve Jobs Really Milking the Macintosh?
• The Plight of the Apple Early Adopter
• Newsletter #454 Preview: Here We Go Again: Revisiting Mac Versus PC Prices
• Apple’s Unfortunate Economy of Words