Over the years, one of the most entertaining pastimes borne of the platform wars has been Mac Spotting-- finding evidence of Macs or Mac use in unlikely or ironic circumstances. For instance, the classic example from way back when is the old saw about how Intel's 3D animated flying Pentium ad was actually made on Macs. In fact, according to one version of the story, the ad agency tried to create the commercial on Pentium-based Wintel systems, but had to switch back to Macs because the PCs just weren't cutting it; Intel freaked when word hit the streets and sued the agency, or had all its directors shot or something. Fun, right?

And there have been dozens of lesser stories like that piling up over the years. Someone reported that the Windows 95 logo and boxes were designed on a Mac. We once found several animated graphics at Microsoft's web site that had been created with GIFBuilder, a Mac-only application. Seemingly more often than not, Wintel computers pictured in retail circulars are shown with the Mac OS on their screens. Happy stuff like that sustained the Mac community through some tough times; it wasn't necessarily productive to throw those facts at Wintel drones who ridiculed our Platform of Choice, but sometimes it felt really good. Unfortunately, none may escape the unyielding cycle of karma, and so the whole "Mac Spotting" thing may be about to turn around and smack us all in the collective face.

Faithful viewer Milo Auckerman found something rather disturbing while he was messing around with the public beta of the new Apple Knowledge Base, the upcoming replacement for the Tech Info Library. Oh, sure, the Knowledge Base looks chock full of Aqua-y goodness, and its usage protocol, which may seem a bit alien compared to other search engines, is perhaps more Mac-like than the TIL's-- but there's a dark secret lurking just under the candy-coated surface. A quick check at NetCraft reveals that the Knowledge Base is running on (gasp!) Windows 2000. Shades of body snatchers and pod people...

Could it be? Could Apple really be admitting that Win2K is the best server platform when it comes to hosting web front-ends for database-housed information? It was painful enough when Steve moved Apple's main web site from actual Macs to Sun workstations running UNIX. But to publicly embrace Win2K? Say it ain't so! Unfortunately, there's no escaping the truth-- and as for why Apple would willingly place itself squarely in the middle of what may turn out to be a public relations debacle of mammoth proportions, John Phelps (the forum leader of Apple Support Discussions) had this to say: "The Mac OS X version of the software is not available yet; once it is, the Knowledge Base will be running on that." Oh, so Apple doesn't actually like Win2K-- they just have to use it because the software they need to use isn't available for any other operating systems. We feel much better now.

Fear not, though, staunch advocates of the Macintosh Way; there will always be positive examples to raise your spirits. When Mac OS X ships and more native software starts to appear, Windows 2000 might find itself facing some serious non-Linux competition. In the meantime, there are still several web sites out there running on Macs-- MacInTouch, for one, and even the channel you're watching now. Granted, AtAT's traffic is the teeniest fraction of what apple.com has to handle every day, but when the show premiered nearly three years ago, we made a promise that it'd always be broadcast from Macs, and that's still in effect to this day. The Mac Web Poster Children, that's us...

Speaking of Mac OS X (and that's about the best segue you're going to pry out of us for a while), we're only a week away from September-- that magical month which Steve Jobs himself declared would finally bring us the long-awaited Mac OS X public beta. Of course, last January he also told us we'd be getting the final version this summer, so there's a limit to how seriously once can take these things. But given that it's been almost four years since Apple bought NeXT and announced that the replacement for the ill-fated Copland project would be based on the NeXTSTEP operating system, well, heck-- we figure it can't be much longer now, right? So September it is.

But if MacUser UK is correct, don't look for the beta to be announced with much fanfare. Steve wouldn't toss copies of it to a screaming Seybold audience (even if it were going to be done in time for next week's keynote, which we doubt), nor will it grace the stage at next month's Apple Expo in Europe. In addition, Apple wouldn't stage a special media circus just to roll out a pre-release copy of anything. Reportedly the release of the beta will be a "low-key" affair in late September, probably consisting of little more than a quiet press release that says "here it is, come and get it if you feel like working for us for free."

Now, for those of you who disagree with Apple's low-key approach to the public beta and think pre-1.0 releases of software should be high-profile, media-blitz events, we have just one thing to say: Netscape 6.0 Preview Release 1. While the final version of Netscape 6 may in fact turn out to be solid, stable, fast, and laden with useful features, the incomplete, resource-hogging, and crash-prone preview release (introduced amid much media hoopla) may well have been the best advertising the competition could have ever imagined. Yes, we expect Apple's public beta to be much more finished than the Netscape disaster, but the fact is, it's a beta. It's not done yet. When it appears, it will have warts. It may even contain bugs bigger than anything the state of Texas has yet been able to produce, entomologically speaking. So we have to agree with Apple on this one: issue the beta quietly so only the hardcore Mac geeks will volunteer as guinea pigs, keep the press out of it as much as possible, use the beta feedback to craft the most amazing operating system ever to grace a hard drive, release Mac OS X 1.0, and then call the press and push, push, push.

Oh, there's one more piece of potential bad news for the less-patient viewers out there. In January Steve promised the 1.0 release of Mac OS X "this summer." In May he amended that to "January." Most recently, at last month's Expo, he pushed it off still further, predicting a "first quarter" release next year. Well, the Apple source quoted in MacUser's article concurs, stating that Mac OS X isn't likely to ship until March. But hey, get off that ledge-- two months goes awfully quickly these days, and you'll still have the beta to play with.

Here's a quickie that's sure to wriggle its way into your most Kafkaesque nightmares: Microsoft is now making chips, and we're not talking about a buyout of Frito Lay. Although the way things are going, we wouldn't be surprised to hear about such a merger soon, with the Redmond Giant looking to corner the snack food market in an attempt to gain a better stranglehold on the developer community by controlling its primary food supply. Microsoft Doritos 2001... The horror... The horror... Uh, wait. What were we talking about again?

Oh yeah, the Microsoft chips. No, when we say chips, we're talking processors. Pretty much the only thing keeping the Wintel juggernaut in check (at least a little) is the fact that it was two virtual monopolies, not one. Microsoft had the operating system monopoly (argue if you like, but hey, that's how the judge ruled) and Intel had the processor market sewn up. But despite working together closely to maintain the hegemony, Microsoft and Intel didn't much like each other, if the stories can be believed, and that friction has always kept things a little on edge. Add to that the fact that these days Intel is feeling the heat from AMD, which we're sure would make any chip king a little cranky, and you've got an Intel who's not in the mood for any more shenanigans.

And that's the scenario into which Microsoft has injected this extra little kick of drama: according to CNNfn, those software geeks in Redmond are in fact diversifying their interests and branching further out into the hardware arena-- as in, beyond mice and joysticks. Reportedly Microsoft is trying to cobble together a new processor called "Solo2" to use in future WebTV devices, rather than relying on Intel to scrape something up. Microsoft feels this won't strain its relationship with Intel in the least-- though we personally have our doubts. And don't we recall some similar ugliness a few years back when Microsoft smacked Intel down for working on its own software? Hmmm. Sounds like this could get interesting.

Say, we're fully aware that Microsoft is much, much bigger than Apple-- but Microsoft's expansion into the chip field has us wondering how tough it would be for Apple to start designing and producing its own PowerPC chips instead of having to rely on Motorola and IBM. It's just a thought, but we can't deny that the idea of a future free of Motorola delays makes us weep with delight.