What ever led to the demise of the Cube?

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by iWantAMac, Feb 8, 2003.

  1. iWantAMac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    AUS
    #1
    Why did Apple stop manufacturing these machines after such a short period of time on the market? Why didn't they extend production and increase processor speeds as they did/would have with their other computers?
    Was it poorly marketed? Lacking quality, or were Apple falling short of demand for the product?
     
  2. rainman::|:| macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #2
    they were truely works of art... part of the MoMA permanant collection... truth be told, there was simply no market for them. Consumers didn't want to spend the extra money, and pros wanted features that only the PowerMac could deliver. It was a niche product, start to finish.

    sad to say...

    it's nice that 3rd party upgrades have gone so far in it, i'm actually finding myself considering getting one of those instead of a new iMac... i honestly can't decide...

    pnw
     
  3. hugemullens macrumors 6502a

    hugemullens

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    Location:
    Michigan
    #3
    The pro users wanted a powermac for upgradabilty and connectivity, the consumer wasnt willing to fork out the money when they could get an imac, so it just never really found a place in the line up. The mac is almost a niche market to begin with, and a niche product in the market just ment that they didnt sell and apple killed them.
     
  4. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #4
    Sales is the killer, the cube was a msterpiece but it lacked value, it came in at around $1799 and it had no moniter. Most users would rather spend a little more and bang you got a powermac with more features and upgradability.

    Thats why the new imac works, its the follow up on the cube, its got the style with the value.
     
  5. barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #5
    Too many newbie mac owners were trying to use it as a toaster and the tech support cost was too much :D
     
  6. JSRockit macrumors 6502a

    JSRockit

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #6
    Plain and simple...the price led to its demise. It would still be around if people weren't so damn practical.
     
  7. DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #7
    Very poor sales vs. high engineering costs.

    Remember when Apple came out with the Cube this was during the time they were used to selling iMac's like candy.
     
  8. Sol macrumors 68000

    Sol

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    Australia
    #8
    Cube over-priced

    I also think that it was the price of Cubes that resulted in poor sales. If it was priced lower than an iMac I am sure that it would have sold well. The iMac got us used to the idea of a computer that does not get upgraded and the Cube was an extension of that idea.
     
  9. JSRockit macrumors 6502a

    JSRockit

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #9
    Re: Cube over-priced

    But now we are seeing that the cube CAN be upgraded. Processors upgrades are available that are double the speed of its original processor. RAM?...not a problem...it accepts 1.5GB. Video card is a bit outdated...but I believe people have figured out how to get that updated too.
     
  10. cubist macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2002
    Location:
    Muncie, Indiana
    #10
    Yes, I'm upgrading my hard drive today, and plan to upgrade the CPU to 1GHz in a couple of weeks. Benchmarks of the 1GHz-upgraded Cube show it to be faster than the 1GHz LCD iMac, despite the Cube's slow 100MHz bus, because of the big L3 cache on the Powerlogix upgrade cards.

    As for the video, the slot is a standard AGP 2X; the main problem is the physical size of most of the newer video cards. The Radeon 9000 and Geforce 4MX, for example, both have a bunch of blank area that makes them too tall to fit. We don't know why the manufacturers make their cards so tall, but the Cube's the only computer that has a height limit. I have a Radeon; many cubers have 2MX or 3MX cards, or Radeon 7500s.

    Upgrading the cube does take time, care and reasonable mechanical skills. But it is basically a G4 tower in a small enclosure. The quality of construction is, IMHO, higher than most computers: the plastic is mainly on the outside; inside, it's nearly all metal. Quite a bit of precision-machined aluminum.
     
  11. JSRockit macrumors 6502a

    JSRockit

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #11
    I like the cube...but it is expensive to buy still and expensive to upgrade...so I just bought a powergbook instead...another classic.
     
  12. jmurnik macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Location:
    NC
    #12
    Just another design flaw by Apple. The case is remarkable, but subject to stress cracks and scratches. I'm on my second case and have another stress crack. Brought me back to when I bought my 5300. As for the cost to buy a used one. Yeah, you're going to have to shell out some bucks. Goes back to price versus demand. Would you buy something you can't upgrade the processor or the video card or buy something that pretty much covers what Apple is still offering today.
     
  13. mymemory macrumors 68020

    mymemory

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Location:
    Miami
    #13
    The scratches!!!

    That was why I gave my Cube back 8 hours later.

    I had the chance to switch my G4 400 for a Cube with a Dual 500, just the fact of having to take so much care of it was enought to ask for my PowerMac back the next morning.

    I actually like the Cube better without the enclosure.:)
     
  14. occam macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2003
    #14
    Cube needed to be faster, best of breed

    I was waiting for Apple go release a 2nd generation cube with state of the (Mac) art graphics, faster CPU, bigger HD. It was a great package at a premium price, but it needed the hardware to make it a keeper for at least a couple years. It was hard to justify the cost without topflight components (even compared to Mac standards, e.g., graphics).

    I would still love a silent no-compromise PowerMac today, and a cube would still be great.
     
  15. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #15
    though it was and still is a great machine...and there are cpu upgrades...they debuted at too high a price compared to the other macs in the lineup

    i hope the cube could come back someday
     
  16. voicegy macrumors 65816

    voicegy

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    Sandy Eggo - MacRumors Member since 1-1-2002
    #16
    hahahaha! Not only a funny post, but you've got the best dang avatar on this board, far as I'm concerned!:p
     
  17. Jimong5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    #17
    I have a Radeon 9000 and its not tall at all. The Mac Edition is only 7 long and is fanless.. I dont see why it wouldnt work in a cube
     
  18. Sedulous macrumors 68000

    Sedulous

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    #18
    I dunno... the cube doesn't sound as powerful as the tower... gotta love that windtunnel roar.

    But seriously, I think the cube is great. I have one and never noticed any scratches or cracks. I did try to put a GeForce3 in there and it seemed to get too hot. Still runs nice with an upgraded HD/1.5 GB RAM.

    As some people already pointed out here and elsewhere, the cube was reborn as the FP iMac.
     
  19. kiwi_the_iwik macrumors 65816

    kiwi_the_iwik

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #19
    I've said it before, and I'll say it again -

    Graphics card manufacturers should STANDARDISE the size of their cards. If we're moving towards miniaturisation in the manufacture of components, WHY can't they keep cards all around the 7" mark (if only to give us Cube owners a break?).

    ;)
     
  20. Sol macrumors 68000

    Sol

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    Australia
    #20
    While they are at it...

    Apple should also miniaturise everything else. Imagine how much smaller and quieter a Cube designed with a 2.5" hard drive would be.
     
  21. benixau macrumors 65816

    benixau

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
  22. kiwi_the_iwik macrumors 65816

    kiwi_the_iwik

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #22
    Re: While they are at it...

    That'd be interesting. With the new generation of cooler G4 chips, and more space for convection cooling after replacing the 3.5" drive with the new 2.5" drives - plus with the latest Radeon 9000 or nVidia 5 (? - coming soon - ?), and the ability to change display sizes at will (as opposed to the iMac) - it'd be a winner.

    :D
     
  23. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #23
    Re: Re: While they are at it...

    Yeah, and they might as well make it dome-shaped like the iMac base, rather than a cube while they're at it! I can just imagine someone coming in and seeing this "igloo" thing on the table, wondering what it is :)
     

Share This Page