Some things never change-- or, at least, they change too slowly to notice. Take Apple's presence in the retail market, for example. Just over a year ago, conditions were atrocious: show-floor Macs were off, crashed, crowded by Wintels, and actively ignored by salespeople. Customers interested in buying a Mac were promptly steered towards a Wintel instead. Apple took a long, hard look at the carnage and decided it was time for a change. So they cut a deal with CompUSA to build Apple stores-within-stores, and all other retailers were dropped. It was a bold move, but drastic situations require drastic measures. Unfortunately, if you think back, the initial reaction to those Apple sections was less than glowing; it was a classic example of "right idea, wrong execution." A year later, most feedback we get about those Apple ghettoes in CompUSA stores is still pretty solidly negative. (There's also the issue of CompUSA's less-than-compelling Mac advertising, and we don't even want to get into the whole stocking ladder thing...)

So is it any surprise that Best Buy's re-entry into the Mac world is being reported as a disaster somewhere on the scale between "Three Mile Island" and "Microsoft Word 6 for the Macintosh"? Sordid details abound; for examples, take a look at MacCentral's coverage of the nightmare, including Don Crabb's commentary. In essence, on the day of the big rollout, it appears that most Best Buy employees were oblivious to the fact that their store now sold iMacs. Worse yet, the employees that did know seemed completely hostile to the idea of actually selling anything with an Apple on it. And as for display models, well, the end is the beginning is the end; reports of crashed and nonfunctional demo units are all over the place.

Now, we ask this in all sincerity: is anyone actually surprised? Best Buy is widely regarded as an even less friendly place to buy a computer than CompUSA is, so all of these reports, while at least vaguely troubling, strike us as par for the course. We have high hopes that Apple can make Best Buy a more iMac-friendly environment, but we're not holding our breath. The one saving grace may be that, despite being such an evidently horrible place to buy a computer, Best Buy still claims to sell one out of every three consumer computers sold in cities where the Big Yellow Tag is open for business. With numbers like that, it's possible that the Best Buy deal may still boost iMac sales. We wonder, though, if people who are discriminating enough to buy an elegant and friendly computer are really likely to buy one from such an inelegant and unfriendly store.

Microsoft's not the only high-tech company that has to deal with trademark ickiness, though their extended court battle for the right to wrest the "Internet Explorer" trademark away from a bankrupt ISP in Illinois will go down in history as one of the more expensive, ugly, and embarassing examples. However, the anticipated trouble over the "Windows 2000" name apparently won't be a problem, as the owner of the trademark is a big Microsoft fan and we assume that a happy resolution isn't far off. On the other hand, there's the little issue of one of Apple's product names infringing on another company's trademark...

Now, we're not talking about ancient history, like the occasional brief tussles with John Lennon's Apple recording label, or the way that Steve Jobs had to secure the name "Macintosh" from a maker of high-end audio equipment. We're talking about stuff in the here and now, namely, the Power Macintosh G3 and the PowerBook G3. It would appear that, according to MacNN, "G3" is a trademark and service mark of an Internet and multimedia design and consulting firm named-- surprisingly enough-- G3 Systems, Inc. Whoops! Just a little bit of toe-stepping, there.

It's kind of ironic that one of G3's claims to fame is that it was a pioneer in the field of multiprocessor server technology. After all, the G3 processor (er, the one Apple uses-- you know, that PowerPC 750 thing) isn't really built for multiprocessing, which is why you don't see any multiprocessor systems from Apple these days. To boost the irony index even higher, G3 Systems' early multiprocessing box used Motorola 680x0 chips-- the same chips used in Macs before the PowerPC showed up to the party. Anyway, while they're admittedly a little peeved with Apple for the appropriation of their trademark, G3 Systems doesn't seem angry enough to pursue legal action. Heck, by the time things got to court, Apple would probably be selling Power Mac G4's anyway. Er, hmm, perhaps Apple should contact G4 Corporation and start talks now? (D'oh!!)

Okay, now that the "Homer gets a brain transplant" Pentium II commercial was revealed to be less than thrilling and the X-Files season premiere left us feeling slightly hollow (there's an unintentional veiled reference there if you think about it), we're anxious to get back to the slings and arrows of "Redmond Justice." For our money, there just isn't much else on the tube with the same level of high drama and low humor. With any luck, we'll be following the foibles and exploits of Microsoft and the Justice Department for a good long time-- and the way things are going, it looks like we're going to get our wish.

Thomas Penfield Jackson, the director of the show (who also has been charming viewers with his on-screen portrayal of an impatient and sometimes-crotchety federal judge), envisioned the whole trial taking only six to eight weeks-- more of an extended miniseries than a full-fledged television season. However, things have rapidly gotten out of hand, and this trial has taken on a life of its own. We're now three weeks into the new fall season, and only three of the scheduled twenty-four witnesses have testified on the stand, according to the Knight Ridder News Service. If the show keeps plodding along at this rate, we'll all still be enjoying "Redmond Justice" until well into April of 1999, although most legal observers are stating that a February end is more likely.

Granted, the interests of justice would likely best be served by a speedy trial; after all, many of the issues at hand directly affect Windows 98, and one of Judge Jackson's goals was to get this all over with before so many copies of Windows 98 shipped out the door that enforcing any kind of decision would become impracticible. But given the unlikelihood that justice's best interests will ever be served in this matter, we're hoping that entertainment's best interests will be served instead. After all, sometimes good TV is really hard to find.