--- On Mon, 7/27/09, Cyrus Griffin <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Cyrus Griffin <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Question: Network Server 700/200
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Monday, July 27, 2009, 11:17 AM
>
> Wow that's heavy. Is that seriously how heavy those are?
> MacTracker
> says they're 84 lbs, wow that's crazy heavy! Surprising
> that they're
> that heavy if they're just plastic...
As several car manufacturers have found, trying to save weight by replacing a
bunch of structural steel with plastic does not lead to weight savings. ;P (See
the Oldsmobile Silhouette, Pontiac Transport, Chevy Lumina vans and the
original Saturn line of cars. The vans weighed as much as a Cadillac Sedan
DeVille.)
It usually takes a lot more volume of plastic to achieve the same structural
strength, especially when using un-reinforced plastics, as used in Apple's
computer cases.
The ANS would've been cheaper to produce, sturdier and more accepted by the
IS/IT industry had Apple used a plain, square, all metal chassis. I don't find
it amazing at all about the RAM issues the ANS had, given the hardware problems
some of their Macintosh computers have had, problems that should never have
been allowed to reach production hardware.
The x100 PowerMacs (and clones) had issues with the SCSI and NuBus. There's the
entire 63xx series (except the 6360) basically built from leftover parts bodged
together. The first Mac with FireWire 800 ports, the ports wouldn't actually
work at full FW800 speed. How the HELL does something so bleeding simple to
test pass through every stage of testing to production without anyone bothering
to check to see if the ports actually work as designed?
Before Apple canceled the "Super Cube" I heard from a person who worked in the
compatability testing lab at Micron. He worked on testing engineering samples
of the Super Cube and they had one DIMM slot that didn't work right. A flaky
RAM slot in an ENGINEERING SAMPLE! That's supposed to be the final design stage
before production. There's hardly ever any difference between the ES hardware
and production. Fortunately Apple killed it rather than repeat Intel's huge
gaffe with their first RAMBUS motherboard that had a RIMM slot that didn't
function.
Most of Apple's hardware has been good over their history, but there's no
excuse at all for the goofs they allowed to get to production.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Vintage Macs group.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/vintagemacs.shtml and our
netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/vintage-macs?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
