Thread

Prototype Mac Case, that is the question . . .

Prototype Mac Case, that is the question . . . Hardware 71 posts Nov 20, 2013 — Nov 27, 2013

#61 Mon, 25 Nov 2013 - 20:44

Forgot this:

Notice that there's no case cover in evidence in that shot.

Click to expand...

Well, there's that other shot that clearly shows that the U-shaped case top *was* used:

I was talking about the shot I marked up and posted:

If your case had been installed in the machine by the manufacturer *without* the top I seriously doubt you'd have it now. (How in the world would it have found its way to a reunion with the rest of the case when the PC was stripped out?

Indeed.

Actually... this comment here? It's actually really a perfect encapsulation of... why this flight of fancy gets a little frustrating. You're extrapolating *way* too far for each little thing you noticed on this hunk of metal, fitting it together in your mind with some pre-boiled concept of what something would have been used for if it had been a prototype (IE, that notch in the case being a "finger hole") or how you would build something if it were you doing it, etc.

I can't say for sure, but I don't think I argued that it couldn't be anything BUT a fingerhole. IIRC, I said it made a GREAT mod for a case that would see a lot of top-popping and that there was no retaining mechanism for a cover other than one of the twelve round punch holes on almost every accessible corner that you'd mentioned as being a possibility for such. You were dead with your theory, about that whack-doodle cable run. BTW.

It's really not clear from this statement if you think that the manufacturer of the machine added the clips to the box and ran it sans-skins so they could also use some particular bump or notch on the chassis as part of its "racking system" and that photo of the machine with the skins on it is wrong, or just saying that's how you'd do it and here's a photo validating your idea. (Despite the overwhelming evidence, a part of which is actually in your hands, that they *didn't* do it that way and that the photo that does show the case sans-skins is a photo of a partially disassembled unit?) It's just a wee bit confounding

Again, because of a simple misunderstanding (do to my unclear/nonexistent referent for "that pic shows") we've both been a tad frustrated. I also wasn't clear enough that the case was empty when I found it. I hurriedly posted a passel of pics I took at lunch time without taking the time to remove the MoBo and PSU I'd bolted up to the wretched thing.

My pet theory about the case is that some OEM for Vertical Market integrators and all kinds of other applications was set up to mod a batch of these boxes for just about any purpose. The "finger hole" and fan mods wouldn't be something the Photo System mfr. would set up to do and the case mfr. couldn't be bothered to do such work, a jobber did it. That photo processing contraption is a huge mass of crap from over a dozen OEM's an specialty houses.

I do apologize for sometimes being too slow to distinguish when you're just saying something off the cuff verses assert something as an actual hypothesis.

Sorry, I thought that was clear when I said something on the order of: CHRP development being the most interesting of improbabilities.

Thanks much for being generous in that apology, see above. [

] ]'>

#62 Mon, 25 Nov 2013 - 21:10

so its not a prototype mac case?

#63 Mon, 25 Nov 2013 - 21:28

:lol: Good one!

After the first dozen posts or so it was eliminated as a possible Apple prototype.

EudiG, spent about a page talking me down from my CHRP WAG based upon coincidental IBM relocation to this area in that CHRP/ATX time frame.

Then I was pummeled from all directions for insisting it was intended for prototyping/general industrial use and not simply a standard beige Clone box.

g then proved it was in fact a standard box that had been a NewEgg product offering and then afterward . . .

. . . went on to discover a case proving that my particular case, so to speak, had indeed been modded for industrial use. :O

Go figure! ;D

#64 Mon, 25 Nov 2013 - 22:45

Then I was pummeled from all directions for insisting it was intended for prototyping/general industrial use and not simply a standard beige Clone box.
g then proved it was in fact a standard box that had been a NewEgg product offering and then afterward . . .

. . . went on to discover a case proving that my particular case, so to speak, had indeed been modded for industrial use. :O

Technically if someone had bothered to do an image search on "QSS-2901" per the leads found by snuci/MacJunky on page one it all could have been over right there. (I'm kicking myself for not having done so myself. I actually hit and scanned the same page as snuci when searching that "PC-NRT-5A" model number and didn't grasp what that page was going on about, IE, that the model number was associated with the *original* computer integrated into some sort of dingus, I just saw that the case of their upgrade machine was obviously different from the topic of discussion here. Unfortunately that mislead me into assuming that the model number was a coincidence and that it'd come from some long-dead whitebox puppy mill.) I suppose it wouldn't have necessarily settled the question of whether it was a bottom-up custom job made just for integrating into big heavy things that make loud noises or a slightly-modified off-the-shelf unit, but whatever. When I realized after your next big picture set that not only did this case look generically familiar, I'd owned the *exact same thing* it sort of turned into a mission to put a name to the face.

(Please bear in mind that the next time you find a hunk of junk like this in a thrift store it may indeed be impossible to do that. Unlike the case of Apple's products generic white-box PCs don't have hoards of obsessive fans that document every single aspect of every single model ever sold for future generations to wonder over. )

Sorry, I thought that was clear when I said something on the order of: CHRP development being the most interesting of improbabilities.

I dunno, it came off more like "it's this and I won't take no for an answer unless it's proved beyond all metaphysical certainty it wasn't" to me, but I guess it was your favourite.

#65 Tue, 26 Nov 2013 - 01:36

Today I took a picture of a different case, I am just going to leave it here:

This had winXP and a P4 or something IIRC.

#66 Tue, 26 Nov 2013 - 23:44

or something

Apple Project Marklar test box! After CHRP failed and it was obvious that PowerPC was no longer sufficient for the needs of the Macintosh, Apple clearly used this particular machine for testing Mac OS X 10.2/10.3 builds on, before ultimately making the switch decision at the last minute and announcing the Developer Transition Kit, which was obviously much better dressed.

[

] ]'>

#67 Tue, 26 Nov 2013 - 23:58

:lol: . . . but no apple logo.

#68 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 - 16:29

Well of course, they had to keep it supar secret. [

] ]'>

#69 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 - 17:14

Totally. That missing front-panel area? That's where the self-destruct device, based on a modified airbag detonator, was located. It was set to go off (along with the shock collar around the developer's neck) if the box strayed more than 50 miles from Cupertino.

Anyway, I guess one more point about the subject of the OP:

My pet theory about the case is that some OEM for Vertical Market integrators and all kinds of other applications was set up to mod a batch of these boxes for just about any purpose. The "finger hole" and fan mods wouldn't be something the Photo System mfr. would set up to do and the case mfr. couldn't be bothered to do such work, a jobber did it. That photo processing contraption is a huge mass of crap from over a dozen OEM's an specialty houses.

... You're right about a "jobber" doing it. The brand name on the case sticker, "CONTEC", belongs to a company that says they've been around for 30 years making industrial PCs. They're undoubtedly the guys who cut the holes. (And probably the ones that stuffed it with parts, per the photolab machine company's specs.)

#70 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 - 17:14

When it comes to prototypes I guess I'll just have to be satisfied with the PEx board I got as a bonus for throwing down the min. bid capital to start the Big@$$Boxlot consortium to get that "prototype" of the last spherically correct pointing device that Apple never even bothered to produce.

HRMMM . . . does that actually qualify a Paladin KBD as a prototype, or the PEx board for that matter? Maybe they're more akin to X-Series aircraft that the Air Force wouldn't contract because they didn't do the Fighter Jock thing, being suited for practical stuff like the "Trash Hauling" all those DuoDeprived combination printer/copier/FAX machines that hit the market soon after the cancellation of the Paladin Project. The Air Force still refuses to embrace planes for Air Support, the six slots of the PowerExpress were like the wildly practical GAU-30 theWarthog is built around, better to build sleek jets like the Cube that was never really practical for the niche market stongholds of the Mac like SFX, video and sound recording production.

I feel better now, they ain't CHRP, but my X-Series pair stand up to "real prototypes" pretty well after all. [

] ]'>

#71 Wed, 27 Nov 2013 - 17:56

Totally. That missing front-panel area? That's where the self-destruct device, based on a modified airbag detonator, was located. It was set to go off (along with the shock collar around the developer's neck) if the box strayed more than 50 miles from Cupertino.

Notice the carefully interlinked scale armor covering the balance of the exposed surface areas. That's gotta be to keep the curious developers out and all that

factor inside the case. Spindly plastics too! :approve:

Anyway, I guess one more point about the subject of the OP:

< snip >

... You're right about a "jobber" doing it. The brand name on the case sticker, "CONTEC", belongs to a company that says they've been around for 30 years making industrial PCs. They're undoubtedly the guys who cut the holes. (And probably the ones that stuffed it with parts, per the photolab machine company's specs.)

Thanks, I feel muuuuch better about having a Win98 ROM HackStation on the workbench for firmware . . . activities . . . [}

] ]'>