The Street is expecting earnings of $2.44 a share on $12 billion in revenue, and most analyst reports I’ve seen so far suggest Apple will easily meet those expectations and perhaps surpass them.

As I’ve noted here before, NPD sales data for the first few months of 2010 points to strong Mac sales, up 39 percent year-over-year through the first two months of the March quarter. Apple iPhone sales are likely to be impressive as well given increased international distribution and broader carrier support.

“We believe Apple will report ~7.25M+ iPhones in the quarter due to strong iPhone 3G S adoption and better penetration into international markets,” Deutsche Bank analyst Chris Whitmore wrote in a research note.

“In addition, we expect solid Mac results (healthy units) and positive product mix towards iMac and MacBook Pros (DB at 2.9M units) due to the continued benefit of the refreshed iMac line up,” the analyst notes. “We expect iPod units of ~10M and the continued mix improvement to support iPod revenue (i.e. strong iTouch).”

Healthy numbers if Apple (AAPL) delivers them, and a nice segue to the company’s June quarter, the first to reflect the market debut of the iPad and last week’s update to the MacBook Pro lineup.

Bob Bowman, CEO of Major League Baseball Advanced Media–pro baseball’s standalone digital media company–tells me iPhone and iPod touch users will soon be able to buy individual games. The feature will be added to the company’s existing MLB.com app and will roll out as soon as Apple (AAPL) finishes approving the update, which Bowman expects to happen within the next few days.

As far as I know, that will make baseball the first pro sports league to sell mobile access to live games on an on-demand, a la carte basis.

The current version of the MLB.com app, which sells for $9.99, gives users the ability to watch a couple of live games each day, but MLB.com selects the games. And those who own both the app and subscribe to baseball’s MLB.TV–an all-you-can eat subscription service–can stream any live game they want to their phones. iPhone and iPod touch users have bought about 250,000 downloads of the app.

Bowman, not surprisingly, says he’d prefer to sell the app-plus-Web subscription together, but says he’s offering the games a la carte as an experiment to gauge demand. The test will run through the rest of the regular season, which ends Oct. 4.

News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox and Time Warner’s (TWX) Turner, the two networks that own the rights to the baseball playoffs and World Series, have a Web blackout for the TV broadcasts of those games. (Bowman says he is working with both networks to offer a compromise to iPhone app users–a “four screen” version with live, stationary feeds of the game–so that, for instance, you may be able to see the dugout, etc. Pricing, if any, still undetermined.)

There is one other restriction to the offer, and it’s the same one that exists with the Web subscription service: You can’t watch games that are broadcast in your home market. That is, I can watch the Minnesota Twins play on an iPhone if I’m in Brooklyn, but not in Minneapolis.

According to the FT, the “full-featured” tablet is being prepped to launch alongside a next-generation digital album format Apple (AAPL) is cooking up with the four largest recording companies, one designed to gin up sales of CD-length music.

“Cocktail,” as the project is known, is a new music format that will gather songs, photos, lyrics sheets, video clips and liner notes into a sort of interactive booklet. Said one executive familiar with the effort: “It’s all about re-creating the heyday of the album when you would sit around with your friends looking at the artwork, while you listened to the music.”

…skipping through nine middling-to-lousy songs to reach that one that inspired you to shell out for the album.

Which begs the question: Can that heyday ever be recreated? Now that we’re accustomed to purchasing only the music we want via the thin-margin, 99-cent-song-by-song downloads that iTunes pioneered, can we ever be convinced to pay a premium for bundled music, cluttered up with a bunch of liner notes, wacky band photos and throw away filler songs?

[Image Credit: Apple Insider]

According to the FT, the “full-featured” tablet is being prepped to launch alongside a next-generation digital album format Apple (AAPL) is cooking up with the four largest recording companies, one designed to gin up sales of CD-length music.

“Cocktail,” as the project is known, is a new music format that will gather songs, photos, lyrics sheets, video clips and liner notes into a sort of interactive booklet. Said one executive familiar with the effort: “It’s all about re-creating the heyday of the album when you would sit around with your friends looking at the artwork, while you listened to the music.”

…skipping through nine middling-to-lousy songs to reach that one that inspired you to shell out for the album.

Which begs the question: Can that heyday ever be recreated? Now that we’re accustomed to purchasing only the music we want via the thin-margin, 99-cent-song-by-song downloads that iTunes pioneered, can we ever be convinced to pay a premium for bundled music, cluttered up with a bunch of liner notes, wacky band photos and throw away filler songs?

[Image Credit: Apple Insider]

Most sports/Web/mobile experiments have way too many caveats to make them really interesting–last month, when Time Warner’s (TWX) Turner let iPhone users stream the NBA All Star game, for instance, it wasn’t letting them watch the actual telecast of the game, just a series of alternate takes. But this is the real deal–you’ll see the actual CBS telecast, for all the games, commercials and all.

Of course, there are still asterisks with this one. It only works with WiFi, not a 3G wireless connection, which means you have to be fairly close to a computer to watch this on your phone. So why not watch it on that computer? Also, it’s not gratis: CBS (CBS) is selling the “NCAA March Madness on Demand” app for $4.99 on Apple’s (AAPL) iTunes store.

It’s an interesting inversion of the clichéd-but-true “analog dollars for digital pennies” phenomenon, whereby traditional content loses value as soon as it moves to the Web. In this case, CBS is asking you to pay money for something you could normally get for free.

But consumers, or at least early adopters who ingest content on their mobile phones, seem OK with this proposition. Presumably, that’s because they’re trading cash for convenience. I’m not quite sure how this will play out with college basketball, where those who really care about the games are going to get themselves in front of a big screen. But it’s cool to have it available, period.

(Hey, it’s Loïc Le Meur and Michael Arrington again, fresh from their equally meaningful Are-French-folks-lazy-or-what? debate!)

This time, while the Mideast burns and the economy continues its meltdown, they and many others are going at it about the favored hyped Silicon Valley company of the moment, Twitter.

The new bone being gnawed on is something I can hardly grasp the point of–some drivel argument about what constitutes the authority of a tweet.

While tweet status would seem only important to, say, a Warner Bros. cartoon character like Sylvester, all I can think is: Who cares?

While I know I seem to say this a lot these days, I guess I am not really clear why people can’t use these various Web tools in any way they like, without a bunch of tech pundits pushing their self-aggrandizing agendas.

You want to rank tweets? Fine–knock yourself out! You want to use tweets to tell your family about your trip to Buffalo? Maybe not so much, but what the heck!

I think, though, the real story is the endless echo chamber of Silicon Valley that seems to persist in overestimating the meaning of Twitter, especially compared to so much more that is going on in the tech industry.

With only about six million registered users (with a much lower number of active ones), Twitter gets written about as if it were a mover and shaker extraordinaire, instead of just being what it is: An interesting status-alert start-up that makes zero revenues and turned down a very large buyout offer from another once-too-overhyped start-up (Facebook).

Well, after yet another week in the real world, I am here to tell you, precious few people still have any clue what Twitter is or how it works.

This is not to say Twitter is not useful or cool or that its growth is not impressive. All that is true about the service.

But the fact remains that Twitter is simply an unknown to most average people in a way other tech trends have not been.

The last time I did a What-the-Heck-Is-Twitter? experiment was in April and it went as follows:

So I was in Washington, D.C., this past weekend for a lovely wedding, traveling back to a city where I started my career and worked for 15 years after college.

And I conducted a little experiment among the more than 100 folks gathered for the wedding, all of whom were quite intelligent, armed with all kinds of the latest devices (many, many people had iPhones, for example) and not sluggish about technology.

They were also made up of a wide range of ages and genders, from kids to seniors.

And so I asked a large group of people–about 30–and here is the grand total who knew what Twitter was: 0

FriendFeed: 0

Widget: 1 (but she thought it was one of the units used in a business class study).

Facebook: Everyone I asked knew about it and about half had an account, although different people used it differently.”

This time, I asked yet another group of about 40 folks, in New York, Scranton and Buffalo, many of whom were young people and all of whom used the Internet regularly.

Those who knew what Twitter was: 3 (two only because they’d read about it being used in the Mumbai terror attacks).

Those who could actually explain how it worked and had used it: 1 (a journalist, natch!).

Friendfeed: 0 (even my family had not bothered to look at my recent post on the cool start-up).

Widget: 25, except most people now call them apps and are talking about using them in an Apple (AAPL) iPhone or an iPod Touch. Everyone was surprisingly knowledgeable, especially younger people, about apps for smartphones.

Facebook: 40–a perfect score, and almost everyone I talked to had a Facebook profile, which accounts for its huge growth to more than 140 million users worldwide.

You get the idea–while the digerati have moved away from Facebook as an important trendsetter, I am thinking that perhaps its time has just started.

Not that I have the tweet authority to say so or anything.

As usual before yet another big Apple event, the psychic friends network is in overdrive in anticipation of the iconic computer company’s “Let’s Rock” media gathering in San Francisco tomorrow.

At this point, I think Apple could announce a change in the color of its bathrooms at its Cupertino HQ and it would be mayhem among the Mac faithful.

Nonetheless, even though what will be announced is likely to be a series of incremental improvements for Apple’s line of music-playing products–iTunes, iTouch and, of course, the iPod–and even the possibility of a revamped design, it’s astonishing how striking the hype is around the event.

Of course, that kind of passion from core users is a blessing for any tech company, and it is hard to quibble with Apple’s stellar ability to market every jog and tittle of its product development as if it was the second coming.

But the most intense focus will more likely be on Apple’s leader, CEO Steve Jobs, whose gaunt appearance at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June set off a flurry of discussion about the exact state of his health.

That talk has since been less frantic, despite the fact that there actually has been no clear announcement from Apple (AAPL) on the delicate subject (and Jobs’s colorful off-the-record chat with the New York Times’s Joe Nocera does not count, folks).

In any case, because AllThingsD.com cannot resist either, Digital Daily’s John Paczkowski will be there liveblogging “Let’s Rock” from the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, with all the news that’s fit to post.

And, of course, everything else too.