So if you've been paying attention, you probably know how we've been going on and on about how Mac OS X is attracting hardcore development nerds to our platform like bug zappers attract despondent insects with nothing left to live for-- only, you know, with what we hope to be a much lower incidence of sudden electrocution. Well, if you want further anecdotal evidence that Apple's latest operating system is luring in programmers that formerly considered Macs to be about as useful from a development perspective as two sticks of chewing gum and a piece of string, look no further than Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference. Or prepare to, at any rate, because it won't actually start for another three weeks or so, which means it's not terribly useful for anecdotal anything just yet.

In the meantime, though, feel free to scope out Macworld UK's passing coverage of the upcoming event, which quotes Apple's director of developer technologies as saying that "former UNIX, NeXT, and Java developers are moving in" in droves, and the mass migration "has exceeded [Apple's] expectations by far." Maybe it's just us, but we get this distinct mental picture of vast herds of migratory geeks sweeping majestically across the veldt towards Mac OS X's verdant hills and welcoming climate. Anyone else getting that? Anyone? No? Ah, well... that's why we get paid the big bucks.

Still, check it out-- a production house called Tweak Films has "deep UNIX roots," but the president of the company states that "months of careful evaluation proved that Mac OS X is the best choice" for the company's future in-house development efforts. Meanwhile, David Cook of an outfit called Cookware originally hated Macs because "they seemed prone to crash and didn't multitask" (preemptively, we assume he means), but he stepped away from his Wintel long enough to take Mac OS X for a test drive, and was "shocked" by what he found. The man has since seen the light and completely "stopped using his PC." He's a recovering Wintel user, twelve months clean, and reportedly in all that time his Mac hasn't crashed once. This is some seriously good stuff, people.

So, yeah, if Mac OS X is really drawing all these formerly non-Mac developers to next month's WWDC, it's probably going to be one massively successful show. Apple claims it's going to be "the best [it's] ever done," which, until we read about all these new Mac developers getting geared up for the event, we assumed meant that the company had rented out a Moonwalk for the occasion so the attendees could engage in a little sock-footed bounciness in between conference sessions. Instead it apparently means that Apple will be "working aggressively to take developers into areas they've never seen before in [Apple's] operating system and way of doing things." That doesn't necessarily rule out the Moonwalk, though. Heck, with a $1295 price of admission, you'd think that the least Apple could do is rent an inflatable carnival attraction.

Far be it from us to poop the party by kicking off a holiday weekend with unconfirmed rumors of trouble in Apple Retailville, but what with things being a tad slow around here lately, it looks like if we're going to dredge up any drama for you at all, it's going to come at the risk of irresponsibly spreading false rumors and bringing people down. Anyway, it's probably just as well; the Soap Opera Producers Union Local 536 is threatening to initiate punitive measures against us, because by focusing on so much good news lately, we've fallen well below union-mandated minimum levels of angst and anxiety. Plus, we're starting to get jeered at by our soap-producing peers. Words can hurt like a fist, people.

So, to restore our good standing in the soap opera community and avoid a stiff union fine, here's your totally unconfirmed obligatory dose of angst for the week: we haven't gone looking to verify these rumors (what, are we supposed to be "journalists" all of a sudden?), but the word around the water cooler is that Apple just dished out another handful of pink slips-- but this time to select individuals working in certain well-established but underperforming Apple retail stores. Details range from murky to nonexistent, so we really can't give you much more than that. All we can say is, if you're in an investigative mood, trundle on down to your local Apple retail location and see if you can spot anyone missing. (You do know the whole staff by sight, right?) You also might see if you can detect a telltale hunted look in the eyes of those still gainfully employed.

Again, we have to stress that these rumors are wholly unconfirmed, and we pass them on strictly in a "hey, here's something wacky we heard" capacity. We're keeping our Skeptic Hats strapped on good and tight, here, because we can't help thinking that if certain Apple retail stores were really laying people off, we'd be hearing about it a lot more than we are. If the whispers are true, though, then they might indicate some rough waters ahead for Apple as it struggles to make its pricey retail initiative profitable in a dumpy economy in hopes of proving the naysayers wrong. It could foretell an imminent scaling back of Apple's aggressive retail expansion plans (for example, those 124 stores by the end of 2003 might turn into 80 or 90), or if you're truly a Gloomy Gus, you can worst-case-scenario it and figure that Apple will soon abandon the retail scheme altogether, shut down all the stores, sell itself off to Disney, and then get swallowed whole in a massive earthquake as a race of mutant subterranean mole people rounds up the bodies for food.

Okay, there... with luck, that's enough squirm-in-your-seat ickiness to keep the union off our backs for another week or two. Thanks for bearing with us. If we were you, we wouldn't stress too much over these layoff rumors, at least until someone comes forward with some actual evidence that they even really happened. But in any event, the very idea sure makes you appreciate the staff at your local Apple store, doesn't it? Bake 'em some cookies; they deserve it.

Attention, those of you who were all worried that Microsoft might abandon the Mac platform once its five-year technology agreement with Apple expires in August: now that you've heaved a gigantic sigh of relief at the company's not-legally-binding assurances that the Mac version of Office will continue "as long as the business case makes sense," we've got just one teensy little question for you. If Office for the Mac went away this fall, would that really be such a terrible thing?

Yes, we know it's a dumb question, but even though we know the answer, we still feel better having asked it. Obviously, if Office for the Mac disappeared, our platform would have a really tough time holding onto the little shred of the business market to which it currently clings. But we're still having trouble getting our heads around the fact that Office is such a monumentally important piece of software. Here's why: according to a CNET article, Microsoft is scraping together a "modest update" for Office v.X, which will be available in "late May or early June"; reportedly this "free download" (oooh, how generous!) will introduce "improved text rendering" and a couple of other features, plus-- and this is the bit that has us asking stupid questions, here-- "more than 1,000 bug fixes."

Now, you can choose to interpret that information in a stunningly glass-half-full manner, e.g. "Wow, Microsoft must be super-good at programming to fix all those bugs, plus they must really like me to be giving me this update for free." Our own interpretation is slightly less Pollyanna in tone: "Wow, Microsoft must be super-sloppy to release a product with that many bugs in the first place, and the very fact that people are freaking out because this $500 software package whose bug count runs upwards of four digits might disappear someday is the very definition of the word 'monopoly.'" C'mon, any company that didn't wield monopoly power would be laughed out of business overnight if it tried to charge half a grand for a suite of office productivity applications so full of bugs it qualifies as a bona fide ecosystem.

Over a thousand bug fixes... man, if this is a "modest" update, we'd sure hate to run into a "major" one in a dark alley some night. But actually, relatively speaking, a thousand bugs isn't all that bad. After all, it pales in comparison to the 63,000 bugs that Microsoft admitted were in Windows 2000 when that product first hit the market. See? We can be glass-half-full people, too!