As much as we like to see things shaken up every once in a while, it's nice to know that some things never change. There are three inevitabilities in this life: death, taxes, and other PC manufacturers ripping off Apple's innovations. (There's also Tater Tots, but we'll omit those for the sake of staying on topic.) Remember the recent trend in "fashion-forward" PC design? It was pretty frightening to see all these PC makers take one look at the iMac's eye-catching colors and slick design-- and then decide that the key to selling computers to the consumer market is goofy shapes and bright colors. Never mind that the iMac represents the culmination of years of design work and projects an overall vibe of "come work with me, play with me-- I won't hurt you and it'll be fun." Apple understands that when the whole computer-- hardware, software, and enclosure-- works together, you have a winner. Inviting and graceful looks naturally flow from good design. Whereas some of the copycats seem to think that a blue Aztec pyramid is the epitome of a well-designed computer.

Anyway, what brought all this up is the recent Second Wave of iMac-inspired computers. Faithful viewer Shane Burgess noted a New York Times article on new systems from Gateway and Packard Bell, which, like the iMac, strive for a reduction of clutter, a small footprint, and a simplified all-in-one design. In addition, both new offerings are integrating a flat-screen LCD display instead of a tradition CRT monitor-- which is being touted as a big innovation over the iMac's design. Uh, Twentieth Anniversary Macintosh, anybody? Also, the author neglects to mention that the iMac is a consumer system with a $1200 price point, as opposed to these flat-screen all-in-ones that cost $2000-$2500. When an all-in-one with an LCD screen is available for $1200, we'll talk. And anyway, if they're focusing on design, it's kind of rash to judge based entirely on small photographs on the web (such as those in this MacWEEK article), but these new PCs just don't seem very inspiring. They seem a little, well, blah. Style isn't everyone's priority, of course, but we think they could have made a bit more effort-- Apple's (mostly) all-in-one LCD Mac came out two years ago, and it still looks better than these. (And it had a PCI slot-- we can't tell if the PCs do or not.)

What's most interesting to us is that when others poach an Apple innovation, they often take the gist but not the details. Some PC manufacturers cranked out the same ugly, ill-designed towers as they always have, but offered translucent blue bezels to affix to the exterior-- yielding a blue ugly, ill-designed tower. Now that's progress, baby! Are we the only ones that see a parallel to Microsoft's poaching of the Mac OS's graphical interface and desktop metaphor for Windows, while ignoring the minute attention to detail, ease of use, and overall consistency of interface that made the Mac OS worth ripping off in the first place?