Apple Cancels its Cube....doesnt even make its first birthday.
- Thread starter JayPatel
- Start date
Apple is giving fruit a bad name! Apples don't spoil as quickly as the cube did.
Why don't they give up and enjoy whatever money they have right now. I wonder if steve jobs owns a pc. lol
Why don't they give up and enjoy whatever money they have right now. I wonder if steve jobs owns a pc. lol
Has anyone ever gone to their local CompUSA killing time and making fun of the employees and the Cube that never stays up and operational without hardlocking within 15-30 minutes?? 
it's a neat design, but overpriced..
damn idiots - why do they charge so much for that crap...if they sold them at PC prices, i'd imagine i'd be using a mac perhaps....
damn idiots - why do they charge so much for that crap...if they sold them at PC prices, i'd imagine i'd be using a mac perhaps....
<< Has anyone ever gone to their local CompUSA killing time and making fun of the employees and the Cube that never stays up and operational without hardlocking within 15-30 minutes??
>>Some of us have better things to do than hangout at Compucrap. If the computer is locking up, it is because the employees are probably peecee users who know hardly anything about Macs.
My friend's cube is up and running 24/7 w/o any lockups.
<< Apple is giving fruit a bad name! Apples don't spoil as quickly as the cube did.
Why don't they give up and enjoy whatever money they have right now. I wonder if steve jobs owns a pc. lol >>
I doubt that Jobs owns a PC. But Gates DOES own a Mac. Hmmmmm, makes you think huh?
<< I doubt that Jobs owns a PC. But Gates DOES own a Mac. Hmmmmm, makes you think huh?
>>Is there anything he DOESNT own
I've heard lots of rumours about Apple stopping production of the Cube. And, yesterday, I saw a 2 or 3 different sites stating the same.
Today I talked to an Apple Marketing guy about this. And he only said he couldn't comment on rumours.
He also told me that Apple is trying to sell the Cube as something with the Power of a PowerMac and the style/design that people loved with the iMac.
I asked him, what he thought was the problem with the Cube. He gave me some comments like:
Not taken seriously because of its size. Too expensive. Not uppgradable in the old fashioned way(ie internal PCI/SCSI).
I then asked him what Apple was going to do about it. He couldn't answer that either.
I asked him again, will Apple stop developing on the Cube, or stop production of it? He said he couldn't answer rumours again
Today I talked to an Apple Marketing guy about this. And he only said he couldn't comment on rumours.
He also told me that Apple is trying to sell the Cube as something with the Power of a PowerMac and the style/design that people loved with the iMac.
I asked him, what he thought was the problem with the Cube. He gave me some comments like:
Not taken seriously because of its size. Too expensive. Not uppgradable in the old fashioned way(ie internal PCI/SCSI).
I then asked him what Apple was going to do about it. He couldn't answer that either.
I asked him again, will Apple stop developing on the Cube, or stop production of it? He said he couldn't answer rumours again
I thought the Cube was an awesome design - very cutting edge - it was however over priced and not easily upgradeable. But then again, I don't know too many Mac users who go inside their boxes to upgrade anyway (don't know that many Mac users anyway), so maybe that doesn't matter. I mean, look at the sale of Imacs; and those aren't very easily upgraded either. Well, I think there s/b a place for it in the computer hall of fame just for the way it was cooled (no fans).
Sigh, another good design idea botched by high prices and slow processors.
Apple needs to seriously think about ditching Motorola and moving to an x86 processor company like AMD or (heaven forbid) Intel to get their CPUs. The G4 chips (and thus G4 computers) are so expensive because Motorola doesn't make very many of them. And because Motorola doesn't make very many of them, it's not a very high priority for them. That leads to slow chips that are far too expensive. If Apple wanted to go to an x86 manufacturer like AMD or Intel, they would get faster chips for much less $$$. That would help to bring down the overall cost of Apple's computers since most of their other equipment is industry standard (PC133, IDE, etc.).
And Apple did compile an earlier version of MacOS X for x86 processors.
Nick
Apple needs to seriously think about ditching Motorola and moving to an x86 processor company like AMD or (heaven forbid) Intel to get their CPUs. The G4 chips (and thus G4 computers) are so expensive because Motorola doesn't make very many of them. And because Motorola doesn't make very many of them, it's not a very high priority for them. That leads to slow chips that are far too expensive. If Apple wanted to go to an x86 manufacturer like AMD or Intel, they would get faster chips for much less $$$. That would help to bring down the overall cost of Apple's computers since most of their other equipment is industry standard (PC133, IDE, etc.).
And Apple did compile an earlier version of MacOS X for x86 processors.
Nick
It's a nice lookin' box...if it didn't cost a fortune I would have bought it and put Linux on it...that woulda been sweet...
*nods* to wyvern.
I agree the cube was a great design. One computer company can't please EVERYONE, yanno.
You all realize that the cube, like the imacs, have only PASSIVE cooling? If you've ever worked on a computer that made NO sound, you know this is a pleasant surprise.
I agree the cube was a great design. One computer company can't please EVERYONE, yanno.
You all realize that the cube, like the imacs, have only PASSIVE cooling? If you've ever worked on a computer that made NO sound, you know this is a pleasant surprise.
It's not a real computer if it doesn't put out at least 40dB!!
How else would you know if the thing's running?
Nick
How else would you know if the thing's running?
Nick
I wonder if Intel had decided back in 1977 to design the x86 instruction set with more "artistry" whether we'd all be using Motorola processors today... The 8086 wasn't pretty, but it beat the "more beautiful" 68000 to market by a few months, and that was all Intel needed.
Time and time again, despite many attempts to prove otherwise, people buy computers as tools to accomplish jobs in the easiest fashion possible. Overpriced products lose, as do those whose design goals don't match those of the consumer.
Once the media glitz and glamour wears off, fashionable products typically have trouble living on their merits.
Let the market determine whether I'm right or wrong.
Time and time again, despite many attempts to prove otherwise, people buy computers as tools to accomplish jobs in the easiest fashion possible. Overpriced products lose, as do those whose design goals don't match those of the consumer.
Once the media glitz and glamour wears off, fashionable products typically have trouble living on their merits.
Let the market determine whether I'm right or wrong.
Yeah, cool looking computers sounds like a good idea. And,
in fact, it worked with the iMac. But that appears to have
been a singular phenomenon. Subsequent attempts to sell "cool"
looking computers with standard innards have failed by both
Apple and by PC makers such as Compaq (the iPaq desktops)
and HP (e-Vectra).
Bottom line: People like the way they look, but they won't pay
for that...And they want the cool apparance to be wrapped around
a computer that offers as much functionality and expandability.
Kwad
in fact, it worked with the iMac. But that appears to have
been a singular phenomenon. Subsequent attempts to sell "cool"
looking computers with standard innards have failed by both
Apple and by PC makers such as Compaq (the iPaq desktops)
and HP (e-Vectra).
Bottom line: People like the way they look, but they won't pay
for that...And they want the cool apparance to be wrapped around
a computer that offers as much functionality and expandability.
Kwad
<< Yeah, cool looking computers sounds like a good idea. And,
in fact, it worked with the iMac. But that appears to have
been a singular phenomenon. Subsequent attempts to sell "cool"
looking computers with standard innards have failed by both
Apple and by PC makers such as Compaq (the iPaq desktops)
and HP (e-Vectra).
Bottom line: People like the way they look, but they won't pay
for that...And they want the cool apparance to be wrapped around
a computer that offers as much functionality and expandability.
Kwad >>
First of all, your so called cool looking computers are not cool looking at all, still hideous beige cadavir boxes. I think the price was not so much of an issue, because they dropped the price over 300 on the Cube shortly after its release. On of the bigger problems, you had to buy speakers & monitor sepratly. Also, with macs, you dont really pay that much more compared to a dell, with a monitor the Cube came to about $1800, not that bad acually. sure you could build a 1.4 athlon for less, but that computer was certinetly not a competitor for the Cube. I own a cube, it is a wonderful computer for many things. Nothing is much cooler than watching a DVD on it , on my IKEA furniture all around, eating sorbet
.The iPaq and e-vectra are beige? Oh, OK. I guess. Must be thinking
of a different iPaq and e-vectra.
Kwad
of a different iPaq and e-vectra.
Kwad
Oh good grief Flat, do we have to go through this again?!
First of all, your so called cool looking computers are not cool looking at all, still hideous beige cadavir boxes.
The Compaq iPaq is not a beige "cadavir" (I think you mean cadaver) box. It's not even beige. Go here to see what one looks like. I'm not defending the machine -- I personally wouldn't want to own one -- but I'm just pointing out the error in your statement.
I think the price was not so much of an issue, because they dropped the price over 300 on the Cube shortly after its release.
Subtract $300 from way overpriced and you still have overpriced. Just because they dropped the price a couple months after it came out doesn't mean it still wasn't too expensive. Prices drop on computing equipment all the time; if Apple hadn't dropped its prices the machines would have been getting more and more overpriced over time as other manufacturers cut their prices.
On of the bigger problems, you had to buy speakers & monitor sepratly
You're refuting your own point (with bad spelling too). Buying speakers and a monitor separately only adds tothe fact that the Cube was overpriced.
Also, with macs, you dont really pay that much more compared to a dell, with a monitor the Cube came to about $1800, not that bad acually.
WTH?! Not that bad?! I just built a 1.2GHz. PC with a Kyro II graphics card, 256MB of DDR, a nice DVD-ROM drive, a Santa Cruz sound card, a 40GB hard drive, and 2 NICs. This machine would run circles around the Cube. Granted, it may not have fashion sense, but neither do I.
Even buying a Dell, you could get a kick-butt 1.6GHz. P4 system that would also run circles around the Cube for less money. And who says you have to buy a Dell? My computer is just as (if not more) stable and reliable, and includes quality components, just like Dells.
sure you could build a 1.4 athlon for less, but that computer was certinetly not a competitor for the Cube.
Man, you're making this too easy. Of course you can build a 1.4GHz. Athlon system for less. And why is an Athlon 1.4GHz. not a competitor for the Cube? Probably because the Athlon is so far ahead of it it's not even funny!!
I own a cube, it is a wonderful computer for many things.
And what would these things be . . . ???
Nothing is much cooler than watching a DVD on it , on my IKEA furniture all around, eating sorbet .
Well, to each his own I guess.
Nick
First of all, your so called cool looking computers are not cool looking at all, still hideous beige cadavir boxes.
The Compaq iPaq is not a beige "cadavir" (I think you mean cadaver) box. It's not even beige. Go here to see what one looks like. I'm not defending the machine -- I personally wouldn't want to own one -- but I'm just pointing out the error in your statement.
I think the price was not so much of an issue, because they dropped the price over 300 on the Cube shortly after its release.
Subtract $300 from way overpriced and you still have overpriced. Just because they dropped the price a couple months after it came out doesn't mean it still wasn't too expensive. Prices drop on computing equipment all the time; if Apple hadn't dropped its prices the machines would have been getting more and more overpriced over time as other manufacturers cut their prices.
On of the bigger problems, you had to buy speakers & monitor sepratly
You're refuting your own point (with bad spelling too). Buying speakers and a monitor separately only adds tothe fact that the Cube was overpriced.
Also, with macs, you dont really pay that much more compared to a dell, with a monitor the Cube came to about $1800, not that bad acually.
WTH?! Not that bad?! I just built a 1.2GHz. PC with a Kyro II graphics card, 256MB of DDR, a nice DVD-ROM drive, a Santa Cruz sound card, a 40GB hard drive, and 2 NICs. This machine would run circles around the Cube. Granted, it may not have fashion sense, but neither do I.
Even buying a Dell, you could get a kick-butt 1.6GHz. P4 system that would also run circles around the Cube for less money. And who says you have to buy a Dell? My computer is just as (if not more) stable and reliable, and includes quality components, just like Dells.
sure you could build a 1.4 athlon for less, but that computer was certinetly not a competitor for the Cube.
Man, you're making this too easy. Of course you can build a 1.4GHz. Athlon system for less. And why is an Athlon 1.4GHz. not a competitor for the Cube? Probably because the Athlon is so far ahead of it it's not even funny!!
I own a cube, it is a wonderful computer for many things.
And what would these things be . . . ???
Nothing is much cooler than watching a DVD on it , on my IKEA furniture all around, eating sorbet .
Well, to each his own I guess.
Nick
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter