Well, we've just seen CNN NewsStand's little "Stock of the Week" segment on Apple, and for the most part, it was relatively positive and accurate. They pointed out that Apple's stock has gone from under $13 to over $38 since last December, and they credited Steve Jobs with infusing the company with the energy it's used to climb back "from the dead." And though there wasn't a whole lot of substance to the piece overall (and in fact there was almost zero information on Apple's product line or what differentiates it from those of other computer companies), we felt that it was particularly gracious of them to mention that "the videotape on 'NewsStand' is edited on digital machines that use Macintosh at their core."

There were a couple of what we consider to be serious inaccuracies, though. First of all, one of the analysts they talked to claimed that, at $1299, the iMac "is not breaking any new barriers or new ground in the way of price performance compared to traditional Wintel based systems." Er, excuse me? If anyone feels like pointing us towards a 400 MHz Pentium II system, complete with a 75 Hz-refresh rate 1024x768 15-inch monitor, for $1299 or less, please do-- we'd love to see it. That doesn't even take into account any additional useability edge the Mac OS gets over Windows; remember, the guy said "price performance," not just "price." (Someone hasn't done his homework.) And secondly, CNN claims that the iMac "is still incompatible with those" Wintel PC's, failing to note that the G3 is so freaking fast it can run PC software at respectable speeds purely in software emulation, if it needs to. Granted, if someone plans to run Windows 100% of the time, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to buy a Mac instead of a PC, but for people who only need to run PC-only software on a casual basis, emulators like VirtualPC are a very pleasant option. Or, at least as pleasant as Windows allows any experience to be...

...On the other hand, the same show included a nice, healthy dose of Lara Croft-- both digital and analog versions-- from the Tomb Raider games, coming to the Mac this holiday season. Footage of Lara automatically redeems any show a certain amount, in our opinion. :)

Wow, we had really thought that the worst of the Great PowerBook Drought of 1998 was over, but apparently we were wrong, wrong, wrong. Despite the fact that they were introduced way back in early May, the highest-end PowerBook G3's are still harder to find than a home shopping channel selling something other than Beanie Babies. Not only have several poor souls who placed their orders for the 14.1-inch, 292 MHz configuration way back on May 5th still not received their goodies, but O'Grady's PowerPage reports that the problem is more widely spread than we ever imagined.

Quick, can anyone tell us the significance of the number 7700? No, it's not some top secret never-released Power Mac that packed a 350 MHz 604e and an on-board Sony Playstation. (At least, as far as we know.) It's the number of backorders that Apple's racked up for its fastest PowerBook. Can you imagine? That's a fairly huge number of units to be behind on, especially since they would fetch about $5600 apiece. That's over $43 million worth of PowerBooks that aren't shipping. Had they shipped on time, Apple's Q3 profit may have been quite a chunk higher than even the fairly impressive $101 million it was.

Even more disturbing, the PowerPage further states that only 2300 units of the 7700 backordered are expected to ship in August. That still leaves 5400 outstanding (or over $30 million in revenue), not even counting any new orders that may add to the pile. Yikes! Here's hoping that these numbers are way, way off... we're not thrilled with the idea that Apple still has so much trouble fulfilling demand. (Though, we suppose it sure beats having a ton of inventory that nobody wants to buy...)

Call us totally nuts, but we've been unable to stop thinking about the iMac's incredible look and feel ever since we first got to use one at the MacWorld Expo. Even if you never turn the thing on, it functions extremely well as a piece of visual and tactile sculpture. It massages the eyes, soothes the cerebral cortex, and yearns to be touched and felt. The interplay of contrasting textures and colors is somehow simultaneously calming and exciting, and even before you ever reach for the power switch, you feel like a kid left alone in a candy store.

Well, today we found out just why that may be. According to an article over at MacAddict, Apple (in a classic example of its legendary attention to detail) actually brought in candy manufacturers to consult on various factors of the iMac's case. Yes, it sounds goofy when you first hear it, but when you mull it over a little, it makes a lot of sense; the colors and textures used in the iMac are remarkably similar to those magical little chunks of colored sugar sitting in the jars down at the corner store. After all, the iMac is the first computer in existence that looks good enough to eat. Or at least to lick.

However, AtAT viewers should please note that the input of candy manufacturers in the creation of the iMac's alternately smooth and frosty translucent case does not imply that said case is edible in any way whatsoever. In point of fact, while the iMac may look like it's carved from a big Jolly Rancher, it's actually constructed of "a polycarbonate composite that is also used to make bulletproof glass." Oooh, now that's gotta be bad for the teeth...