8 ms·

A facelift for the Macintosh

82 points by donohoe 12y ago

zmonkeyz 12y ago
I like that design. :)
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
LimitedTime 12y ago
I miss the sunflower design.
Udo 12y ago
> However, when building new technology Apple often unfortunately neglected their own design history. One might argue that good designers and designs move on as they co-evolve. This "new" design is a nice piece of borderline-functional retro chique, but apart from being thin it hardly qualifies as futuristic or practical from our perspective today. As components shrink, people expect the display to become the only visible component of the computer - and Apple is clearly on that path. I would consider it the right path from a usability as well as a design perspective.
- davekeck 12y ago
  > people expect the display to become the only visible component of the computer ... from a usability as well as a design perspective I'm not sure putting the ports on the rear of the e.g. iMac improves usability. It certainly looks nicer, but I wouldn't consider the required neck acrobatics to plug in a thumb drive a usability improvement. (But I guess it makes sense in the long-term with everything going wireless.)
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    Simply hook up a short cable and let it dangle from the rear.
    - FireBeyond 12y ago
      Although arguably overpriced, the Bluelounge Jimi (http://www.amazon.com/Bluelounge-Jimi-Extension-Unibody-JM-USB-01/dp/B00JU56IB6/ref=sr_1_2 http://www.amazon.com/Bluelounge-Jimi-Extension-Unibody-JM-U...) does a good job of making this workable.
    - SwellJoe 12y ago
      What? How is that more aesthetically pleasing or more functional than simply putting the ports where you can reach them easily?
      - derefr 12y ago
        There are basically four kinds of devices: 1. interaction peripherals where Bluetooth+batteries is workable (keyboards, mice) 2. interaction peripherals where Bluetooth+an external power cable is workable (speakers) 3. low-power data peripherals (CF cards, flash drives) where low-speed USB is acceptable 4. high-speed data peripherals and controllers (RAID storage, discrete GPUs, etc.) that effectively need a PCIe channel 1 and 2 are wireless, obviously. 4 doesn't get reconfigured much, so it makes sense that Thunderbolt and related "extension" ports are on the back of the device. (They were previously inside the device, after all.) 3 is the main problem, then, that currently suggests accessibility of ports: the small, transportable, label-able data-containing devices that descend from floppy disks. But why not think of alternative solutions, if "lightweight" data storage devices are the only constraint? One design I always thought fondly of was having small magnetic-backed data-storage "pucks" with no plugs as such, and making the non-screen part of the computer (e.g. the front-bottom panel area of an iMac) a magnetic attach-point for them. You would literally "mount" the your drives onto the computer. (Presumably it would inductively power them while they're there, too.) This wouldn't be a very fast storage device class compared to something using actual wires, but it wouldn't need to be; fast storage is what Thunderbolt et al are for. It'd likely also have other uses: for example, magnetically attaching your ID card (which is also a smart card) to a corporate computer to cause it to log in—and also to indicate to anyone else walking by that the computer is in use.
tommoor 12y ago
This looks like it wouldn't stand up to me? There would have to be something pretty weighty in that bottom portion...
- eidyia 12y ago
  i see broken screeeens
Springtime 12y ago
Regardless of its practicality the design made me smile.
simplexion 12y ago
But can I play Bolo?
- slowmovintarget 12y ago
  Or Crystal Quest...
- joshdance 12y ago
  Bolo! Many an afternoon was spent in the computer science lab that had a bunch of Macs hooked up, playing Bolo.
Hilyin 12y ago
Yeah, who wants widescreen anyway? ;)
- donatj 12y ago
  Widescreen has never been a very good layout for anything other than multimedia.
  - kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
    It's good for side by side docs/code as a space saving alternative for a multi-monitor setup.
  - ferrari8608 12y ago
    Most people use their PC for multimedia, among other things of course.
rahulgr8888 12y ago
The design seems good though a little unnecessary. There's a lot of extra unused space on the screen which is also increasing its weight. Now if the screen's triangular, that'd be awesome.
zbowling 12y ago
The design is a bit tacky and has too many useless elements. The extra long thing next to where the SD card goes into. Why is there a slit there? Just to remind you of the old Apple II? It's not needed and Apple would never do that. That Apple logo on the front is nothing Apple would do. Lower left? nah. Apple would put one Apple logo on it. On the back. Maybe even none at all (look at the Mac Pro). The headphone jack seems perfect to pull the thing down right on it's screen. The blue glow on the back? really? Apple designs are about removing the bezel and letting the computer disappear and let the screen come out. This thing is like 60%-70% computer and 35% screen. This isn't a "facelift", it's a mock up of a design regression. This would never be something out of Cupertino.
- wodenokoto 12y ago
  > That Apple logo on the front is nothing Apple would do. Lower left? nah. If you look at the actual apple computer standing next to the mock-up, you'll see the nothing-Apple-would-do-lower-left logo. According to his biography, Steve Jobs added a handle to the original iMacs, not because he wanted people to carry them around, but because it made it less threatening to people who aren't used to computers. So adding things is part of Apple's design history. Anyway, the rest of the slit is a speaker, so while it is obviously there as a throw-back (the whole design is a throwback) it does serve some purpose.
kondro 12y ago
The worst part of this design is now Apple can never release it.
- onion2k 12y ago
  The designer has probably infringed Apple's design patents making this. The designer couldn't do anything if Apple released an identical product because they'd countersue him and win.

82 points by donohoe 12y ago

zmonkeyz 12y ago

I like that design. :)

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

LimitedTime 12y ago

I miss the sunflower design.

Udo 12y ago

> However, when building new technology Apple often unfortunately neglected their own design history. One might argue that good designers and designs move on as they co-evolve. This "new" design is a nice piece of borderline-functional retro chique, but apart from being thin it hardly qualifies as futuristic or practical from our perspective today. As components shrink, people expect the display to become the only visible component of the computer - and Apple is clearly on that path. I would consider it the right path from a usability as well as a design perspective.

davekeck 12y ago
> people expect the display to become the only visible component of the computer ... from a usability as well as a design perspective I'm not sure putting the ports on the rear of the e.g. iMac improves usability. It certainly looks nicer, but I wouldn't consider the required neck acrobatics to plug in a thumb drive a usability improvement. (But I guess it makes sense in the long-term with everything going wireless.)
- jacquesm 12y ago
  Simply hook up a short cable and let it dangle from the rear.
  - FireBeyond 12y ago
    Although arguably overpriced, the Bluelounge Jimi (http://www.amazon.com/Bluelounge-Jimi-Extension-Unibody-JM-USB-01/dp/B00JU56IB6/ref=sr_1_2 http://www.amazon.com/Bluelounge-Jimi-Extension-Unibody-JM-U...) does a good job of making this workable.
  - SwellJoe 12y ago
    What? How is that more aesthetically pleasing or more functional than simply putting the ports where you can reach them easily?
    - derefr 12y ago
      There are basically four kinds of devices: 1. interaction peripherals where Bluetooth+batteries is workable (keyboards, mice) 2. interaction peripherals where Bluetooth+an external power cable is workable (speakers) 3. low-power data peripherals (CF cards, flash drives) where low-speed USB is acceptable 4. high-speed data peripherals and controllers (RAID storage, discrete GPUs, etc.) that effectively need a PCIe channel 1 and 2 are wireless, obviously. 4 doesn't get reconfigured much, so it makes sense that Thunderbolt and related "extension" ports are on the back of the device. (They were previously inside the device, after all.) 3 is the main problem, then, that currently suggests accessibility of ports: the small, transportable, label-able data-containing devices that descend from floppy disks. But why not think of alternative solutions, if "lightweight" data storage devices are the only constraint? One design I always thought fondly of was having small magnetic-backed data-storage "pucks" with no plugs as such, and making the non-screen part of the computer (e.g. the front-bottom panel area of an iMac) a magnetic attach-point for them. You would literally "mount" the your drives onto the computer. (Presumably it would inductively power them while they're there, too.) This wouldn't be a very fast storage device class compared to something using actual wires, but it wouldn't need to be; fast storage is what Thunderbolt et al are for. It'd likely also have other uses: for example, magnetically attaching your ID card (which is also a smart card) to a corporate computer to cause it to log in—and also to indicate to anyone else walking by that the computer is in use.

tommoor 12y ago

This looks like it wouldn't stand up to me? There would have to be something pretty weighty in that bottom portion...

eidyia 12y ago
i see broken screeeens

Springtime 12y ago

Regardless of its practicality the design made me smile.

simplexion 12y ago

But can I play Bolo?

slowmovintarget 12y ago
Or Crystal Quest...
joshdance 12y ago
Bolo! Many an afternoon was spent in the computer science lab that had a bunch of Macs hooked up, playing Bolo.

Hilyin 12y ago

Yeah, who wants widescreen anyway? ;)

donatj 12y ago
Widescreen has never been a very good layout for anything other than multimedia.
- kevin_thibedeau 12y ago
  It's good for side by side docs/code as a space saving alternative for a multi-monitor setup.
- ferrari8608 12y ago
  Most people use their PC for multimedia, among other things of course.

rahulgr8888 12y ago

The design seems good though a little unnecessary. There's a lot of extra unused space on the screen which is also increasing its weight. Now if the screen's triangular, that'd be awesome.

zbowling 12y ago

The design is a bit tacky and has too many useless elements. The extra long thing next to where the SD card goes into. Why is there a slit there? Just to remind you of the old Apple II? It's not needed and Apple would never do that. That Apple logo on the front is nothing Apple would do. Lower left? nah. Apple would put one Apple logo on it. On the back. Maybe even none at all (look at the Mac Pro). The headphone jack seems perfect to pull the thing down right on it's screen. The blue glow on the back? really? Apple designs are about removing the bezel and letting the computer disappear and let the screen come out. This thing is like 60%-70% computer and 35% screen. This isn't a "facelift", it's a mock up of a design regression. This would never be something out of Cupertino.

wodenokoto 12y ago
> That Apple logo on the front is nothing Apple would do. Lower left? nah. If you look at the actual apple computer standing next to the mock-up, you'll see the nothing-Apple-would-do-lower-left logo. According to his biography, Steve Jobs added a handle to the original iMacs, not because he wanted people to carry them around, but because it made it less threatening to people who aren't used to computers. So adding things is part of Apple's design history. Anyway, the rest of the slit is a speaker, so while it is obviously there as a throw-back (the whole design is a throwback) it does serve some purpose.

kondro 12y ago

The worst part of this design is now Apple can never release it.

onion2k 12y ago
The designer has probably infringed Apple's design patents making this. The designer couldn't do anything if Apple released an identical product because they'd countersue him and win.