It's tough to judge these things without running actual performance tests, but after yesterday's spiel on Mac OS X 10.0.3's single-bug-fix raison d'être, we're considering changing our tune. After using the new version heavily last night, we'd swear that the system is somehow just a bit faster, especially in launch times. It could be our imagination, of course, but since we weren't expecting a performance boost, we think it's less likely that we're fooling ourselves. Whatever. In any case, Mac OS X 10.0.3 is clearly faster than 10.0.0, which felt like Aqua had been dipped in wood glue and treacle-- the point being, things are getting better.

However, we still don't think Mac OS X feels zippy enough to foist upon a mainstream crowd. Mac OS X users who disagree, try this before you flame us to oblivion: boot back into Mac OS 9 on the same hardware and feel the wind in your hair. Perhaps Mac OS X is faster under the hood, but when it comes to consumer sales, perception is everything, and Mac OS X is going to have to feel at least as responsive as Mac OS 9 by the time the new operating system is preloaded on all Mac systems this summer.

Enter Puma, the first "big" revision to Mac OS X that will probably hit the streets as version 10.1. Puma will be the first release intended for use by "regular people," as opposed to those of us twisted geeks who jumped in on Day One just begging for pain. And as faithful viewer CodeBitch pointed out, the Naked Mole Rat has managed to overcome his grief at the passing of Joey Ramone long enough to mention that Puma is "speedier than Robert Downey Jr. on a Club Med vacation with some outlaw bikers." Hopefully that translates roughly into "perceptibly as fast as or faster than Mac OS 9," but of course we can never be entirely sure.

The Rat is also kind enough to provide details of Apple's development plans for Puma, and it goes something like this: feature freeze on June 1st; user interface freeze a week later; final candidate stage on July 2nd; golden master on the 9th; and, of course, a massive Jobsian unveiling at the Macworld Expo on July 17th. Mark your calendars! We're planning to be there to give it a spin at Apple's booth-- and, with luck, to update our PowerBook by glomming onto Apple's AirPort network right on the show floor. Fingers crossed!

Well, we suppose that in this economy it was inevitable; by this time, any tech company that hasn't laid off a sizeable chunk of its staff simply doesn't have any staff left to cut loose. There are notable exceptions, of course, such as Apple-- whose CFO Fred Anderson clearly stated last January, "We are not planning an across-the-board layoff... we don't want to mortgage the future." With over $4 billion in the bank, Apple appeared to be in a solid position to ride out these tough times without going crazy over pink slips like Compaq (5000 jobs cut), Dell (4000), Gateway (3000), and Hewlett-Packard (3000).

There were rumors that Apple did quietly lay off the Cube development team a few months back, but Steve Jobs expressly denied that claim, despite Apple's official policy of never commenting on rumors. And we've heard rumblings of scattered pink slips in the support department, but never anything widespread (or, indeed, even confirmable). The fact is, if Apple has laid some people off, it's hardly the sort of panicked, emergency cost-cutting bloodbath that seems to be all the rage in the rest of the tech sector. Still, when faithful viewer Wayne Parkhurst informed us that Apple is cutting jobs in its iServices division, we admit we got a little nervous.

As it turns out, we probably shouldn't have. While CNET reports that Apple has confirmed the job cuts, we're only talking about "a small number" of positions that were eliminated "as part of a restructuring of its iServices consulting unit." Elsewhere in the article the number of lost jobs is referred to as "a handful." And given the relative obscurity of the iServices group (we're betting many of you never even heard of it before now), a restructuring there hardly constitutes cause for widespread panic. Apple's official spin on the sitch is as follows: "Apple continually reviews its business to ensure we are operating at maximum efficiency. As part of this ongoing evaluation, we have restructured the iTools/iServices group to more effectively run our business and serve our customers." That sounds reasonable.

Still, glass-half-empty people that we are, despite our every logical impulse, we're probably going to be edgy about looming Apple layoffs for the forseeable future. Call it an addiction to drama, but even when Apple's stock quadruples, jobless rates are at an all-time low, and Alan Greenspan is spotted dancing on Wall Street and singing "It's Raining Men," you can bet we're still going to be wondering when Steve's going to reach for the little hammer to break the glass on the Emergency Pink Slip Book. But, of course, rational Apple employees have little reason to worry. So just let us stew on our own.

Anyone who's been tuning in to this little show for any length of time probably won't be surprised to learn that the AtAT staff is often plagued with unsettling paranoia dreams involving Microsoft's attempts to subjugate humankind as a slave race of workers and drones, while Bill Gates reigns supreme as World Emperor. (Hey, who doesn't?) The thing is, dreams being the wacky things they are, Microsoft's world-domination antics are generally zanier in our own personal slumberland than they are in real life. So instead of, say, a transparent attempt to crush an enemy by bundling a competing product free with the operating system that holds over 90% of the desktop market share, we're typically dreaming about Microsoft brainwashing the children of the world to use Windows by having Bill Gates lick each individual piece of Cap'n Crunch cereal before it goes in the box.

In fact, a little over a week ago, we had this really crazy dream about Microsoft instituting a Reward-The-Stool-Pigeon program to crack down on the sale of "naked computers"-- a heinous disease that's crippling our economy because some ne'er-do-wells actually have the gall to try to buy computers without Windows on them. Get this; we dreamed that Microsoft was actually trying to bribe PC manufacturers to rat out people who ordered computers without Windows by offering them Fossil watches and barbecue grills as prizes for squealing on these dangerous criminals. We didn't think much of it at the time; insane garbage like that infects our sleeping lives on a regular basis. (We should maybe talk to someone about that.)

Imagine our utter shock, then, when we were cleaning out our downloads folder this morning, and discovered that, rather than being a twisted product of our deranged subconscious minds, Microsoft's "Squeal For Prizes" promotion is real. Faithful viewer Jeremy actually emailed us a link to a Wall Street Journal article on the pilot program last week, and apparently our Fight Club-style levels of sleep deprivation forced our tired minds to file such an absurd scenario automatically in the "nutty dream" category. And really, are you surprised? This whole scheme sounds like either a bad dream or the plot of some profoundly awful movie script-- but take it from the journal, folks: it's a real, honest-to-goodness (though intensely ill-conceived) Microsoft initiative. Hoo mama.

See, Microsoft can't believe that anyone is crazy enough to want to run something like Linux, so the company assumes that anyone buying a Wintel without the "Win" is planning on installing a pirated copy of the company's operating system. And so, in an attempt to collar these obvious pirates, Microsoft actually emailed "thousands" of PC manufacturers to say "You may be eligible to win prizes! Here's how!" and then proceeded to detail the process by which these fine, upstanding box-builders could snitch in exchange for a copy of Flight Simulator or a spiffy free watch. Geez, who needs dreams when the real world is this surreal?