4 ms·

> However, when building new technology Apple often unfortunately neglected their own design history. One might argue that good designers and designs move on a

by 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.

by Udo 12y ago

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.