Need I point out the fact that Cube came along LONG after floppies disappeared from Macs...like by about 3 years
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Back to the Future Skylake Mac Cube mITX Build *REBORN*
- Thread starter ToroidalZeus
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And Steve Jobs dumped the PPC too. So again his vision was to never cling onto the past.
And why did Jobs drop PPC? They couldn't fit a G5 into notebooks without a-significant power consumption or b-adequate cooling. The PPC chip was far better than Intel chips at the time, but there were issues with notebooks. Intel was a better choice for laptops which is why they switched. It wasn't cause "PPC was a thing of the past"
Well, if you knew 'anything about taste' then you would know taste is subjective. In most people's eyes, I would say mismatching would be a clear indicator of poor taste. The original setup was very clean and matching. The new one is not. "Taste" generally also appreciates quality craftsmanship... there is no debating the obvious here when it comes to the attention to detial.
Hmm... well those sound like extremely difficult parts to replace. I sense you have severely devalued a somewhat valuable item (considering its age and functionality)
Wait... so then why are you still trying to use a G4 cube?
------
P.S. I think you're recontexualizing history here. Steve Jobs did not create the Cube- Johnathon Ives technically did, but whatever. It was not created to omit the floppy drive... Otherwise he would have just removed the floppy/zip drive from the G4 tower (All PowerMac G4 base models lacked floppy/Zip drives). If you remember, iMac released 3 years earlier had negated the floppy drive. The Ti PowerBook G4 did not have hot swappable bays to support such media (built in optical only) unlike the PowerBook G4. Same for goes iBooks.
Why was the cube created? Great question... Which pretty much sums up why it failed as a product. It did not fit anywhere in the line-up, aside being and intermediary of power and size wise between an iMac and PM G4. It cost $200+ more than a comparable G4 and big upgrade limitations, making it a waste of money in reality. $$$/Form > Function
I think it's legcy is it boasted Apples design abilities by putting a full power computer into a tiny box. It was by no means practical compared to other Apple offerings- much like the new 20th Anniversay Mac or the new cMacBook. That said, I think it revealed the future of Apple's design (Mac Mini, Mac Pro Gen 2).
The Cube had nothing to do with removing aging technology (Zip, Floppy). I'm not sure how old you were in 2001- but the Floppy disc was still a very common type of media (really as late as ~2005/2006 in my memory). If I remember, in 2001 an 8 MEGABYTE USB flash drive was $400+.
Last edited:
Congratulations sir, you took a valuable computer that is greatly desired, rare, and unique, and turned it into a pile of crap shoved into a falling apart shoe box. The cube is a beautiful machine, however what you have done is diminished it beyond reasonable standards. Not sure if you are aware that this machine is in an art museum. You think your hack job turd "hackintosh" would look nice in a museum? I sure as hell don't, and I don't think anyone else here thinks so either. So once again Sir, not that you deserve to be called that after the childish act of destruction this project turned into, congratulations on ruining a priceless relic of the genius and ambition of Steve Jobs. Something that I have been looking for since I started collecting these old "worthless" machines.
Also, for the record, I can get lag free 720p YouTube on my 1.25GHz PowerBook, my 1.3GHz PowerBook, my 1.5GHz PowerBook, and with a better GPU, I'm sure I could likely get 1080p working great on my dual 2.3GHz G5.
Now do us a favor and press the "X" on your browser window and leave us alone. We don't invade your hackintosh forums saying "POWERPC MACS ARE THE BEST! DONT TAKE WORKING MACS AND BREAK THEM! HACKINTOSH IS THE DEVIL!"
Also, on a final note, hackintosh machines are taking Windows boxes and installing OS X on them, not gutting old working macs (that can be sold on eBay for a lot of money) and putting modern parts into them. That's called stupidity...
Also, for the record, I can get lag free 720p YouTube on my 1.25GHz PowerBook, my 1.3GHz PowerBook, my 1.5GHz PowerBook, and with a better GPU, I'm sure I could likely get 1080p working great on my dual 2.3GHz G5.
Now do us a favor and press the "X" on your browser window and leave us alone. We don't invade your hackintosh forums saying "POWERPC MACS ARE THE BEST! DONT TAKE WORKING MACS AND BREAK THEM! HACKINTOSH IS THE DEVIL!"
Also, on a final note, hackintosh machines are taking Windows boxes and installing OS X on them, not gutting old working macs (that can be sold on eBay for a lot of money) and putting modern parts into them. That's called stupidity...
I must admit, a Cube fallen victim to your "gut em and hackintosh em" mindset is neither going forward with technology or creating the best user experience possible. You must cling to the Cube's 15-year-old case design (which looks very out of place in your setup), and any Hackintosh is simply not the best user experience possible.
If you want both those things, look at a 27" 5K iMac or new Mac Pro (I have selected one of these for my main setup already). Otherwise, allow the PowerPC Macs forum discussion to remain about old Macs that just won't stop being useful or appealing.
Last edited:
I don't understand why the OP keeps posting these "projects" in the PowerPC forum. At best they are tenuously related through the usage of a PowerPC Mac enclosure which is then butchered. Badly.
BTW, taking another look at your cuts in the bottom, it doesn't look like you know how to "cut corners" either as I don't seem to see any...
A) I don't want a PC that belongs in a Museum, I want one that actually works.
B) These were mass produced consumer tech products, maybe in 100 years it'll have high-end collector value, maybe.
Wow 720p video, That's great rez for a PC from 2005.
There is no such thing as a "windows box." Windows and Macs both run on the exact same Intel Platform.
FYI I paid $100 for the Cube, that's not a lot of money and plenty of PC cases cost more than that.
Both of those PCs are completely wastes of money.
5K is great but at 27" it's puny. A 40" display (even at lower PPI) makes a much larger difference on user experience as everything is nearly life-size. Furthermore the 5K iMac runs at 100C; it's insane.
The Mac Pro is completely overpriced for the specs. It's nearly 2 years old and costs 3,000 for the entry model and that doesn't include monitor. The hardware for this build was about 1/4th the price. Besides if I wanted the power, I already got a i7-5820k with a GTX 980 rig.
Hilarious post, as if 4K is the only way to watch videos. Old Macs don't have to support the latest standards to remain useful, and besides, 4K video is best on Retina iMacs that will actually display it 1:1
It depends on how you use it and how far you sit from it. For a computer display I would prioritize resolution over size, as 27" 5K is plenty, but for content consumption/gaming uses a bigger 4K display may be better.
You can always attach an external display to a Retina iMac, if you really aren't satisfied with the stunning 27" 5K display. I do recommend you try one for a while and see how much of a difference it makes first.
The new ones don't, actually.
Goto 2:14 in your link; temps are only 2-4 degrees lower.Hilarious post, as if 4K is the only way to watch videos. Old Macs don't have to support the latest standards to remain useful, and besides, 4K video is best on Retina iMacs that will actually display it 1:1
It depends on how you use it and how far you sit from it. For a computer display I would prioritize resolution over size, as 27" 5K is plenty, but for content consumption/gaming uses a bigger 4K display may be better.
You can always attach an external display to a Retina iMac, if you really aren't satisfied with the stunning 27" 5K display. I do recommend you try one for a while and see how much of a difference it makes first.
The new ones don't, actually.
Also 27" is puny. Reminds me of people saying 3.5" is enough for an iPhone. My guess is this build with a 40" 4K setup is 3 or even 4 yrs ahead of Apple.. Let me ask you, have you used a 4K 40" display as a monitor? Cuz I have used a 5K iMac and while it sure is sharp, the added screen space of 40" 4K is far more usable. So what exactly are these uses where a smaller screen with a higher PPI is is better?
If you're really concerned about temps, a higher fan speed can be used to cool it down, as was mentioned in the video. As long as it doesn't throttle, I really don't care.
Plenty of people are happy with 21.5", let alone the higher-end 27". I just can't see Apple going up to 40", as that is a monster I wouldn't even be able to fit on my desk. And definitely not at only 3840x2160, which is less than the current 21.5" 4096x2304 Retina iMac.
The 27" 5K actually has more usable screen space, which again makes it ideal as a computer monitor. Text and graphics look very crisp on the high pixel density.
I am aware larger screens can seem more immersive, but mainly with content consumption or gaming, which is pretty much restricted to only 4K for the time being anyway.
You didn't answer my question, have you used a 40" 4K monitor? I'm gonna assume NO.
5K natively would have more screen space than 4K. However the iMac uses HiDPI model to scale the resolution cuz or else everything would be ant size on that small display. So in the end it only gets sharper text.
4K @ 40" is the same PPI as 1440p @ 27" so it's not slouch when it comes to sharpness. Sure it's less sharp than 5K but the added screen space more than makes up for it: Websites display more information at once requiring less scrolling, it's multitasking is a breeze with multiple windows. Videos and Games are near life-size for a truly immersive feel. Developers love the extra resolution for displaying code (kinda the something as websites). From my exp 40-42" curved display is the optimal size at 2-3 ft viewing distance and it will end up being the future standard.
FYI this is what forward thinking is all about and that was one of Steve Jobs' core principles. I think you are just trying to make yourself feel better about spending soo much money on the retina iMac.
You can easily change to higher-than-native HiDPI (which is then downsampled and provides more screen space) in System Preferences > Displays > Scaled. I have not seen any need to do this, as the added sharpness and detail is actually a great way to take advantage of the extra pixels, but it can be done.
------
You can't deny 5120x2880 displays are forward-thinking. 5K and higher resolutions are the future. I almost feel sad that you're still stuck in 2013 with 3840x2160
Last edited:
Again have you used a 40" 4K display?You can easily change to higher-than-native HiDPI (which is then downsampled and provides more screen space) in System Preferences > Displays > Scaled. I have not seen any need to do this, as the added sharpness and detail is actually a great way to take advantage of the extra pixels, but it can be done.
------
You can't deny 5120x2880 displays are forward-thinking. 5K and higher resolutions are the future. I almost feel sad that you're still stuck in 2013 with 3840x2160
You are just talking out of your aas dude. Almost everyone that has used a large 40" display prefers it to 27" or even 32"
Some of us here don't play games all day and sit behind a screen you have to look around to see things. 40" is ridiculously big. I even find my 32" big. Most of us here are perfectly content with "smaller" displays. You on the other hand, ruin perfectly good computers, then make it "fit in" by throwing in a "period correct" display, keyboard, and mouse. I'm just trying to get you to realize that you have no idea what you are talking about and not posting here is probably your best option
I'm just going to say I like hacking and doing things outside of spec but this one looks bad.
Cherry's are WAY better than buckling-springs
Cherry's are WAY better than buckling-springs
We have a guy at work with a 40" 4K, although he's legally blind and uses it scaled to be able to do his job(he has less screen area on it than your typical 1280x1024).
Overwhelming is the best way to describe it, though. For actually getting work done, I find multiple smaller displays a lot more efficient.
I have a friend who works as a programmer and got rid of his 40" 4K at work for this exact reason-he said that it was just too much information at one time and too hart to find what he was looking t. He went back to dual 27s, and says that those can even be too much at times. Bear in mind that this is a guy who makes a living looking at a computer screen in some case 16+ hours a day(and at this point budget is not a consideration for his employer) and didn't like it.
Overwhelming is the best way to describe it, though. For actually getting work done, I find multiple smaller displays a lot more efficient.
I have a friend who works as a programmer and got rid of his 40" 4K at work for this exact reason-he said that it was just too much information at one time and too hart to find what he was looking t. He went back to dual 27s, and says that those can even be too much at times. Bear in mind that this is a guy who makes a living looking at a computer screen in some case 16+ hours a day(and at this point budget is not a consideration for his employer) and didn't like it.
I'm just going to say I like hacking and doing things outside of spec but this one looks bad.
Cherry's are WAY better than buckling-springs
I guess you haven't used the greatest keyboard in the history of the world, the IBM model M
Cherry's are WAY better than buckling-springs
Them there's fightin' words
I have.
Model M people are like a cult and they mod the heck out of those things
See Bunn above
Model M people are like a cult and they mod the heck out of those things
I don't mod Model Ms, I let the manufacturer do it for me
I realize keyboards are somewhat subjective, but I do make a conscious decision to use one because I really like them.
I also use a lot of Apple Extendeds, although I prefer buckling springs somewhat to damped Alps.
I don't like the Cherry switches I've tried, but again preference.
In all honesty, though, even the mighty Model M bows down to the keyboard on the Selectric