Every few days, I see a message floating above the desktop asking if I want to sync something on my MacBook or Mac Pro. It may be something in the keychain, such as login information, or a preference in Mail or another Apple program.

That seems well and good, and I’m glad to know the feature, part of Apple’s MobileMe Web services, appears to be operating, but the results can leave an awful lot to be desired.

After accepting the sync, I will sometimes find that an email account has mysteriously become disabled, or a particular setting, such as how often I want my spam mailbox emptied, reverts to a different option.

Since I’m also co-host of a paranormal radio show, I suppose I could just blame this on some mysterious force from the unknown. No it’s not a manifestation of the occult, but a synchronization defect in MobileMe of long standing.

Story continued in this week’s Tech Night Owl Newsletter.

There’s been an awful lot of discussion lately about whether Apple plans to enter the “nascent” netbook market. While the name should pretty much convey the meaning of the product it describes, here’s a common definition (so we get our terms straight): “A small, low-cost, mobile computing device designed for consuming content, rather than creating new content.”

Now the iPhone is actually a pretty close match to that description, but the common perception of a network is something closer to a small note-book computer. Indeed, Apple’s legendary eMate 300, a grown-up Newton, might have been one of the first products to fit into that category.

The MacBook Air doesn’t rate, because it’s really a full-size portable sporting the same sized screen as a regular MacBook and a correspondingly full-sized keyboard. The enhanced graphics capabilities of the refreshed model make it an even more complete solution for many devoted road warriors.

On the other hand, the PC contenders in the netbook game tend to be little more than dumbed down computers with tinier screens, slimmer keyboards and low-power processors. They are best suited for email, Internet surfing, basic word processing chores and, indeed, even keeping simple financial records. At a cost of a few hundred dollars, they are regarded as the next great thing in personal computing.

That is, assuming there are enough people out there who want what is essentially a crippled computer, at least in this day and age. Ten years ago, they’d be powerful beasts.

So where does the iPhone fit in? Well, for the most part, it actually meets most of the netbook requirements, at least as far as Internet access is concerned. It’s also a whole lot easier to lug around than even a three pound netbook.

But when it comes to even the most simple text editing chores, however, the iPhone is a big-time loser. Sure you can write short letters, and I will sometimes make an emergency edit on this site using a special WordPress application. It doesn’t make sense, though, why Apple continues to put such features as cut, copy and paste on the black burner. It severely restricts some of the iPhone’s potential.

Apple is quoted as saying that this feature is on the “to do” list, and will arrive eventually, but that other features have taken greater priority. Maybe, but putting both the address and search bars within the narrow confines of Safari in the latest iPhone software, version 2.2, surely doesn’t seem to have a greater level of importance. Nor does it make a whole lot of sense.

However, it’s also clear to me that Apple will continue to chip away at the iPhone’s shortcomings, so it may well be that, sometime in the next few months, more of the features for which folks have been clamoring will make their appearance. I wouldn’t be surprised, for example, to see some new fascinating new stuff announced during the Macworld 2009 keynote address.

The question, though, is whether improvements in the iPhone would supplant the need for an Apple netbook. As far as I’m concerned, that would suit me just fine. When I want a note-book computer, I take my 17-inch MacBook Pro along with me. To me the true portable must be the equivalent of having a desktop on the road, which is why I choose that particular option.

In terms of flexibility, there isn’t a whole lot I can do on my desktop Mac Pro that I can’t do on a note-book, although performance won’t be quite as good.

However, I realize many of you regard a 17-inch portable as just too ungainly, and too heavy to drag around through airport terminals. Between the MacBook and the MacBook Air, there are plenty of options. Indeed, these products appear to be among the few hot tickets during this holiday season.

But it’s also clear to me that Apple is watching the network situation real carefully, and if they feel they can sell a bundle of them, it won’t be long before they deliver a response in this product space.

So what form would it take? Would they simply take a MacBook and give it a healthy diet to make it smaller and cheaper? After all, it does seem that a miniature MacBook Air would be rather too closely to compete.

Or will Apple choose the other direction, a sort of iPhone Pro, which takes a souped up version of the iPhone’s chassis and installs it in a larger case with a bigger screen and perhaps a normal-sized keyboard.

No, it’s not my cup of tea. But if there are enough people out there who think otherwise, you can be reasonably assured that some fascinating announcements are in store from Apple in 2009.

So I recall all those lurid commercials of many years ago from certain high-power electronic retailers promising that they positively won’t be undersold. Of course they had so many terms and conditions in those offers that few people who requested a price match or a refund for overpayment were ever actually compensated for their efforts.

It’s a game, really, meant to reassure the customer, not a promise that they expect to have to fulfill very often.

With the economy in shreds for this holiday season, folks are talking up the claim that Apple’s own retail stores have been given the marching orders to match prices from third-party retailers.

Now I suppose you really can’t complain. After all, you will, I’m sure, take a lower price wherever you can get it for your new Mac or iPod. But, sorry folks, the iPhone 3G isn’t part of the plan.

However, according to published reports, Apple has traditionally told its managers that they do indeed have the authority to meet the competition head on, only that policy apparently hasn’t been given much publicity.

Now it’s also true that price reductions on basic Apple hardware aren’t traditionally that high, but that $100 or $200 you might save on a new MacBook or MacBook Pro can certainly finance extra memory, or you can use it to pay off a few bills.

Then again, Apple has historically been so overpriced when it comes to RAM — and they use the same RAM you can buy at a fraction of the price from other vendors — they could certainly have lots and lots of bargaining room.

On the other hand, when it comes to sales tax, they are in the twilight zone. For customers in the U.S., they charge whatever tax your state collects. Other online retailers don’t, although, in theory, you may have to pay that tax direct to your state.

In any case, the growth of Apple’s incredibly-successful retail chain has been a mixed bag for other dealers, especially when they’re located near a company store. But if it’s not a pricing issue, what’s the problem?

When it comes to sales and support, that depends. Some third-party resellers are long-time Mac fans, and they try their level best to do right by the platform. They will provide such value extras as migration to a new Mac and the ability to download software updates if you’re bandwidth challenged at home. Moreover, they are busy refashioning their interiors to match Apple’s more closely.

Where they can’t compete is inventory. Take the iPhone 3G. You’d think that AT&T, which is the exclusive carrier for the iPhone in the U.S., would get its fare share of stock from the get go, and that was simply not the case. My personal experience simply echoes what most of you know already.

When the iPhone 3G was first released, I tried to take the easy way out, since Apple’s own retail outlets involved a drive of 30 minutes or more. I also considered the cost of gas, and how much my free time is worth, and you can see where I made the wrong decision.

The two nearest AT&T factory stores only had a few dozen units in stock, and not even all the available configurations and colors. Only those who showed up real early could take one home. The rest were asked to pay for a rain check, and take delivery when new supplies arrived, which was expected to happen a few days later.

Since I wanted instant gratification, I called an Apple Store at random and asked them how they were faring. They said they had plenty available, that, based on the current crowd, it would take about an hour to actually get into the store. Of course they couldn’t guarantee they wouldn’t sell out by the time I got there, but I decided to take the chance anyway.

When I arrived, one of Apple’s sales reps was busy working the crowd and giving them face time on his iPhone 3G. Yes, he assured me, everyone in the line would be able to buy the one they wanted. True to the original estimate, I did indeed enter the storefront 60 minutes later, but waited another 30 minutes to get served.

You can understand why third-party resellers are paranoid that Apple gets priority, even though they claim they are fair to all their dealers. Sure, right.

The other day, a cashier at a local convenience store, noticing my Apple T-shirt, asked for the location of the nearest Apple Store. He only wanted an iPod, so I reminded him that there was a Best Buy and an independent Apple dealer just five minutes away.

“Well, I know that, but I want to be sure that I get the color I want.”

With that sort of attitude, it’s not just price matching alone that sells product for Apple. It’s the perception of favoritism. That may be good for the customer in the short term, but not if Apple wants to have a robust third-party dealer network.

When it comes to Apple, sometimes you don’t know what to think about some of their long-time behavior patterns when it comes to marketing and support.

In taping an interview for this week’s episode of The Tech Night Owl LIVE, author and commentator Kirk McElhearn brought to my attention the fact that Apple, after extolling the Mac OS’s freedom from malware, is actually recommending, in a tech note, the three top commercial anti-virus applications.

Now I’m sure you recall that very popular TV ad, where the dude who plays a Mac told the PC guy how Macs didn’t suffer from malware threats. Indeed, if you look at the facts, that’s essentially true. After all, as I said yesterday, the infections discovered so far have either been proofs of concept, or reflected minor outbreaks. In some cases, Apple’s own periodic security updates have patched some of the known leaks that presented potential threats.

So why spend money for software that, in fact, you may not yet need? Well, I suppose you could suggest that, since Apple sells those security products at their online and retail stores, maybe they just want to earn a little more profit to pad the bottom line. While I can understand the motive, are you being well served by this mixed message?

Overall, while Apple is quite explicit about what it fixes in a security update, they will rarely say anything about those issues until the patch is ready. Now from a security standpoint, I can see why it makes sense not to remind people what they can do to infect Macs before the fix is available, but quite often third parties have already spilled the beans.

This tentative security management policy is why the specifics about Safari 3.2’s anti-phishing protection took several days to unearth. Apple gave very little information about the feature, though it didn’t take too long for security experts to figure out that Apple teamed with Google to provide a database with data about bogus sites that’s actually downloaded when you first run the new version of Safari.

The feature itself is identified by a singular preference labeled “Warn when visiting a fraudulent website” that’s checked by default. It’s also quite possible that this week’s 3.2.1 update was, in part, designed to address potential crashes that occurred when that feature was activated. Then again, Apple said nothing specific about that either.

In all, you get the feeling that the company is reluctant to admit that, yes, personal computer operating systems aren’t invulnerable, and that there have been some virulent Mac viruses over the years. Sure, most of that occurred in the Classic Mac OS era, but still the job of protecting the Mac OS is always trying to stay one step ahead of the Internet criminal.

The anti-phishing feature was, itself, long in coming, and may have been precipitated by that statement a while back from PayPal executive warning about using browsers without such protection. While they claimed they really didn’t include Apple in their list of discredited browsers, the message was obvious, and it’s good to see the feature in Safari, even though it’s a case of better late than never.

Then again, you do get the impression that, by word and deed, Apple wants you to think that their products are perfect, and even when the inevitable bug fixes arrive, only recently did you get any solid information about what was changed in those updates.

That may indeed be the reluctant response to constant complaints in the tech press and by many Apple customers that they wanted to know what an update was designed to do before deciding whether to download a copy and install it.

In contrast, the beleaguered Microsoft, a chronic offender when it comes to building bloated software riddled with security leaks, is usually overly-descriptive about what they are fixing. Since they cater heavily to the business crowd, they are responding to the needs of system admins to understand all the deep and dark secrets about patches before they decide whether to deploy them to their networks.

Now that Apple has made it quite clear they are putting greater emphasis on a growing business-related user base, they really have little choice but to follow the same practice. That’s a good thing, though it’s unfortunate that Apple must be dragged kicking and screaming to adopt smart policies.

Indeed, when it comes to security, Apple needs to do a lot more to show they’re being proactive about the matter. While it may not be time to install antivirus software on your Mac yet, that time may be close at hand. Apple will help greatly by identifying potential threats early on, and helping Mac users protect themselves against what may be inevitable, even if that inevitability takes a year or two to arrive.