The iMac keeps selling up a storm; units seem to fly off of store shelves as if repelled by some kind of magnetic force. So far, Apple's done an admirable job of keeping up with demand, but the strain of cranking out iMacs twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week is really beginning to show. Apple's just barely shipping iMacs fast enough to keep the stores stocked, while volumes of other Macs is dropping like a stone. According to several resellers, availability of various Power Macs and PowerBooks is less than satisfactory, and the situation hasn't been all that great ever since the iMacs started rolling off the production lines. Coincidence? Hardly.

So Apple's finally close to outsourcing some of the manufacturing in order to keep supplies at a reasonable level, according to a CNET article. The biggest contract manufacturer on the planet, SCI Systems, claims that there is a "very good chance" that future iMacs may be born in non-Apple facilities-- including SCI plants. Apple's keeping mum on this (surprise, surprise), but we have no reason to doubt the truth of the rumors.

One of the intangible attractions of the iMac is that it doesn't just look like it was designed by Apple; it feels like it was crafted by Apple. While some reviewers have said that the iMac's plastic case feels "cheap," we at AtAT think it's one of the most tightly-constructed computers we've ever used. So while we welcome the idea of an Apple that's actually capable of selling as many computers as people want to buy, we hope that the outsourcing of manufacturing won't degrade the quality of the merchandise. We doubt it will, given that SCI has built Macs for Apple before, and one of their plants in Colorado actually belonged to Apple before they sold it in the "lean days" of 1996. Here's hoping.

Well, we've officially met and exceeded our U.S. Recommended Daily Allowance of irony today. First we came across a ZDNet article about how PC manufacturers are adopting a "wait and see" attitude about the iMac and its revolutionary design. Are "slick, cool PCs" the "way of the future?" (To which question most of us would probably answer, "well, ,duh.") IBM reserves judgment until they can see just who's buying all the cute little computers. Compaq says that Apple has good luck with all-in-one systems, but they can't base a strategy on the iMac's success. Dell claims their customers are too high-end for the iMac to be relevant. Other manufacturers had no comment. Overall, it sounds like Wintel manufacturers aren't too bullish on easy-to-use integrated systems with futuristic designs and cool translucent cases. Fair enough.

But then an anonymous MacHead pointed out a CNET article about new a new PC from Intel that "borrows heavily from the iMac design." Like the iMac, It's got a funky shape, only this one's more reminiscent of a Mayan pyramid than of a truncated Easter egg. But more importantly, it's translucent blue. At the machine's introduction, Intel's CEO claims that customers are looking for "different form factors and absolute simplicity of design." The big difference? You can buy an iMac now. Intel's blue plastic computer won't be available until 2001. (Perhaps it should be redesigned to resemble a black monolith instead?)

That's not all-- apparently a Korean PC manufacturer named Trigem is working on an "iMac knock-off," based on a 333 MHz Celeron chip, and they've already hired an industrial designer to come up with a copycat design. So at least some of the Wintel industry thinks the iMac's industrial design is helping move units. We just thought it was cool that both articles came out on the same day and essentially contradict each other. Mmmmm, irony-- keeps the heart pumping, fills you with vim and vigor, and always puts a spring in your step! Are you getting enough?

The dream is over; Quark Inc., the makers of QuarkXPress, has officially withdrawn their proposal to buy out competitor Adobe. In a press release, Quark reveals that Adobe has repeatedly rejected their offers for a friendly buyout, and "summarily dismissed" the entire proposal. Apparently Adobe wouldn't even return phone calls to discuss the possibility.

While Quark could conceivably attempt a hostile takeover, their "desire to do a friendly deal" is the overriding factor in their decision not to. Well, that and the fact that a takeover battle would chew up time and money from both companies and probably send them both spiralling further into economic ruin. But that's as maybe. One thing is clear-- Adobe doesn't want to be bought, and in fact it recently amended its own bylaws to strengthen its "formidable defenses" against a hostile takeover.

While we can't say whether a buyout of Adobe would have been at all beneficial to the graphics and desktop publishing industries, we can certainly surmise that the fireworks during a hostile takeover would have been spectacular. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), Quark doesn't want to play that game. We're getting a little antsy what with the lack of buyouts in the past year; there were all those rumors about Apple being acquired that never came to fruition, and the only big takeover we've seen was Compaq buying Digital. Granted, that was a doozy, but we're ready for some new entertainment.