If a high beam headlight could really cause harmful interference with the vision of approaching car drivers, they would not be allowed at all. Right?

Here's a sampling of interference events: http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/rpsts/ped.pdf (edit: only some of them are about EMI interference)

Instruments acting up won't automatically cause a crash. But they may contribute to the accident (ref AF447)

http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/pdf/nasa-rp1374.pdf - some examples of what lack of EMI shielding can do.

The airplanes wouldn't drop like flies, but you could probably make a plane divert in bad weather by jamming the NAV frequencies.

How about acknowledging that the rules may be overreaching, yet be thankful that the airline industry likes to err on the side of safety?

The risk of dying in an airliner crash in the US is now literally too small to measure. I think we can afford to loosen up a bit.

I would love the airlines to err on safety. By making the seats out of a fire resistant non-toxic foam, before they were made to after a series of accidents. By fitting smoke hoods nearly 50 years after is they were first recommended.

And by the FAA spending a 0.1% of what the TSA costs on weather radar at small airports .....

Because these are low power devices working at low frequencies, and it's about minimizing risk not eliminating it.

..and lots of people will be disappointed if they keep the chassis design on the iPhone 3D :)

I think it's funny how everyone expects a new design every year, just because that's how the cell phone world has always been. Looking at the iPod, Apple only had a few designs that they gradually improved and made smaller.

It does, iOS is a minimal OSX with a customised GUI.

I'm not sure how Apple is trying to shoehorn touchscreens in Lion. They have made a very clear distinction between OSX and iOS, and instead added more gestures to the touchpads instead of trying to make a Mac with a touch screen.

I agree though, that trying to mix both is a mistake (one that's been tried for 10 years without much success).

Another example, letting the office PBX send a notification for missed calls through notifo. I always figured it was a niche product, but it should have been big enough to succeed.

My guess is that we'll see this more and more, at least storage in the various components such as glass displays, air data computers etc. Lots of data is already stored for performance/maintenance purposes, which is why they were able to get some helpful data over satellite link before the plane went down.

However, everything installed on a plane needs to be certified for good reason, and unfortunately that makes even the simplest modifications expensive.

If they had spent enough time they would have demoed it at the press conference, so they are probably mockups.

I think they are 3D renderings