One of the major differences between the 2 syndromes is the fact that aspies are verbal whereas many autists are not. The few autists who are verbal will only speak if they are spoken to; they dont initiate conversations.
I am not sure where you get the idea from but far more autistics than you seem to assume are actually verbal.
Many autists have no desire to interact with people at all or to live independently; in fact quite a few of them are incapable of taking care of themselves at all.
Again, that seems rather uninformed there - there are many autistics who want social interaction, just as many Aspies show no desire or even a hatred of social interaction and other people. And there are many autistics who are extremely independent and motivated to take care of themselves (Temple Grandin is such an example), moreso than some Aspies who may have the abilities needed to do so but not the motivation or willingness to do so (often complicated by problems like anxiety, depression etc.).
Noetic, where do you get your information from? It sounds to me like the persons you're describing are most likely aspies who've been slapped with the Autism diagnostic label.
I've got several dozen books and collections of papers on autism at home, and the consensus appears to be that social needs and social approaches vary immensely on the spectrum.
If you google the term "active but odd", this is what is seen as "the AS approach" but was coined before AS was a diagnostic label, and there are many very much classically autistic children who become "active but odd" in their approaches when they develop speech.
I think the different types are "aloof", "passive" (that's me), "active but odd" and "stilted and formal", although a lot of people seem to have mixes of these.
Also, polls on AS forums usually show a general trend but more often than not there is no consensus on what social needs and social approaches tend to be like.
I do agree that there is a certain level of passivity in autism and more of a "one-sidedness" in AS social approaches, but I have read too many differing accounts of people's experiences to believe in the stereotypes any more.
How do you personally distinguish between autism and AS???
I don't have the time to elaborate... but the gist is I think there are many more varieties of common collections of traits ("sub-types" of autism or ASDs) than are currently represented in the DSM and other diagnostic manuals or conventions.
One example of "Kanner autism" to "Active but odd" is Ben Jackson, featured in the documentary "My Family and Autism" by the way. (Just FYI I do not count myself as AS but HFA, however I was not meaning to use my own experiences as an example above)
I also have a friend whose son is severely to moderately autistic and did not speak until he was 7*. While he does need help with some things and may never live independently, he is more than happy to keep himself busy with household chores and is eager to help out at home (a lot more so than most Aspies seem to be), so it is very much not true that autistics do not want to be independent or are unable to develop self-help skills (as much as a certain member of this forum has once again started accusing me of claiming that autistics lack these skills or are unable to learn them, I have never claimed such a thing and have always "spoken up" when such a thing was claimed, as was done here).
* He speaks two languages now, but still has severe sensory issues and goes to a special school
One thing that does appear to be true-and which I have always thought of as the defining feature of autism-is the Lack of interest in social interaction and in other people in general. But if you "dont have the time to elaborate" than how can you justify your arguments?
I pointed you towards a term/system that elaborates on different types of social interaction. If you don't want to research something properly, don't expect others to spoon-feed you the information you can't be bothered to look up yourself.
There seems to be an objection amonst some of you here to my categorizing autism and asperger syndrome rather than just lumping them all together in the nebuluous group of [i]autistic spectral disorders[i/].
Not in my case... the objection is to your rather false views on what autistics can or can't do.
he said what really cued her in that I was abnormal was my misuse of personal pronouns. i.e.: when I wanted something I would say "you want a/some ________?" which according to a shrink w/ no knowledge of Asperger Syndrome said that such is considered autistic behaviour.
It is indeed. 
Not in my case... the objection is to your rather false views on what autistics can or can't do.
Sorry, I mant conclusions not views. Your views are your own and you are entitled to them
The reason why nobody can tell you for certain what the difference is is because the "experts" don't agree either. Some lines of thought that I feel might be relevant are that:
a - A study often referred to as the "Stony Brook" study attempted to subtype autistic and autism-like symptoms into clusters based on a set of children in a specific area. They found not one or two but at least 6 different clusters of similar traits that fell into two broad categories: Autism Spectrum (where those fitting autism or PDD-NOS criteria were placed, among others) and Schizoid Spectrum (this is where those most similar to AS in the DSM were counted, among others). In addition to this they found 3 or more clusters that showed disintegrative aspects that only set on in late childhood/teens, but again some autistic symptomology was found after onset of these problems.
So that's partly (there are other texts that show similar subtypes and hint at up to a dozen or more such types) why I know for a fact there are more subtypes than just what's in the DSM.
b - Several studies seem to imply that a higher verbal IQ than spatial and practical IQ indicates AS, the opposite indicates Autism. The problem with that is that the AS samples were diagnosed based on their verbal ability to start with (and on spatial problems and motor skill deficits), so their verbal IQ was bound to be higher - and their motor skills lower - anyway.
c - There is evidence that some of the variety on the autistic spectrum is down to which ares of the brain are different. Changes or damage to both sides seems to cause autistic symptoms, changes or damage to the non-dominant hemisphere AS symptoms and changes to the dominant one atypical autistic symptoms with language problems. But I still think that both can be affected, yet one side dominates (one type of difference).
I have come to agree with the subtyping in the Stony Brook study that places AS in a more "personality"-oriented level of difference, but even after all the material I have absorbed in the past few years it is still impossible for me to give precise points. The closest I can get is that AS is less sensory/neurologically different from "normal", and that the differences seem to be more in personality and higher cognitive functions than in "wiring" for the most part.
What Im implying is that there are people on the Spectrum who are given the autist label who dont really fit the clinical description.
That is probably true for more or less any diagnosis out there!
But for persons who are on the Spectrum who have No desire for social interaction and no interest in other people-how would you describe Them in terms of a diagnostic label?
If they are on the spectrum then autism, AS or PDD-NOS, depending on which criteria they fulfil*. Their social approach would fall into either the "Aloof" or the "Passive" category as described by Lorna Wing.
If not, Schizoid Personality (Disorder) describes the lack of desire for interaction, anhedonia etc. better than any ASD.
*
Autistic Disorder DSM Critera:
http://www.autism-resources.com/autismfaq-defi.html
Point 1 c) describes the feature you enquired about, but it is only one of four criteria of which two are required for diagnosis. This means that it is not a necessary requirement for diagnosis of autism.
The language criteria should also make it clear that a lack of speech or delay are NOT required (only one of the 4 features that are required for diagnosis mentions a lack of or delay of speech):
2) b) in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the
ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others
The DSM IV criteria for AS in comparison:
http://www.aspergers.com/aspcrit.htm
Note: The requirements for diagnosis for social interaction are exactly the same as for autism. At least from the "official" diagnositic point of view that does not differentiate the two.
Well there's a lot of research that indicates that those with Asperger's aren't "convincingly" on the autistic spectrum, it's more just an unusual personality type, and that's the long and short of it.
That's not strictly speaking true - "those with Asperger's" includes people who are more HFA than AS, and it is not "all" with AS. There seems to be a "broader autistic phenotype" or "autistic personality" that a subgroup of those diagnosed with AS fall into, but this does not include all with AS. (Most of Asperger's original cases would be diagnosed with autism for example)
PS: A large percentage of those diagnosed with AS are clearly autistic in the true, developmental sense, so it's perhaps more a case of including those in a more broadened autism definition and creating a new category for those who do not have the "classically" (albeit mildly) autistic traits, and whose traits manifest more on a personality/higher cognitive level. The closest thing that describes that group currently is "Schizoid" but this only describes one area (social) of traits and does not include the cognitive traits.
I guess the "nebulous" nature of the Autistic Spectrum does not make it invalid. It's just that humans are never easy to categorise, and the key lies in the word "spectrum".
I think the word tapestry works much better than spectrum, because a spectrum is too two-dimensional to apply to autism. Lisa Blakemoore-Brown wrote of a tapestry in her book "Re-weaving the autistic tapestry" and it makes a lot of sense.
There are dozens of traits that are aspects of autism, plus at least as many developmental differences that have been noted among those with autism (some do X faster than others, some slower, some skip steps etc.) and not only the severity of those traits but most importantly the amount and WHICH traits one has, makes a huge difference in how someone "presents".
And I do think that there are combinations of traits that can occur in someone otherwise presenting as "NT" as well, where they then manifest as say a strong personality type, or as a learning difference or disability etc.
I don't assume every Aspie thinks black and white. I never said that.
You have in the past stated that it is typical or characteristic of AS though, when you yourself believed to think in this way, which you now seem to have started to doubt. It's not the same as saying EVERY Aspie is like this but people can be forgiven to think this is what you believe.
In this case I would suppose it depends on which specialist you go to?
Indeed - the most important thing in choosing one IMHO is that they have seen a wide variety of people on the spectrum, of all ages.
I think the word tapestry works much better than spectrum, because a spectrum is too two-dimensional to apply to autism. Lisa Blakemoore-Brown wrote of a tapestry in her book "Re-weaving the autistic tapestry" and it makes a lot of sense.
A little cliched but some part of me likes this analogy. I guess I chose to think about the "spectrum" because I like to think about what words really mean, and Autistic "spectrum" is the most commonly used term.
How can something be a cliche when it's an unusual way of describing something?
I would like to know Why my first posts to this thread were so provocative to people here. Whats wrong with seeing the world in black & white? Why is being categorical a BAD thing? Whenever I make categorical remarks about human characteristis-ESPECIALLY amonst NTs-people always get so bend outta shape. I assumed that most people on the spectrum tended to be Categorical to the extreme like I am.
If you meant my response
How can something be a cliche when it's an unusual way of describing something?
That wasn't meant in a negative way I was just asking because I was confused