Slashdot Mirror
Pictures Of New Apple Cube?
Margin Walker writes "AppleInsider doesn't seem to be scared of Apple's legion of legal representation. They've posted photos of the G4 Cube and nifty new CRT and flat-screen displays." The site is pretty hosed, so if some folks could get some mirrors up, that'd be bitchin'.
Update: 07/19 12:11 AM by CT : The Mac Junkie has mirrors of the pics, and claims that
they are frauds along with some good arguments to back it up. Update: 07/19 01:27 PM by CT : Apple Legal shut both of them down with Cease & Desist orders. Mirrors are all over the place.
Have you ever tried to quickly swap cards, RAM or drives in a regular ol' PC tower case? it sucks. The Blue+White G3 and G4 cases rock hard when in comes to this sort of thing.
I have no comment on the iMac cuz I don't own one.
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
I disagree with your assesment that the problem is the hardware, not the OS. First of all, what kind of movie are we talking about here? I have had trouble with the FPS playing "A Bug's Life" DVD on a G4. Secondly, what OS are you using on the Intel box? If you are using windows, like most people, than I see why you are having problems. In my experience, it takes the full resources of a pentium II 300 to play one MPEG or Quicktime movie in a small window in windows(never played fullscreen.) If you are running linux, I don't have much experience, but from what I have read, it isn't the best OS for media handling, and when I used it X seemed to be taking up a lot of resources... Anyway, have you ever tried BeOS? Now that's an OS that puts MacOS to shame. Back in 1994 the Be people were doing things like, in real time, playing 6 movies mapped to the sides of a 3D, rotating cube. That was on dual powerpc boxes... It is even better on the latest (intel) hardware.
I take it, then, that you've never seen the words "Patent Pending" stamped on a product? I see it all the time. Companies are greedy, and they want to start making money off their products as soon as possible. If that means releasing them before they've actually been issued the patent, then so be it.
Shows up in the most unlikely places, sometimes, too. Last time I went to a concert (Summer Sanitarum Tour at the Foxboro Stadium in Foxboro, MA, FWIW), the tiles that were covering the football field had "patent pending" stamped on them, if I remember right.
--
--
"I personal[ly] think Unix is "superior" because on LSD it tastes like Blue." -- jbarnett
Brings new meaning to the term i-Toaster.
Either that or Steve Jobs is going into the breadmaker business.
Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Jobs already made the mistake of releasing a cube-shaped computer once in his career. The original NeXT computer was a black cube, 12 inches on a side. You don't see too many of them around any more.
And I'd be willing to bet that the Cobalt Raq systems sell better than the Cobalt Qubes.
Here are the specs of the NeXT cube, according to "The NeXT Book", by Bruce Webster, first edition, 1989. 68030 CPU at 25MHz, 68882 FPU, 56001 DSP, 8MB RAM, expandable to 64MB (16 SIMM slots!), 330MB or 660MB 5.25" hard drive, 256MB optical drive (the only removable storage!), built-in SCSI, built-in Ethernet, 1120x832 gray-scale (2 bit-plane) 17" display, 256K video buffer, passive backplane with 4 slots (similar to NuBus, but the cards are about 11"x11"; the main board takes up one of the slots), nice keyboard (includes power, volume, and brightness control), decent mouse, black cast magnesium case.
The hardware was definitely impressive for its day (1989) but a bit pricey. Actually, much of it was ahead of its time. Nobody had 17" monitors back then; nobody had that kind of resolution. And the optical drive was a flop. The color slabs were the really nice boxes. They came out a year or so later than the cube.
The really impressive part of the NeXT was the software though. You can see its legacy in a lot of some Linux GUI software, and the Mac OS X is based on NeXTStep. One of the best things about NeXTStep is its use of Display PostScript. WSYIWYG, because the display and the printer are written to in exactly the same way.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Yes, the pics are definitely computer-generated, but MacJunkie has a few things wrong. Point-by-point:
> 1. In this form, the machine would be very much top-heavy
Not necessarily--the transparent base could be solid plastic, in which case the case would be very, very stable (more so than a current G4 minitower).
> 2. Look at the size of those air vents. You could drop a pencil through there,
> or spill a cup of coffee
Much about Apple's current crop of cases is aesthetic, not functional; there could be mesh and foam inside those huge vent louvers to protect from accidents like that, anyway.
> 3. While in the photograph taken from a diagonal angle there are three screws
> on the top of the machine, there are
> only two in the head-on photo. Why?
Because the third screw, the one in the middle, is shielded from view by the raised border of the vent cutout.
> 4. There are no handles. Apple loves handles, and furthermore, anyone who expects to
> get a good grip on a computer with plexiglass sides has got another thing coming.
Those raised bars on the top of the case are handles which retract into the case when not in use, and can be pulled up into handles when needed. This was noted in the first articles about this alleged case design, so I wish the person who wrote this debunking article would do his homework.
> 5. The front of the machine has at least a couple tell-tale Photoshop
> fingerprints. First, look at the Apple logo in the second image. Does it look
> a little smushed to you? It is. The artist had to use Photoshop's Distort tool
> to get the image to be angled correctly, but this tool doesn't take 3D
> measurements into consideration.
This is complete BS. The logo in question looks distorted because it is being viewed at an angle, from above, to the side, and on the diagonal--a very complex angle. The distortion visible is in line with the angle of observation, with only a little deviation. I disagree that this is a Photoshop image, and here's why.
It is definitely computer-generated, but most likely by a 3D design and rendering program, not by a 2D tool like Photoshop. The attention to detail in shading and angle and contour in these images is certainly doable in Photoshop, but at the cost of a huge amount of time.
In contrast, I could create the same images in 3D Studio Max and similar programs in a fraction of the time required to do them in Photoshop, plus I'd have an interactive 3D model to move around easily and get as many 2D image captures from as I want. 3D Studio Max, I know, isn't available for Macs, but similar products are (not as good IMHO, though). In particular, the attention to details like very accurate lighting and shading points to a 3D app creating these images, not a 2D app like Photoshop; this guy's concluding remarks about a lighting source being out of place are BS, the images appear to have pretty accurate lighting and shading. Doing these images in Photoshop would be too much of a bother, especially when so many good 3D apps are widely available (even the dongle protection for 3D Studio Max has been broken, and it's food for the warez kiddies now).
Plus, the pics on AppleInsider have been removed and replaced with images with a message about Apple's legal dept. making them take the pics down. This supports earlier claims, which were disputed, that Apple had done so on other sites hosting these pics. This indicates that there may be a grain of truth to these computer-generated images. My personal opinion is that the images are, indeed, authentic in that they come from Apple design mock ups, not necessarily of a design that will be used any time soon, but of a design that is or was being considered. My guess, unsupported by anything but Apple's stupid lawyermongering, is that these were taken from early 3D computer-generated designs from Apple's case-styling guys. But Apple is pissing me off with their lawyer-whoring bullshit; I was considering buying an Apple since I used to use them in college, but now they can fuck off. I hate ity when people try to stifle freedom of the press, important enough that the framers of the constitution put it first in the bill of rights.
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."--Tacitus, *The Annals*
Now that was a cool computer. Fuck transparent plastic, i want cold, black steel on my desk.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
Therefore, I've posted my own copy here: http://home.rochester.rr.com/crayz/
BTW, this is what an Apple legal threat would look like:
-----------
From cpyrt@apple.com Fri Jul 7 20:56:43 2000
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:28:28 -0700
From: Copyright Admin.
To: Ryan Meader
Subject: NOTICE OF INFRINGEMENT
*Apple Confidential*
-NOT FOR POSTING OR REDISTRIBUTION-
Dear Ryan,
Re: www.macosrumors.com
It has been brought to our attention that you have posted an article on the above web site titled, 'Apple's "Cube" desktop Mac confirmed' (hereafter referred to as "the Article").
By posting the Article, you are improperly disclosing Apple's trade secrets. Apple believes that the person(s) who disclosed the information in the Article to you violated their non-disclosure agreement with Apple. Consequently, Apple has never authorized the information to be disclosed or published and your continued display of the Article could result in your company being held for violating Apple's proprietary rights. Your continued dissemination and use of this information is in violation of Apple's statutory and other rights.
We believe, in good faith, that the information posted is being used in a manner that is not authorized by Apple and that the information contained in this email is accurate. Therefore, Apple demands that you cease and desist from disseminating the Article posted at the referenced URL immediately, including any hyperlinks to other locations where the information or Article may be available from all web sites and servers under your control.
Please immediately remove the Article and confirm in writing by Monday, July 10, 2000 that you have removed the Article from your web site. Apple reserves its right to seek immediate equitable and other relief, including damages claims, should you fail to remove this material.
Thank your for your courtesy and immediate cooperation. I can be reached at (408) 974-9994 should you have any questions.
Sincerely, Sue Runfola Apple Computer, Inc. Legal
Sue Runfola Apple Legal Copyright Administration 1 Infinite Loop, MS: 38-I Cupertino, CA 95014
Phone: (408) 974-9994 Email: copyright@apple.com Fax: (408) 974-5436
THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE PRIVILEGED AND MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSON(S) NAMED ABOVE. ANY OTHER DISTRIBUTION, RE-TRANSMISSION, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMISSION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY ME IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE OR RETURN E-MAIL, AND DELETE THIS FILE/MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM.
A squat, top-vented computer might not be completely nuts. It would make a good foot stool/warmer.
Other points:
I bet there will be an Apple Cube, and I bet it'll be released tomorrow. It's right in line with Fred's comments today that iMac sales are getting flat. I just think it'll look more like the earlier sketches with the contrary handles and front-faced design.
BTW, I have a mirror for this pic and the 17" CRT, which is beautiful and I wish is real, but I fear isn't bulbous enough to be legit.
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
These sites (AppleInsider, MacOSRumors, MacInTouch etc.) have a really lousey track record of posting half-truths and downright lies. Their quality control is really poor.
What's more, they can do real damage. I was involved in a product that Apple Insider leaked images of, two days before it was publically launched. As a result, we lost most trademark and patent rights outside the US. In most other countries, you cannot trademark and/or patent something that has already been released into the public domain.
So when you wonder why companies like Apple don't like these kind of sites and often seem heavy-handed in dealing with them, remeber that leaks like this can cost a company substantial amounts of money.
Sailing over the event horizon
Its not as if they knew it was a fraud and decided to post it anyways.
Yeah, and I've got this nice bridge to sell you :-) They could have figured it out themselves if they'd taken five seconds to look at the images, like the MacJunkie guys did. Instead they went for the "post first, figure out the truth later" approach. They are shoddy amateurs.
They found out later that the story 'could' be a fake. I agree with MacJunkie that it looks like a fraud, but who knows.
Exactly, who knows? So at the very least AppleInsider should have done some due diligence and tried to figure out what they had. Then if they decided to post, they should have put some caveats on their web page instead of telling us these definately were photos of the Cube machines.
Maybe Apple will see it, and decide to scrap the old design. Thus making it true. Who knows.
Well, if the machines are going to be unveiled at the MacWorld keynote tomorrow, I doubt they'd have time to redisgn the cases. Look I know Apple are cool and all, but even they can't redesign a case in less that 24 hours...
It came from a reputable source. It should get the benefit of the doubt.
How do you know it came from a reputable source? Who said it did? AppleInsider? Their "reputable sources" are wrong at least half the time, so they aren't reputable at all. Don't give them any benefit when they have such a poor track record.
Sailing over the event horizon
I agree, it's seems to be fake. But suggesting that it's fake because no one would put have vents that size (or, ostensibly, on top) because they'd be vulnerable to spills is silly.
I know for a fact (for a fact) that monitors are quite vulnerable to water spills. Multiple water spills. Angled just right to let the entire glass spill into them.
-----