[Note: this scene's first paragraph (well, the first one after this one, anyway) was sponsored in part by the Society for the Eradication of Counterdramatic Punctuation, which seeks to eliminate any and all use of the period, also known in some English-speaking parts of the world as the "full stop." Please do no be alarmed. Normal punctuation resumes in Paragraph 2. Thank you for your understanding in this matter.]

Hey! The wiener dog made out of a banana on our wall says it's March! So where the heck are those speed-bumped Power Macs the rumor mill's been expecting in varying degrees ever since the beginning of the year? Is it possible that Apple really doesn't plan to ship them before the company's Australian Power Mac trade-up promo ends on the 26th? And more to the point, where are those G5-flavored Xserves which Apple promised would be available in February? There's no excuse for this sort of slackitude! GEORGE IS GETTING UPSET!!

Well, here's the thing about the Power Macs: since Apple has never formally announced any sort of update to the product line (except for an increase to 3 GHz sometime this summer), it's actually sort of tough to get all indignant with Apple for being "late," but hey, that never stopped us from trying. Besides, at this rate, by the time Apple finally ships a 2.5 GHz Power Mac G5, everyone'll just wait six weeks and buy the imminent 3 GHz model instead. (So you see, we whine out of love.) If you're looking for answers, we haven't got any, but AppleInsider figures that new Power Macs now won't surface until the "end of March, at the earliest," due possibly to problems getting hold of enough Radeon 9x00XT graphics cards from ATI. Mac Rumors, on the other hand, cites an "unverified source" claiming that the delay is actually related to "difficulties with cooling in the faster machines." Take your pick.

As for the Xserve, well, that's even scarier; despite Apple's original claim that G5-equipped Xserves would be "available in February," the Apple Store currently quotes a lead time of "5-7 weeks" on new Xserve G5 orders-- and is, perhaps tellingly, still selling G4-based models which ship in a mere "3-5 business days." AppleInsider reports that early orders of the G5-based servers were originally slated to ship early last month but recently slid to the end of March, and posits that "insufficient stockpiles of the new 90-nanometer G5 processor" are to blame. (Oh, so Motorola's making them now? Who knew?)

Now, amid all these fine theories, allow us to inject one more, which may be far too obvious to mention, but what the heck-- we aren't paid for subtlety (although we are entertaining bids). Remember when most shipments of the original Power Mac G5 were delayed for weeks and weeks, and it came to light that it was because all of the initial G5s had been hijacked to fill educational orders first? No, it wasn't fair, but it did allow Virginia Tech to build its 1,100-Power Mac cluster in time to qualify as the third-fastest supercomputer in existence. And really, wasn't that worth waiting an extra month?

Well, we're sure you recall that the school recently announced its plan to replace all 1,100 Power Macs with G5-based Xserves, which are far better suited for the task of sitting in a rack somewhere chewing on numbers all day. Granted, this time around Virginia Tech isn't facing any deadlines, but given how much business the school has brought Apple both directly and indirectly, plus the sheer amount of street cred the Mac gained by forming the basis for one of the world's fastest and yet cheapest supercomputers, we wouldn't be surprised if Apple was rolling out the red carpet and redirecting all Xserves down Hokie Way until the school has what it needs. And since new Power Mac models would almost certainly use the same new 90-nanometer chips as the Xserves, well, there's your "insufficient stockpiles" right there.

If this theory turns out to be correct, then the Mac community's love-hate relationship with Virginia Tech will likely sink to dangerous new depths. But just remember, folks: you wouldn't hit a guy with glasses, would you?