For better or for worse (and we sure hope it's for better), it sounds like the Apple-Best Buy relationship is on the mend. We took the fact that the new fruit-flavored iMacs were released some seven weeks ago and still haven't surfaced in any of the 213 Best Buy stores across the nation, added in the reports of the complete and utter absence of any iMacs, including Bondi blue models, from several of those stores, and we just had to assume that a breakup was imminent. And given the absolutely atrocious experience many people have had while trying to buy iMacs at their local Best Buy, we can't say were all that sad about seeing the consumer superstore chain leave the Apple fold, even though they were such a huge potential source of iMac sales revenue.

But the honeymoon's not over yet-- at least, not if Apple Insider's sources are correct. It appears that the haggling over the potential inventory nightmare of trying to stock iMacs in five separate colors has finally concluded, and Best Buy caved. All five flavors are winging their translucent way to Best Buy stores and should show up within a week. And that's not all; Apple is telling their retail support lackeys MarketSource Corporation to throw a lot of weight Best Buy's way. And by "weight" we don't just mean training and marketing materials-- we're talking swag. Swag of the Apple-branded giveaways persuasion; Apple apparently hopes to win the hearts and minds of the anti-Apple Best Buy sales personnel by bombarding them with t-shirts, buttons, and day planners. Well, it's an interesting plan, if a doomed one...

Sounds like Best Buy is "putting up with" Apple's demands, more or less. And that's just good business sense, given the sales potential of putting one of the most popular consumer computers into one of the largest consumer-oriented electronics superstores. Truth be told, we have a feeling that the real reason that Best Buy is complying with Apple's wishes to keep the iMac account is so that they'll be in on the ground floor when the Apple consumer portable ships later this year. It's hard to imagine a brightly-colored, translucent, lightweight, shockproof and inexpensive laptop not breaking sales records, and if Best Buy's management has any working grey matter at all, they want a piece of that action. First things first, though-- we'll be keeping our eyes open at the local Best Buy for the arrival of fruit-flavored iMacs.

Speaking of the iMac's popularity, could it be that its six months of fame is over? After hitting number one on the sales charts last November, it sank to number three in December. Apple watchers the world over were hoping that the new fruit-flavored models introduced in early January, which included bigger hard drives, faster processors, and lower prices in addition to a choice of colors, would help propel the iMac back into the top spot. Even if the new models didn't catch on right away, it seemed likely that the fire-sale prices for the "classic" models ought to give the sales numbers a serious kick in the kiester. Sounds reasonable, doesn't it?

Unfortunately, things don't always work out in a "reasonable" fashion. PC Data's January numbers are in, and according to a CNET article, the iMac's relative popularity is still flagging. Despite a sticker price down about $300 from the previous month, the Bondi blue models have slipped one more slot to fourth place, behind two Hewlett-Packard models and a Compaq computer. Worse still, none of the new iMacs even debuted in the top ten; in fact, even when combining all five flavors, the fruit-flavored iMacs didn't even crack the top fifteen.

Is this the end for our beloved hero? It's certainly possible that availability problems with the new models contributed greatly to the low sales figures, and it's also possible that shoppers who had their hearts set on, say, Grape, preferred to wait for their favorite flavor than to settle for a Bondi model. But six months is a fair stretch of time in the computer industry, and it's also possible that the iMac really is on the way out. We won't know until the distribution issues are ironed out; once consumers can walk into their local Best Buy and walk out with the iMac of their choice, we'll take another look at the numbers to see what's up.

Sure, George Clooney's last episode of ER has probably been the most hyped-up event during this February Sweeps Month, but that doesn't mean that other shows shied away from the competition. Take, for example, the "verbal fireworks" that erupted in court during last Thursday's episode of "Redmond Justice." According to a Cox News Service article, the writers for the hottest antitrust courtroom drama on the air really have their mojo workin' now. Okay, so it was no school bus crash, but it's pretty hard to script automotive mayhem and severed limbs into an antitrust case (though, if there's a way to do it, our bets are on the "Redmond Justice" writers to be the ones to do it).

The show warmed up with the ever-lovable Judge Jackson (whose personality seems like some kind of hybrid between those of Judge Wapner and Lou Grant) openly questioning the veracity of Microsoft's latest witness, John Rose, a senior veep at Compaq. The issue at hand was whether or not Microsoft had threatened to cancel Compaq's Windows licensing agreement if the computer manufacturer didn't restore the Internet Explorer icon to the Desktop of its products. As evidence that Microsoft did nothing wrong, Rose produced what he claimed to be a copy of the agreement between the two companies, which he claimed showed that Microsoft was well within its rights. But Jackson was doubtful, stating that "the terms of [Compaq's] agreement with Microsoft make no sense to [him]," and questioned whether it was a "genuine" agreement. Furthermore, if the terms of the contract in question were agreed to in August of 1995, as Rose claimed, why was the actual contract not signed until June of 1996? According to Rose, it "took the lawyers and the contract people that long" to finalize the contract-- which involved the addition of two paragraphs. Clearly, the judge wasn't buying it, as the Washington Post described him as "incredulous" that such a change could take that long.

But wait, that's not all! That might be enough spice for a regular episode of "Redmond Justice," but the ratings this month are far too important to entrust to a single helping of Judge Jackson's trademark grumpiness. In addition, the writers threw in a brief skirmish between Boies and Compaq's lawyer, William Coston. Coston admirably fulfilled his role as guest star by exploding in indignant outbursts when Boies' attempts to discredit Compaq's testimony went so far as to accuse Compaq of violating a non-disclosure agreement they had signed with Be. Be, most of you will recall, is the upstart company led by ex-Apple exec Jean Louis Gassée, whose BeOS operating system is trying to play David to Windows' Goliath. Boies tried to paint Microsoft and Compaq as being "joined at the hip" by claiming that Compaq violated their NDA with Be to tip Microsoft off about the potential threat of the new OS. Coston played his role well, jumping up from his bench at the back of the courtroom and approaching the judge while accusing Boies of "sullying the firm's reputation by this allegation." Jackson called a recess to let things cool down and to give Boies a chance to name his source at Compaq in private. But when we returned from the commercial break, what did we find but Coston ripping into Boies again-- which prompted Boies to identify his source in open court. Whew! Does it get any better than this? Now that is Must-See TV.