So no one's likely to argue with us if we say that Macintosh has traditionally been the computer platform of choice among the world's so-called "creative types," right? Heck, that's one of the reasons that it's often viewed by non-Mac people as "not a real computer"; after all, any computer that can be operated by a writer, or an artist, or a filmmaker (as opposed to a computer scientist or someone who thinks sorting out IRQ's is a fun way to spend a Saturday night) can't be a real computer. Way back when the useability gap between Macs and PC's was a lot wider, "creative" types who needed a computer embraced the Mac, and for the most part, that loyalty continues today.

Which is why we're not terribly surprised to see that Apple continues to promote QuickTime by posting movie trailers to its web site. Specifically, it's cool to see Apple posting QuickTime versions of the trailers for the Academy Awards Best Picture nominees. It's a neat all-in-one deal: it appeals to those "creative types" (read: the content creation market) while simultaneously attracting the average consumers (i.e. the potential iMac market) who go ga-ga over movies and awards cermonies. And let's not forget how strongly Apple's trying to court Hollywood and the entire broadcasting community-- remember how Steve Jobs addressed the National Association of Broadcasters last year, saying that he wanted QuickTime to be the technology of all broadcasting? Remember, as CEO of Pixar, Steve's not exactly in the dark about the whole Hollywood thing. Well, the NAB gathering is just around the corner, and according to Mac the Knife, Apple's preparing a devastating one-two punch of QuickTime 4 and Final Cut Pro, the nifty as-yet-unreleased video editing software they bought from Macromedia way back when.

So whether you're anxiously awaiting the NAB deal next month or the Oscars ceremony in just a couple of weeks, it's worth checking out Apple's page of trailers. Marvel at the achievements of the filmmakers, sure, but marvel too at the technology that's letting you load those trailers in your web browser and watch them on your computer screen. Plus, don't forget to vote for which film you think should win Best Picture-- we're big fans of Life Is Beautiful, ourselves.

Another day, another privacy concern... It seems that Microsoft has admitted to an "issue" discovered in Windows 98 and Microsoft Office. Apparently Office generates its own unique ID number, called a GUID, that is based partially on the computer's Ethernet hardware address (if an Ethernet interface is available). This identifier is then reportedly sent back to Microsoft when the user runs the Registration Wizard in Windows 98. A CNET article has more on this potential violation, which Microsoft is calling a "flaw."

The gentleman who discovered this issue reports that during the registration process, Windows 98 sends a multitude of info back to Redmond, including information about the computer hardware, the GUID, and an ID number generated by each Microsoft application. What's more, the GUID of a specific computer is stored in each document created by Microsoft Office applications. Rob Bennett, a Windows product manager, says that "the GUID is most likely not being stored in databases at Microsoft," which is about as comforting as a teddy bear wired to a car battery. We somehow find it a bit hard to swallow that Windows 98 "accidentally" trasmits this GUID back to Microsoft during registration, but that's just us. As for Microsoft's motives, that's entirely open to speculation. Personally, we think it has less to do with tracking an individual's actions and more to do with finding pirated software. Regardless, Bennett says the "bug" will be fixed in the next service update to Windows 98.

While the "bug" he's specifically talking about is the way that the GUID is sent back to Microsoft when users register Office using Windows' Registration Wizard, there's no indication that the GUID will go away or that Office will stop stamping it into every document. What we at AtAT are wondering is, who's safe from having their Office documents branded with a GUID? Does it affect Mac users, too? The focus of the article is that Microsoft might be secretly collecting information about their customers when the GUID is sent to Redmond-- a scary thought, sure, but we're also a little concerned about the possibility that documents created in Office could then be traceable back to a specific computer. Does this make it impossible to generate a truly anonymous letter in Word, for example? Could analysis of the binary content of a Word file allow someone to prove that it was written on a given computer? It might just be us being paranoid again (no!), but all we can say is, we recommend you don't use Word 98 if you're planning on writing any ransom notes...

We know we're not alone; there are those among you who, like us, are still mourning the dreadful loss of "Redmond Justice." Sure, it's just on hiatus and will return in six weeks or so, but that's damn near forever to a pack of TV junkies whose attention span is so short as to be measurable only under laboratory conditions. Just what are we supposed to do during the downtime for our daily antitrust fix? We miss the thrill of battle, the musty smell of the courtroom, the surprise witnesses, the sudden tearful confessions of murder... Hmmm, it's possible we're thinking about something else, here... Regardless, we know there was something cool and delightfully entertaining about "Redmond Justice" and we're jonesing for a little courtroom action. Why, oh why did the producers of the show introduce a six-week hiatus? Sure, the players deserved a vacation, but can't they just once consider the feelings of us, the faithful viewers?

But suddenly, all comes clear-- the producers of "Redmond Justice" have a cunning plan to release us from our dungeon of misery and capitalize on their show's success in the same grand manner that television producers have done since the seventeenth century. We speak, of course, of the spin-off, that most sacred staple of network programming that virtually guarantees a ready-made audience salivating for more. Yes, just as Cheers begat Frasier and Barney Miller spat out Fish, just as (in the words of one of this millennium's Great Sages) "Happy Days had a baby and they named it Joanie Loves Chachi," there's a new antitrust show coming to town, with new issues, new allegations, and new characters with new axes to grind. It's called (regrettably) "Monopoly Inside," and it premieres Tuesday-- check your local listings for the time and channel.

According to a story on Yahoo News, "Monopoly Inside" is leading off with an expected six-week run, which ought to tide us "Redmond Justice" fans over until the blasted hiatus runs its course. That's decidedly canny program planning on the producers' part-- make us all sweat with a week's withdrawal to soften us up so we'll be more receptive to the spin-off. Here's the set-up: On one side of the conflict is Intel, the "other half" of the Wintel juggernaut. Trying to take them down a notch is the Federal Trade Commission, charging that Intel illegally squelched competition by using its monopoly power to squeeze technology from its competitors. Mediating the affair is Administrative Law Judge James Timony. If you ask us, those producers are taking something of a risk, since it appears that none of the players in "Monopoly Inside" will be familiar faces. No boyish antics from David Boies? No cranky and incredulous interjections from Judge Jackson? We can't help but feel that a spin-off has an uphill battle when none of its stars are beloved characters from the previous show. Still, Melrose Place pulled it off, so we'll just have to wait and see.