How about that AAPL, huh? Believe us, we at AtAT are not financial wizards, nor do we claim to have any real knowledge about what the stock market is or how it works. (It's a place where you can buy a lot of soup, right?) But even high-finance ignoramuses like us are at least vaguely aware that when a company's stock price goes up, that's generally a good thing. That's why we keep a fairly close watch on Apple's stock, even though we don't own a single share between us. Over the last few trading days, AAPL hit a new year high of over $46-- that's actually a three-year high, and not far off from the five-year high of $50 or so. And it's way better than the year low of $17 or whatnot.

So the big question in our minds is, what'll happen to the stock price after Apple releases its latest quarterly financial results on Wednesday? We know they'll post a profit-- Steve Jobs revealed as much during his keynote address, and really, could you expect otherwise after the phenomenal success of the iMac? But just how much of a profit are we talking about? It's important to note that Apple's previous four profitable quarters were achieved largely through cost-cutting moves, and not from any actual sales growth. This time, though, it looks like Apple might be posting its first profit in a good long while that is directly attributable to increased sales. As analyst Andrew Neff of Bear Stearns puts it, "if [Apple] can make money when they're shrinking, they're in a really good position when they are growing." A Reuters article has more on the mystery numbers.

According to the article, analysts seem to be predicting a profit of 66 to 69 cents a share-- roughly $83 to $88 million. Maybe it's just us, but that sounds a little low. If you think you've got your financial analysis mojo working, make sure you enter your best guess in the quarterly Beat the Analysts contest. You just might win fame, fortune, and a high-level job at a major securities firm. More likely, though, you'll get your name mentioned on AtAT and win some cheesy piece of Mac software that was buried long ago in our Baffling Vault of Antiquity™. Still, there's also that sense of satisfaction at having beat out those high-priced analysts without the benefit of years of training or, say, a paycheck. Er, well, it's sort of satisfying, at any rate...

So yeah, Apple's about to announce its fifth consecutive quarterly profit, and the iMac is largely responsible. What's not to like? It's small, powerful, friendly, and now it comes in five fruit flavors. We are, however, a little taken aback by Apple's plan to sell iMacs in five colors; rather than take our advice and make the additional colors an Apple Store build-to-order option only, Apple has gone ahead and given five different part numbers to the five different colors and plans to sell them all at retail. This seems to be an astonishing risk from an inventory perspective. Who's to say that one color won't be hugely popular, while another barely sells at all? Apple could end up writing off inventory losses due solely to the public's color preferences.

According to TechWeb, though, the risk isn't all that bad. They spoke to Leatrice Eiseman, the director of the Pantone Color Institute, who claims that Apple's five color choices for the new iMac are all quite safe, in terms of popularity. She claims that "the only risky color is the lime. It's the iffiest. It's been very hot in the middle to latter 1990s, but it's a color that is losing momentum." Hrm, okay. How does that translate into real sales? For the answer, we turned to MacWEEK, who got some initial sales figures from MacMall: in the first two days after the new colors were introduced, MacMall sold "23 Blueberry, 14 Grape, 11 Lime, four Strawberry and two Tangerine iMacs." So Blueberry seems to be the most popular by far, with poor Tangerine bringing up the rear... Imagine warehouses filled to bursting with scads of unsold Tangerine iMacs. Brings a tear to the eye, doesn't it?

Meanwhile, if you're planning on taking advantage of the fire-sale prices on the Bondi Blue models ($999 or so at most stores), you should act fast. This past Sunday, when we were loading groceries into the AtATmobile, we witnessed a happy couple wheeling two iMac-loaded shopping carts across the parking lot from the local Microcenter. "That's a whole lotta iMacs," I commented, as they wheeled past. I counted ten or eleven of the happy blue lumps, both in boxes and sitting loose in the carts, which they then proceeded to load into their minivan. It was an odd sight, but a thrilling one; whether they're opening a cybercafé or just installing an iMac in every room of their house we couldn't say, but they sure looked happy about the whole situation.

Denied! Suddenly, "Redmond Justice" has turned into a private performance, barring access to the hordes of fans who follow the court drama with an almost religious fervor. As the government's twelfth and final witness testifies that Microsoft has the power to set its prices as high as it pleases, PC manufacturers like Dell and Compaq blanched at the prospect that making evidence about pricing available to the public could wreak no small amount of havoc on their business. Indeed, numbers such as the price each manufacturer pays for a Windows license are typically closely guarded. A ZDNN story has more.

Unsurprisingly, Microsoft keeps such data under lock and key, so that they can hammer out the best possible licensing deal with each of the PC manufacturers who need to install Windows on their products. News outlets, however, have lobbied to keep the trial open, since closing it "could set a dangerous legal precedent." Yeah, and it would also interrupt the viewing enjoyment of thousands of "Redmond Justice" fans! After all, you know how these shows are-- miss a couple of episodes, and suddenly everyone's sleeping with someone different. It's tough to catch back up. Unfortunately, the judge agrees with the manufacturers on this one, ruling that the financial info in question is "completely sensitive." So we'll just have to tune in to something else in the meantime.

On the plus side, transcripts of the closed hearings will be made available to the public after they occur-- though the "sensitive" pricing information will all be edited out. Still, we'll be able to get the gist, just not the juicy details. Sort of like reading Soap Opera Digest-- it's not as good as the real thing, but at least you're not completely in the dark.