It was a clever design and a gorgeous piece of hardware.
Three strikes and the Cube was finally out. It created a real rat’s nest of wires – and made it almost impossible to really plug-n-play USB and FireWire components, since those ports were inaccessible unless you turned the Cube on its side. All the wires: power, video, two USB ports (one for the speakers), two FireWire ports, the modem, and ethernet. To make the whole machine fit inside the clear enclosure and to facilitate removing the hardware without requiring the user to disconnect every cable, all the wires plugged into the bottom of the Cube. The Cube’s greatest design flaw came from design brilliance. The external speakers were yet another way the compact Cube cluttered up the user’s desk. That wasn’t a flaw in itself, but it meant one more piece of hardware to clutter up the office. To keep the Cube small and allow for air cooling, the power supply was a fairly large external unit. Touch it by accident and watch the Cube shut down.That was annoying every time it happened – and even once was too often. Perhaps the most annoying flaw was the power switch on the top of the Cube. Those who owned Cubes were not disappointed with their performance. Several of us on the Mac Web saw the value, promoted the Cube at the new price, and some of us even put our money where our mouth was.
They didn’t affect performance, but in a computer designed as a visual statement, they were a serious flaw.Īpple eventually dropped the price of the basic G4 Cube to US$1,299 and introduced a more expensive model with CD-RW, but the perception of poor value was ingrained. Most of the perceived cracks were mold lines, but some were real (my Cube had a real crack). And the whole powerhouse computer was packed in a remarkably small, quiet (no fan!), stunningly attractive case.Īh yes, the “cracked” case. With FireWire and USB, it’s easy to add external peripherals. Most Mac users don’t need expansion slots when so many features are standard. Still, the Cube was brilliantly conceived. Worse yet, benchmarks consistently shows the Cube had about the same power as the less costly, more expandable 400 MHz G4. It was a comparison we rarely made, since we didn’t really see the Cube competing on the basis of performance. Of course, Apple wanted us to compare the 450 MHz Cube with the 450 MHz Power Mac G4, which sold for $700 more. We asked Apple to consider a less expensive Cube with a slower processor to provide a better value. Was it worth the extra money for at most 12% more speed and less expansion options? We didn’t think so. Every Mac site in the world quickly pointed out that the least expensive Cube, attractive as it was, cost $300 more than the far more expandable 400 MHz Power Mac G4. The Cube’s run of bad luck began with its US$1,799 price. From the standpoint of visual design and computing power, the Cube had all the marks of a winner. Still, Apple discontinued the Cube due to lackluster sales less than a year after releasing it.įrom Apple’s perspective, the Cube offered all the power most users would ever need in a stunningly attractive and very different package. In fact, it was an impressive piece of hardware in many ways. Like several other Road Apples, the Power Mac G4 Cube was not a terrible design. We try to avoid calling any Mac a Road Apple while it’s in production, so we conducted our post mortem after the Cube was “put on ice”.