Ladies and Gentlemen, I still cannot find the quote button in this forum. Did it get eliminated for some reason? I've opened this forum in FireFox and Safari but I still cannot see it. Am I simply losing my mind? It surely was there before.
Mac128, you are correct about my nostalgic love for B&W compacts. And your analysis about why things panned out as they did is quite logical and businesslike. Thank you for that perspective.
Even so I cannot help but feel that, when viewing the entire line of "compact B&W Macs" in retrospect, the SE/30 is the machine that shines most brightly. It had a small screen, yes. That was limiting and frustrating at times. But that small screen made the overall machine a "compact Mac," freeing more physical desk space for those of us who required such.
The critical point though is that the SE/30 was the most "Expandable" of all the B&W compact Macs, yet it remained the same size as the cute-looking Mac 128k, in stark contrast to the much larger Mac II series at the time. The SE models also avoided being too compact, which would have put an even tighter limit on its performance scalability. The SE/30 hit that sweet spot in terms of size versus expandability, considering the technology available in that day. The SE/30 didn't have 6 Nubus slots, but it didn't need that. However, the Mac 128, 512 and yes even the Plus did need something extra -- the tiny bit extra that the SE and SE/30 offered, a single yet flexible slot for expansion (i.e., user customizability). But as I said previously, such expandability would never have existed under Jobs, the grim reaper of expandability.
"Basic expandability, in a sexy and compact form factor" is still highly sought after today. As I type this on my Nov. 2009 iMac Quadcore, my hand caresses the onboard SD card slot. Such a small thing, yet so pleasing. I don't mourn the loss of PCI slots in my iMac, yet I would think less of the machine had it no SD card slot. Funny how that is. And when I think about it, how much more pleased would some be if the iPad had an internal SD card slot (or even a camera)? I for one surely would be more pleased. Perhaps if demand for such is sufficiently high, a future model may bring us those "fundamental" and quite nearly "ubiquitous" features -- features that in no way would make the iPad "overly complex" or "too expensive" or "like a desktop computer" or a "security risk."
Jobs may not have intended the iPad to be anything more than a glorified iPod Touch -- another cash cow to be milked for the sake of boosting AAPL into the stratosphere. But in the long term, it's what is most pleasing to the user that endures.
As buyer of electronic devices, I most often seek something attractive looking and compact, yet fast and customizable/expandable, and priced realistically. I currently do not own a single iPod, iPod Touch or iPhone. Yet the iPad intrigues me for some reason. Perhaps it is because it more suits my needs than those other devices. And really, what suits my needs is what it's all about.
So while there is a lot of political jockeying among corporate executives and Bottom-line CEOs, and while some are willing to accept the Jobsian utopia of "you can get your kicks with Fisher Price simplicity," there are those of us who long for a little more. No, not a lot more like a midrange Mac tower or that sort. Just a little more. For the era in which it was sold, the SE/30 is the only "compact Mac" model that comes close to satisfying that longing. It brings "just a little more" to Job's original Macintosh. That little bit extra was enough to bring satisfaction to many (to those who could afford it at the time).
It's a similar situation with the iPad. The current iPad is a first in many ways -- a Mac 128k, if I can be so bold. But I long for an iPad SE -- basically the same device, but with just a tiny bit more in terms of expandability.
With all this said, expandability alone isn't everything. If it was, my vintage Mac collection would be focused primarily on IIfx's, Quadra 840AVs and Apple Network Servers. No, what's really neat is a great performance plus basic expandability, attractively housed in a small-yet-usable form factor. That's what the SE/30 represents to me. Even after 20 years, the overall design still intrigues me. It hits the sweet spot.
It's rather easy for me to give such an evaluation now in the "buy it for $100" EBAY era. I lusted after the SE/30 when it retailed for thousands of dollars 20 years ago, but I knew I could never afford one then. So obviously, cost is important in the day in which a product is new and still being manufactured. But over time cost becomes irrelevant and we can more freely judge a product on its technological, aesthetic and usability merits. I find it interesting that an SE/30 can still be useful today, even to the level of getting on the internet via Ethernet. But its important to consider that usability results from a single PDS expansion slot -- irrelevant to and perhaps even hated by Steve Jobs, but very useful and pleasing to me.
Mac128, you are correct about my nostalgic love for B&W compacts. And your analysis about why things panned out as they did is quite logical and businesslike. Thank you for that perspective.
Even so I cannot help but feel that, when viewing the entire line of "compact B&W Macs" in retrospect, the SE/30 is the machine that shines most brightly. It had a small screen, yes. That was limiting and frustrating at times. But that small screen made the overall machine a "compact Mac," freeing more physical desk space for those of us who required such.
The critical point though is that the SE/30 was the most "Expandable" of all the B&W compact Macs, yet it remained the same size as the cute-looking Mac 128k, in stark contrast to the much larger Mac II series at the time. The SE models also avoided being too compact, which would have put an even tighter limit on its performance scalability. The SE/30 hit that sweet spot in terms of size versus expandability, considering the technology available in that day. The SE/30 didn't have 6 Nubus slots, but it didn't need that. However, the Mac 128, 512 and yes even the Plus did need something extra -- the tiny bit extra that the SE and SE/30 offered, a single yet flexible slot for expansion (i.e., user customizability). But as I said previously, such expandability would never have existed under Jobs, the grim reaper of expandability.
"Basic expandability, in a sexy and compact form factor" is still highly sought after today. As I type this on my Nov. 2009 iMac Quadcore, my hand caresses the onboard SD card slot. Such a small thing, yet so pleasing. I don't mourn the loss of PCI slots in my iMac, yet I would think less of the machine had it no SD card slot. Funny how that is. And when I think about it, how much more pleased would some be if the iPad had an internal SD card slot (or even a camera)? I for one surely would be more pleased. Perhaps if demand for such is sufficiently high, a future model may bring us those "fundamental" and quite nearly "ubiquitous" features -- features that in no way would make the iPad "overly complex" or "too expensive" or "like a desktop computer" or a "security risk."
Jobs may not have intended the iPad to be anything more than a glorified iPod Touch -- another cash cow to be milked for the sake of boosting AAPL into the stratosphere. But in the long term, it's what is most pleasing to the user that endures.
As buyer of electronic devices, I most often seek something attractive looking and compact, yet fast and customizable/expandable, and priced realistically. I currently do not own a single iPod, iPod Touch or iPhone. Yet the iPad intrigues me for some reason. Perhaps it is because it more suits my needs than those other devices. And really, what suits my needs is what it's all about.
So while there is a lot of political jockeying among corporate executives and Bottom-line CEOs, and while some are willing to accept the Jobsian utopia of "you can get your kicks with Fisher Price simplicity," there are those of us who long for a little more. No, not a lot more like a midrange Mac tower or that sort. Just a little more. For the era in which it was sold, the SE/30 is the only "compact Mac" model that comes close to satisfying that longing. It brings "just a little more" to Job's original Macintosh. That little bit extra was enough to bring satisfaction to many (to those who could afford it at the time).
It's a similar situation with the iPad. The current iPad is a first in many ways -- a Mac 128k, if I can be so bold. But I long for an iPad SE -- basically the same device, but with just a tiny bit more in terms of expandability.
With all this said, expandability alone isn't everything. If it was, my vintage Mac collection would be focused primarily on IIfx's, Quadra 840AVs and Apple Network Servers. No, what's really neat is a great performance plus basic expandability, attractively housed in a small-yet-usable form factor. That's what the SE/30 represents to me. Even after 20 years, the overall design still intrigues me. It hits the sweet spot.
It's rather easy for me to give such an evaluation now in the "buy it for $100" EBAY era. I lusted after the SE/30 when it retailed for thousands of dollars 20 years ago, but I knew I could never afford one then. So obviously, cost is important in the day in which a product is new and still being manufactured. But over time cost becomes irrelevant and we can more freely judge a product on its technological, aesthetic and usability merits. I find it interesting that an SE/30 can still be useful today, even to the level of getting on the internet via Ethernet. But its important to consider that usability results from a single PDS expansion slot -- irrelevant to and perhaps even hated by Steve Jobs, but very useful and pleasing to me.