What one word strikes the most fear into the hearts of the Mac faithful? We're talking about a single word that, when uttered, calls forth phantoms from the past so chilling, all those comforting thoughts of black ink, sales growth, increasing developer support, etc. just freeze solid and shatter on the floor. It's the word you avoid in mixed conversation at users' group meetings-- the word you can use to frighten small Mac-using children when you regale them with scary tales of the Dark Years. Yes, we're talking about-- Copland.

For the irrepressibly young among you (or the incurably forgetful), we're not talking about the 1997 Stallone flick. We're talking about Apple's abortive and resource-draining attempt to create a "modern" successor to System 7, complete with a new look, (mostly) protected memory, (mostly) preemptive multitasking, and a slew of other OS goodies. But the project dragged on for years until Apple finally realized that it just wasn't going to happen-- and they pulled the plug. That's when Amelio went shopping for outside help and eventually bought NeXT and rehired Steve Jobs, and now we're all waiting for Mac OS X, which looks like it'll be a winner. But the specter of Copland remains, as a constant reminder that even the most important projects can and do go awry.

Why are we bringing this up? Because O'Grady's PowerPage is whispering that all is not well with Apple's consumer portable, code-named "P1." It seems like we've been waiting for this thing forever, and the latest news was that it would finally be introduced at next month's Macworld Expo keynote. But the dirt dished at the PowerPage indicates that Apple is "having trouble even preparing a working prototype" in time for the show. In fact, rumor has it that an emergency meeting was called in Cupertino over this past weekend to discuss what should be done-- and among the more frightening questions allegedly asked was whether or not Apple should "scrap P1 entirely." Copland II, anyone? If things are really so far behind on the P1 project, is it possible that the lateness of the current PowerBooks and a "difference in style" with Apple hardware czar Jon Rubenstein were not the only reasons that ex-PowerBook development veep Mark Foster was "basically fired" last week? After all, if he mismanaged P1 development so badly that Apple must now decide whether or not to ship it at all, well... Keep in mind that this is all speculation built on rumor, and nothing more-- so far.

Now that PowerBook development has been merged into the same group working on Power Mac desktop systems, we have no idea what's going to happen to all the projects in the pipeline. Our first instinct was to expect further delays from both product lines as both groups adjust to the new situation, but after thinking about it for a while, it sounds like the desktop folks shouldn't be affected much at all-- and given how late stuff generally seems to be coming out of the portable division, we have to hope that the situation will only improve under new management. So, without further ado, in classical Impatient Mac Fan™ fashion, it's time to stop drooling over the new "bronze" G3 PowerBooks that have just started shipping-- and time to start drooling over the next professional laptops that Apple's little elves are hammering out for release sometime in the distant future.

Mac OS Rumors has the early specs on these little wonders, and while it's so early in the development cycle that any or all of the listed features may well change in the year or so before the products actually ship, there's still a lot to chew on: faster buses, faster processors, better graphics-- all the stuff you'd expect, really. In addition, Rumors claims Apple's looking into using "light-emitting plastics" for the screens, in the quest for brighter and crisper displays, and polymer batteries to conserve weight while carrying more juice than the current Lithium Ion models. Spiffy stuff. But probably the most significant information in the whole report is that Apple has reportedly finally recognized that users of "professional" PowerBooks often have drastically different needs; to that end, apparently the next PowerBooks to touch down on our humble planet will come in two species: "Business" and "Creative." (We have little doubt that Apple will come up with better names before they ship.)

The Business model will allegedly be the smaller, thinner, and lighter of the two, using a 13" screen, a variation of the RAGE Pro graphics chip, and fast G3 processors. (This is presumably the "Executive PowerBook" that Jobs alluded to at the shareholders' meeting, for businessmen who mostly just need to check email on the road.) The Creative version, on the other hand, is geared more towards the mobile graphics professional who really needs to lug around a full-powered workstation; they'll have larger 14" or 15" screens (perhaps going all the way up to 1280x1024 resolution), RAGE 128 graphics power, and faster G4 processors, in addition to more RAM, larger hard disks, and DVD-ROM as a standard feature. It's about time; while we always liked the idea of simplifying Apple's product line, a "one size fits all" strategy for PowerBooks just didn't seem like all that good an idea. We're counting the days.

No matter what Microsoft may say in public, we find it hard to believe that they can look at "Redmond Justice" so far and honestly believe that they're winning the case. Time and time again they've been embarrassed in court, been laughed at by the judge, and been just plain outclassed by government lawyer David Boies, who apparently got his degree at the Perry Mason Law School for Those Who Can Do No Wrong. Heck, if they did think they were winning, would they be spending so much effort trying to generate grass roots support among the public? There were the "leaked" memos, the newspaper ads made to look like letters to the editor from "ordinary concerned businesspeople," etc. Clever stuff-- slimy stuff, too, but clever nonetheless. But probably not a strategy that would be used by a company who honestly thought they would win.

The latest move in this extracurricular activity, according to faithful viewer Jerry O'Neil, is reported in an Associated Press article: Microsoft has added a link on its Windows Update web page urging visitors to write to Congress in support of Microsoft's "freedom to innovate." The online call for public outcry isn't what's new, however-- the link has been present on various other Microsoft web pages for at least six months now. What's noteworthy is that the link was not present on the highly-trafficked Windows Update page (which allows Windows 98 users running the latest version of Internet Explorer to download bug fixes and other patches automatically) when the page was shown to Judge Jackson in court last week. Could it be that the company didn't want the judge to see them using their massive Windows installed base to further their position in the battle for public opinion? After all, isn't that an "abuse" of the Windows monopoly curiously similar to the one they're on trial for in the first place?

Our recommendation, of course, would be to visit the Windows Update page yourself, regardless of what OS and browser you're using, and follow Microsoft's instructions for how to write to your elected officials. As for what opinion you express, well, that's up to you. Wouldn't it be funny if Microsoft's tactics actually generated more letters condemning them than defending them? Unfortunately, at broadcast time, the Update page yielded repeated "Server Too Busy" errors, and we were unable even to load Microsoft's home page-- "The connection was refused." Hmm, what do you think-- just another Windows NT crash, or do you suppose they're onto us? ;-) The "Capitol Comment" page that Microsoft links to is functional, however, and it specifically asks for opinions on the "Redmond Justice" case. Go to it...