Quote:
Originally Posted by chucker
It's kind of a toss-up for me. He either would have shipped it, been annoyed by the feedback, then canned it, or we would have looked at internal prototypes, been annoyed by the project setbacks, and canned it before it's ever even announced.
That's not my recollection of the Rev A stereotype. It was something like "they got the basic design right, but there are some kinks to work out, and we won't see the result of that for another 6-12 months". One can quibble over whether that made them subpar, or whether Rev A was even a real thing at all*, but I do think the idea of "Rev A" was to criticize that Apple would ship a design that showed a promise, but didn't quite yet deliver on it.
*) How many people can even answer this one, though? It's not like you'd typically buy both Rev A and Rev B and be able to judge differences. We're not all the Grubers and Arments of this world who spend their money on every single iPhone revision. I spaced out Mac purchases to three to five years, so I never really got two Macs of the same larger generation. White iBook, Alu MBP, unibody MBP, Retina MBP, … — never twice of those.
Even if you're a reviewer, you only get a fairly distorted view — you get the first few days of weeks of the product, not its long-term reliability.
|
I honestly don’t know what you are referring to.
Example:
Revision A iMac vs Revision B
Major difference was an ati rage Iic 2MB graphics card vs an ATI rage pro turbo 6MB.
Powermac g4 rev a vs rev b was basically gigabit Ethernet and dropping of the Yikes motherboard.
Rev a vs rev b iPhone difference was 3G.
Maybe your memory/experience does not go as far back but I’m not the one who referenced “Steve”