Okay, it's like this: we don't actually keep formal tabs on such statistics, but we're quite sure that yesterday's speculation about the mysterious "phone number" in Mac OS 8.6's disk image Get Info comments box generated more feedback than any other single item in AtAT's nineteen months on the air. Could we be any more proud? So, thanks to the dozens of you who wrote in to contribute to solving the "mystery," about half of whom noted that the hard drives of latter-model Macs also include a seven-digit hyphenated number in the comments box, and about half of whom just about flat-out berated us (although usually in a very chummy, loving way) for not knowing that Apple's service part numbers look just like phone numbers and have shown up in installer volumes since Mac OS 7.6 or so. In addition to those, a handful of the responders actually thought they detected the faintest hint of irony and absurdity in our tone and therefore had the nerve to assume we might just possibly be joking. We can't imagine where they got such a far-fetched idea... (And we'd like to extend a sincere and irony-free thank you to everybody who wrote in-- we love hearing from you, even if we don't get a chance to respond.)

So that's the "real" story-- the "phone number" that appears in the Get Info comments box of Apple-supplied hard drives and installer disks is Apple's official software identifier number for the system software installed. Faithful viewer Revvy, a former Apple technician, notes that it's "impossible to distinguish an Apple part number from a phone number" since they all have the format xxx-xxxx. In fact, he recalls "several times that [he] mistakenly dialed the wrong number after writing an Apple part number on a customer's invoice." No mystery there. Unless, of course, it's no coincidence that Apple chose that format for their part numbers; it would make a nifty way to embed all sorts of secret phone numbers into Apple products. Our question to you is this: which Apple service part number is actually Larry Ellison's home phone number?

On a related note, we found it interesting that two faithful viewers (Todd Wheeler and Tekmo) both noted instances in their respective pasts when they tried to dial Apple's old technical support number, (800) SOS-APPL, and accidentally dialed a zero in place of the "O" in SOS. Surprisingly enough, that one little change connected them to a phone sex line, just as the "phone number" in the Mac OS 8.6 disk image does. Coincidence? Oh, sure, and we suppose you believe in the tooth fairy, too, right?

Poor PowerPC-- it's such a lovely chip architecture, and yet the processor itself is horribly underutilized in high-profile computing products. Sure, they're beating at the heart of every Mac sold in the past several years, but let's face it; there are a lot more Pentiums out there slogging through day-to-day computing tasks. Motorola seems to see the PowerPC's big future as being in "embedded systems," which we take to mean using the PowerPC in smart appliances more than in actual computers. IBM, on the other hand, has seemed content to stick the PowerPC into high-end servers instead of desktop computers. That is, until now...

As faithful viewer Robert Fernando points out, IBM has apparently inked a billion-dollar deal with Nintendo to provide PowerPC processors to drive future game console systems. If you think the N64 is cool now, imagine what Nintendo will be able to come up with based on a custom 400 MHz PowerPC, scheduled to ship in the new systems in about a year and a half. A New York Times article has more on this intriguing development. The thing is, game consoles are evolving into much more than just game consoles; with the PowerPC at its core, Nintendo's next system may well be a full-fledged electronic entertainment unit, providing "Internet communications and music and video entertainment." Sounds like an all-around home computing appliance, doesn't it? Which means that Apple might one day be competing with Nintendo and the other console manufacturers in the consumer market. (Personally, we're not all that worried; a year and a half is almost forever in the computer world, and even trying to imagine what the iMac will be like in the fall of 2000 makes our collective head hurt.)

There are two things we want to say about this situation. First of all, isn't it interesting that two of the big next-generation game consoles are planning to use technology currently used by Apple in shipping Mac systems? In addition to Nintendo embracing the PowerPC, Sony's next PlayStation spec apparently includes FireWire connectivity. Secondly, just when we're getting used to Apple no longer being saddled with the word "beleaguered," now it looks like the PowerPC has inherited that title-- the Times article uses the adjective twice to describe our beloved chipset. Ah, well-- we'll see how beleaguered the PowerPC is when the G4's start shipping.

So as a Mac owner, have you gotten smug about the Y2K problem yet? Oh, don't worry-- a certain smugness is probably justified; after all, the Mac itself has been just fine with the concept of a year greater than 1999 ever since it first rolled off the lines fifteen years ago. Just don't get too smug, because just because your computer itself is compliant, that doesn't guarantee that all your applications are. And by the same token, just because your Mac is Y2K-ready, that doesn't mean that the company that made it is, too.

That's right-- according to a Reuters article, Apple's had to increase its estimate of its "total external spending associated with Year 2000 issues" because costs have gone up. Whereas previously they expected to spend a total of about $9 million to fix up Y2K-clueless systems, they now figure the grand total is more likely to be about $13.2 million-- and it could well be higher. And while we initially assumed that they were talking about internal PC-based systems used for manufacturing, finance, and all that other fun ERP stuff, the article states that Apple expects to spend "$6.8 million to address Y2K compliance of certain Apple branded products." Given that Macs are pretty much ready to go (or so we've all been told, by no less an authority than HAL 9000-- he wouldn't lie, would he?), we find ourselves wondering just which Apple-branded products those might be. Old IIGS systems, or what?

Anyway, presumably Apple's taking care of whatever the problems are, so we imagine we don't have a whole lot to worry about from an end-user standpoint. Right now our biggest Y2K concern involves whether our cable service will be interrupted; we can't live for long without the Cartoon Network. While others are stocking up on canned goods and bottled water, we're frantically taping hour after hour of Space Ghost. After all, you've gotta have your priorities straight...