A cryptic message materialized on a Dalai Lama "Think Different" billboard yesterday; someone-- or something-- changed the ad's slogan to "Think disillusioned." In addition, the Apple logo had been transformed into a "creepy grinning skull." A ZDNet article describes the puzzling alteration.

Since nobody's come forward to claim responsibility for the vandalism, we can only speculate as to the identity of the artist and his/her/their intentions. The simple and obvious explanation is that some group of anti-Mac bigots with far too much time on their hands went to an awful lot of trouble to deliver a relatively slick (yet strangely ambiguous) message to the rest of Silicon Valley. Another possibility is that it's meant as a protest of Apple's recent decision to drop the Dalai Lama's image from its Think Different ads in Hong Kong, fearing reprisal from the Chinese government. (As an aside, we find it a startling coincidence that, as we write this, Agatha and Johnny Bluejeans are hawking the Dalai Lama Dolly on Comedy Central's Viva Variety. What's up with that?)

We at AtAT eschew both of these possibilities, however, in favor of the most likely explanation: extraterrestrial beings who have been monitoring the technological progress of our society are disillusioned by the majority's use of a clearly inferior computing platform when a superior alternative is readily available. The replacement of the Apple logo with the skull represents a not-so-subtle warning to all Windows users of a dismal and hopeless computing future-- a future that is, however, still avoidable. (Rod? Rod Serling? Are you there?)

Every time we resolve ourselves to the fact that Microsoft is an unstoppable juggernaut, something happens that reintroduces that teeniest little bit of doubt. You've certainly heard by now that the Department of Justice, who has accomplished relatively little in its ongoing "Redmond Justice" case, is considering filing a new lawsuit targeting anticompetitive practices regarding Windows 98. You may also have heard that, disappointed with the soft line the DoJ is taking, the attorneys general of eleven states are planning their own antitrust action against Microsoft. What you may not have heard is that those attorneys general and the DoJ have been considering tag-teaming Gates & Co. by filing separated but coordinated suits as early as next week. A Reuters article considers the possibility.

Now, this scenario is still apparently just at the discussion stage, but it's a fascinating possibility. Microsoft's currently juggling over a hundred separate and distinct lawsuits, but the prospect of two such heavy-hitting and potentially nightmarish suits being filed cooperatively might actually give their lawyers a serious workout. We're curious to see just how much legal trouble a company even as huge and successful as Microsoft is can take before it just becomes too much. (Does anyone know how many lawyers Microsoft retains? Or how much they spend a year on legal counsel?)

By the way, the article also notes that the eleven states considering action against Microsoft are now twelve-- West Virginia has signed on, as well. Speaking purely in percentage of states, that means that a full 25% of the continental United States thinks Microsoft is competing unfairly. How high a percentage is necessary for Congress to declare war? ;-)

My oh my, the "legitimate" press has glommed onto the story of how Disney is discriminating against Mac users by allowing only Windows 95 users to access their "Disney Daily Blast" site. The New York Times apparently found the story noteworthy, once they found out that Mac users are hacking their browsers to make Disney's servers think those Macs are really Windows machines. As long as the server thinks it's connected to a Windows box instead of a Mac, most of the site works flawlessly. (We doubt the Times would be interested without the "hacking the browser" angle, but hey, we'll take what we can get.)

Disney's response to this demonstration that the "No Macs" restriction was clearly not primarily a technical decision was simply to state that they are working on Mac support (which they've been saying for a year), and until the whole site works well on the Mac platform, they'd rather not charge Mac users to access the site. Personally, we at AtAT think that's a pretty flimsy justification. Especially since Disney uses plenty of Macs in the production of the Disney Blast site. Why not offer Mac users a discounted rate based on the 10% of the site that's not accessible, instead of arbitrarily blocking all access by the platform? After all, AOL charged Mac users the same as Windows users even when Windows users had access to lots more content, like online games and such.

If you want to try this yourself, detailed instructions and screenshots are available at the "Disney Blasted" site. We've heard, however, that the Disney Blast isn't all it's cracked up to be; just another overrated pay site for children. Still, it's interesting to note that rather than simply restrict Mac access to the 90% of the site that works on Macs, Disney instead decided to block Mac users entirely. That hardly seems fair, now, does it?