The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
What do you think are the best looking computers and consoles?
Rohan
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
There's been a lot of computer systems and consoles, the great and the obscure, and everyone has an opinion on what they think had the best physical features, had the best impact. An attractive design will catch your eye, and though there's a lot to be said for first impressions, they are important. So, what machines particularly appealed to you over the years? And we'll avoid pc cases, as that's a whole other discussion. I'll start off with a list and find the best photographs that I can for each entry.
Commodore B Series
The two computers in the foreground are the B series machines from Commodore, which didn't exactly hit the ground running. But they looked great, with those lovely flowing lines a sensible and beautiful evolution of Commodore's earlier efforts, like the PET and Educator 64.
Commodore 64G
There were several iterations of the Commodore 64 hardware, and though it was really hard for me to choose between the C64C and the C64G, in the end the latter clinches it for me. Using the original "breadbin" casing but bringing the colouring in line with Commodore's revamp of the C64 and it's peripherals, such as the 1541-II drive.
Amstrad CPC 6128 Plus
I've always liked this machine, though I've only ever seen one in person - everyone in my area had C64's, Spectrums or Amiga's back then. It had nice, colourful graphics, plenty of ram and it looked nice to boot. Nice, big keyboard, great chunky footprint. The sound chip wasn't a patch on the C64's, but that's no surprise.
Atari 800XL
I've never seen this machine in the flesh, so to speak. In fact, I'd never even heard of it until I saw it on the 'net. Atari computers didn't exist in Ireland that I know of, apart from the 16-bit ST line. Atari to us mostly meant the 2600, and lamentably the 5200 and 7800. But I can't help but love the look of this machine - very sleek, very nice. I don't usually like brown and yellow on a computer, but it works well here, and the silver side buttons are very nice. Can't stand the fact that the return button is tiny and in the wrong place, though!
Atari Jaguar
Yeah, this was a terrible machine, we all know it. Some truly awful decisions were made, and it was so underpowered as to be a joke. But I love the styling, it's very smooth and the logo is fantastic. People refer to the cd attachment as looking like a toilet, but I think the machine looked even better with it.
Panasonic 3D0 FZ-1
Another non-starter in the early 32-bit years, but it was far more successful than the Jaguar, at least. Due to the open nature of the 3D0 corporation, if you had a license your company could make the console and choose whatever styling you wanted. Panasonic went the elegant route for their first version, the FZ-1. I love the pillars on each side, the rough feel on the top of the machine and the power and eject buttons. Somewhere down the line Panasonic changed the styling with a new iteration, the FZ-10, but it was ugly as sin. Goldstar also produced a version but it didn't hold a candle to the Panasonic original. We were all looking forward to the M2, but Matsushita, who purchased the technology, were terrified at the thought of having to compete with Sony and did nothing much with it. Shame. We got a lovely looking console, at least.
Amiga 500
Oh, this was a tough one. It was a toss up between this and the Amiga 1200, which is another lovely looking machine. In the end I have to go for the original Amiga home computer. I love how it sweeps from front to back, with that nice big Amiga logo. Sweet looking thing, and a line of computers so far ahead of their time.
Sharp X68000
Another machine I've never heard of until I came across it on the 'net. Very clean lines, and it has a handle so you can pick it up and take it with you! Class all the way for this powerful computer.
Apple Macintosh Classic
Say what you will about Steve Jobs (I could say plenty), but the man knew design. The original is an absolute classic, and looks fantastic. I remember my first time being in the computer lab at secondary school at the age of thirteen, where they had a variety of different machines. For someone like me, it was like a wonderland. They had an Apple IIe and Apple III, a BBC Micro, an Amstrad 286 that nobody was allowed to touch, an Acorn RISC pc, a weird little Siemens-Nixdorf self-contained computer with a 12" orange monochrome screen, and one Macintosh. While I adored the variety, the Macintosh was always where the first person into the class headed - it was always a draw. As time went by, they replaced those wonderful machines and it became a Mac only environment - and the machine everyone gravitated towards was the only colour Mac for some time. I learned so much from these computers.
Sinclair QL
The Sinclair QL, or Quantum Leap, was to be the next big thing from Sinclair, makers of the successful Spectrum line of early 8-bits. I always thought the Spectrums looked ugly, from the cheap plastic feel of the ZX-80 to the horrible, horrible keyboard of the ZX-81, down to the ugly as sin Spectrum 128K. But the QL caught everyone's attention for it's (then) futuristic look and much lauded abilities. It tanked, badly, which boded ill for Sinclair and for Sir Clive in particular, who would go on to design the laughable C5. The keyboard apparently was awful to type on, but it looked amazing for it's day.
Probably some I've left out, but I can't think of any at the moment. What do you guys think? Agree? Disagree? Think I've missed out on some obvious entries? Then go ahead and post!
Commodore B Series
The two computers in the foreground are the B series machines from Commodore, which didn't exactly hit the ground running. But they looked great, with those lovely flowing lines a sensible and beautiful evolution of Commodore's earlier efforts, like the PET and Educator 64.
Commodore 64G
There were several iterations of the Commodore 64 hardware, and though it was really hard for me to choose between the C64C and the C64G, in the end the latter clinches it for me. Using the original "breadbin" casing but bringing the colouring in line with Commodore's revamp of the C64 and it's peripherals, such as the 1541-II drive.
Amstrad CPC 6128 Plus
I've always liked this machine, though I've only ever seen one in person - everyone in my area had C64's, Spectrums or Amiga's back then. It had nice, colourful graphics, plenty of ram and it looked nice to boot. Nice, big keyboard, great chunky footprint. The sound chip wasn't a patch on the C64's, but that's no surprise.
Atari 800XL
I've never seen this machine in the flesh, so to speak. In fact, I'd never even heard of it until I saw it on the 'net. Atari computers didn't exist in Ireland that I know of, apart from the 16-bit ST line. Atari to us mostly meant the 2600, and lamentably the 5200 and 7800. But I can't help but love the look of this machine - very sleek, very nice. I don't usually like brown and yellow on a computer, but it works well here, and the silver side buttons are very nice. Can't stand the fact that the return button is tiny and in the wrong place, though!
Atari Jaguar
Yeah, this was a terrible machine, we all know it. Some truly awful decisions were made, and it was so underpowered as to be a joke. But I love the styling, it's very smooth and the logo is fantastic. People refer to the cd attachment as looking like a toilet, but I think the machine looked even better with it.
Panasonic 3D0 FZ-1
Another non-starter in the early 32-bit years, but it was far more successful than the Jaguar, at least. Due to the open nature of the 3D0 corporation, if you had a license your company could make the console and choose whatever styling you wanted. Panasonic went the elegant route for their first version, the FZ-1. I love the pillars on each side, the rough feel on the top of the machine and the power and eject buttons. Somewhere down the line Panasonic changed the styling with a new iteration, the FZ-10, but it was ugly as sin. Goldstar also produced a version but it didn't hold a candle to the Panasonic original. We were all looking forward to the M2, but Matsushita, who purchased the technology, were terrified at the thought of having to compete with Sony and did nothing much with it. Shame. We got a lovely looking console, at least.
Amiga 500
Oh, this was a tough one. It was a toss up between this and the Amiga 1200, which is another lovely looking machine. In the end I have to go for the original Amiga home computer. I love how it sweeps from front to back, with that nice big Amiga logo. Sweet looking thing, and a line of computers so far ahead of their time.
Sharp X68000
Another machine I've never heard of until I came across it on the 'net. Very clean lines, and it has a handle so you can pick it up and take it with you! Class all the way for this powerful computer.
Apple Macintosh Classic
Say what you will about Steve Jobs (I could say plenty), but the man knew design. The original is an absolute classic, and looks fantastic. I remember my first time being in the computer lab at secondary school at the age of thirteen, where they had a variety of different machines. For someone like me, it was like a wonderland. They had an Apple IIe and Apple III, a BBC Micro, an Amstrad 286 that nobody was allowed to touch, an Acorn RISC pc, a weird little Siemens-Nixdorf self-contained computer with a 12" orange monochrome screen, and one Macintosh. While I adored the variety, the Macintosh was always where the first person into the class headed - it was always a draw. As time went by, they replaced those wonderful machines and it became a Mac only environment - and the machine everyone gravitated towards was the only colour Mac for some time. I learned so much from these computers.
Sinclair QL
The Sinclair QL, or Quantum Leap, was to be the next big thing from Sinclair, makers of the successful Spectrum line of early 8-bits. I always thought the Spectrums looked ugly, from the cheap plastic feel of the ZX-80 to the horrible, horrible keyboard of the ZX-81, down to the ugly as sin Spectrum 128K. But the QL caught everyone's attention for it's (then) futuristic look and much lauded abilities. It tanked, badly, which boded ill for Sinclair and for Sir Clive in particular, who would go on to design the laughable C5. The keyboard apparently was awful to type on, but it looked amazing for it's day.
Probably some I've left out, but I can't think of any at the moment. What do you guys think? Agree? Disagree? Think I've missed out on some obvious entries? Then go ahead and post!
...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
Rohan on
0
Posts
The Powerbook 100 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerBook_100) is one of my favourite designs, even measured against portables today.
I wonder if I should have posted this in G&T instead?
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
As for consoles, at that time, the Mega Drive II (PAL Genesis 2) was a nice change in design and in size.
Dreamcast had also very modern lines and more recently I like the simplicity and minimalistic look of the Wii.
Oh, I remembered another -
Silicon Graphics Workstation 320
Can't find any good pictures of it, but if I could gut one of those cases, my current pc would be sitting inside one - unfortunately I think they would require extensive modification. Lovely, sleek and still looks futuristic to this day.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
It was not the fastest computer. It was not a machine that had a long time on the shelf. In some circles, it was even a joke.
What it was was ahead of its time in form factor, and fucking beautiful. And we ARE talking about pretty computers, not really great computers, right?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
I think Nintendo made it purple, proprietary, and cubed to spite the trends of the era.
All the rest looks like crap, of all different varieties. Colorful plastic crap, beige plastic crap, black plastic crap... Consoles and computers are very ugly devices for how much they cost and how much we love them.
Of course, subjective, opinions, all that, but looking at this thread from a completely non-nostalgic PoV, it's hard to find any of those generic beige boxes at the OP (oh, this one is slightly more curved) remotely beautiful.
But the word beautiful in the classical sense is not really the right word since I think it's more a question of the design telling a story of power(true or not) and focus. A great looking computer is beautiful in the same sense a great tool or a helicopter gunship can be - it's sort of a form following function plus something extra. There are of course exceptions I but it seems mostly to be found in the super computer world where the budgets are big and there is also more size to work with. letting the designers go a little crazy:
For instance check out this Cray computer:
Or this IBM:
Being that I highly value from following function also means some of those classic computer icons like the Mac Cube G4 and the original iMac's are disqualified in my view. They may look great just new but once they're used a bit and dust gets in not so much - just like those very pretty acrylic keyboards OMG!
Looks like a microATX mobo would fit without too much trouble.
I would hurt you for gutting one of those.
The CBM-II/B-Series PETs are truly beautiful computers, no doubt. You really have to see them in person though. Porsche design!
A near miss from commodore:
If it was Black instead of earwax it'd look badass.
This is ugly, but it's a good ugly:
Just looking at it you can get a feel that it's someone's pride and joy, something they've spent a lifetime on building it from the ground up.
The Amiga 600, a smaller, more reliable Amiga 500, with more ram, a standard IDE interface, better graphic capability, a newer OS, and a cooler shape:
People hated these things at the time because they replaced the 500's custom expansion slot with an actual industry standard. People were idiots.
Acorn Archie RISC PC:
Fun thing about these machines was that literally every single chip except the ram (on ordinary SIMMs) was custom designed. Graphics, sound, CPU, Expansion Buses, everything. They were pretty much High-end workstation class machines with almost no flaws or compremise. But they sold for about the same as a low end emachine.
The case could be extended with extra slices to fit in more drives and expansion slots, eventually ending up in the ROCKETSHIP:
fuck yeah, that's a pizza oven. And a sink.
I think that's true until the PS3. The slim redesign is seriously gorgeous. But, of course, I do have a thing for matte black finishes.
What up Amstrad PC1512.
This little baby came out in '86 for £499. Modified 16 colour CGA, free monitor and mouse, GEM desktop and DR DOS...
Behold, literally the first IBM PC that wasn't shit, and maybe the last Amstrad product that wasn't, too. It's no powerhouse, but it was cheap as hell for a complete system. This was when other 8088 and 8086 systems were nearly £2k.
I liked the look of the Amiga 600, but I much prefer the 1200 with it's numeric keypad. Apparently they were produced by SCI (now Sanmina-SCI) in their Irvine plant. I worked at Sanmina-SCI a couple of years back in Cork, and we were sent to Irvine for training in Roche Diagnostics diabetics devices when they were closing that plant. I wish I'd known about the Amiga being produced there as I could have asked them anything!
As for the SGI 320, yeah it's too expensive for something that I'd have to ship over here from America, and then spend time getting a micro-atx board to fit inside the case. I'm broke, and I already have a nice case (the NZXT Phantom)... but I'll always remember just how good the 320 looked. Mmm, that's a sweet design. Making purple look good!
We had one of those Acorn RISC pc's at school, though they had little software for it. I loved it, thought it was ahead of it's time. I'd love to be able to step back in time to 1991 to see all those old computers again. I still remember my first time taking computer class back then - I was sat at a Mac with a few friends and whatever we did to it, it crashed. Being a Commodore user, I assumed we could just reset the Mac and have it boot back up as normal. So I pressed the reset button and "bong!" the Mac booted up. Got a clip around the ear from the old brother who was teaching us (this was a Catholic school, back when brothers and nuns were teaching). Wouldn't happen nowadays!
I joined the computer club there after school, and though we were supposed to be learning about computer architecture and software, what we really did was play games. By the time they'd replaced all the computers with Mac's, everyone was playing games like Pirates! and Star Trek Rescue, which we modded. Someone was always posted as a lookout - whenever the professor, who was head of the computer and chemistry departments, was spotted coming down the hall, he would enter the room amid the sound of every Mac going "bong!" as we all hit the reset button to avoid being caught playing games. Fun stuff.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
Problem with this particular one is that the computer doesn't have a power supply of it's own, it's powered by the monitor meaning you couldn't swap it out except for the same model of monitor. I never (in the states) found anything that used it's 16 color cga mode, meaning I had two pcs at the same time (The other being a PCjr) that had proprietary graphics.
I'm pretty sure I owned two of those at one point. One of their monitors I used for 80-column mode on my C128.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
Just go to any electronics repair place and they could knock you up a couple adapters. I'm sure Amstrad dealers woulda had shitloads lying around, because it's all +5/+12/-5/-12V, nothing special or unique in any way.
http://www.seasip.info/AmstradXT/1512tech/section1.html#1.21
That nonsense about the supposedly irreplaceable monitors probably did more damage than the one about the cooling fan.
As for the 16 colour mode, GEM had a driver for it, so I guess you were using DOS software (why?)
The Kapsel Media Center. Looks pretty cool, also fanless.
NZXT Phantom. My current desktop uses the white version of this full tower case. Not only does it look awesome, but it's a fantastic case inside as well.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
People who like apple are the same people who are fans of minimalist design. Apple doesn't put fins or unneeded ridges or spoilers or flashy paint jobs on their stuff; they are rounded, monochrome, minimalist designs that get out of the way the reason you have the device in the first place; to listen to music or get shit done.
To me, as "cool" looking as some of the cases are above here, they remind me of CRXs with huge aftermarket rear spoilers and flame stickers along the side panels.
I like Apple hardware for the same reason I like the old IBM XT systems. Nothing unneeded, nothing out of place. Built to last.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
I mean, Lenovo and a few others come to mind as systems that match and occasionally exceed Apple's device durability, but so long as you aren't being needlessly rough with it (something nothing shy of a toughbook can handle very well), a Macbook Pro will outlast pretty much every other laptop on the market.
My dad's oldstyle 17" MBP is still a beast of a machine, is running Lion, and all he has had to do to it in the past 4 years is replace the battery (which is easier on his model).
Compare that to the 3-4 laptops he would have gone through in that time (and did before I moved him over), and it kind of proves the point in his circumstance.
And that durability / longevity is attractive to me.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I don't see how "you give it back and they give you a new one" is awful.
Either way it's kind of insulting to Apple's engineers and designers to compare their work to IBM. IBM's industrial design at the PC/XT/AT era is just really lazy when it's not actively ugly:
"eh, just throw the brightness and contrast dials anywhere. No, don't bother keeping them out of the line of sight. Centering the CRT? What, you don't want to look at an off center monitor all day? Madness! Besides, we already spent our design budget on the giant bezel."
Then we get to the PS/2 era:
Just... What the fuck is this mess? There's no functional reason for it to look like a rejected prop from a new hope, it just does. Someone very carefully and deliberately made it look ugly, and probably got paid quite a lot of money to do it too.
Ugh. Technology is making me mad again.
Look at that goofy ass power switch. Look at the vents! It's a work of madness.
At least apple did it so that the monitor would be directly over the QWERTY section. I think the idea was to have the computer off center on your desk, with the area to the left of the monitor full of stuff. The Atari TT did that too.
IBM were just being too lazy to design a chassis that could hold the entire PCB under the tube.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
my university actually used them as information kiosks, so it was great seeing them all over campus and occasionally playing with screen.