3 ms·
When the Cube came out I was thinking it would be what the Mac mini became. Instead it was a shitty PowerMac that cost almost as much as a PowerMac. If you wan
by giantrobot 6y ago
When the Cube came out I was thinking it would be what the Mac mini became. Instead it was a shitty PowerMac that cost almost as much as a PowerMac.
If you wanted to use it for anything but trivial stuff you really just wanted a PowerMac. If your needs were trivial you were much better off with an iMac. Apple's 2x2 product matrix worked pretty well and the Cube didn't fit in it at all.
It was a weird expensive mutant.
- timw4mail 6y agoKind of like the Twentieth Anniversary Mac before it in terms of having more style than substance.
- dhosek 6y agoMaybe, but I remember thinking how cool it would be to have one of those. They actually sent someone to your home/office to set it up for you as part of the purchase experience!
- giantrobot 6y agoThe TAM was way more style over substance than the Cube. The Cube did have some utility in that it was virtually silent. I know a lot of audio people that liked them for this reason. The TAM was a $10,000 pure luxury item. That being said I would love to add a TAM to my vintage Mac collection.
- wmeredith 6y agoI think that was the point of both of those devices. Say what you want about these machines, but them and the trash can Mac Pro were all beautiful. you can always get horsepower from a rack mount running Linux.
- dhosek 6y agoThe 2000 PowerMac G4 Tower actually started at $200 less than the Cube.
- masswerk 6y agoTh G4 Cube wasn't weaker than the standard G4 and stood to all the tasks. (It even had faster graphics, but this became a bit of a problem, when the dedicated OpenGL drivers were discontinued and eventually stripped from further OS releases, which showed at least in OS X.) It missed the expandability, but provided a smaller package, low noise and really good sound in exchange. However, you were stuck with the dedicated displays.