I like almidax's idea. Hopefully @dondan can implement it in a better way.
Maybe harder rubber is more resistant.
-
Save 15% on ALL SFF Network merch, until Dec 31st! Use code SFF2024 at checkout. Click here!
DAN C4-SFX - old
- Thread starter dondan
- Start date
- Status
I like almidax's idea. Hopefully @dondan can implement it in a better way.
Maybe harder rubber is more resistant.
I always love the Jonsbo UMX1 case. They do run hot, and expensive to get here in the states. I’d love to see your take on this execution, @dondan !Btw: What do you think about a outer design that looks like this without the gab under the window panel:
Btw: What do you think about a outer design that looks like this without the gab under the window panel:
I don't mind the curves at the top and bottom that come with a unibody design, although I still prefer the original renders.
I don't like all the I/O on the front, and I would likely opt for a perforated/vented side panel instead of glass, especially with all the raised screws around the edges that are required to hold it in place.
I saw the comments earlier regarding the possibility of longer panels that are unsupported bending. Have you considered a top or front panel made of glass. I saw the InWin A1 has a glass top panel and it looks better than I though it would.
Looking forward to seeing your new ideas soon.
Another idea from almidax ([h]forum):
While I still prefer the OG design I find this idea... acceptable. Less rounded and more "masculine".
While I still prefer the OG design I find this idea... acceptable. Less rounded and more "masculine".
Another idea from almidax ([h]forum):
While I still prefer the OG design I find this idea... acceptable. Less rounded and more "masculine".
That is actually pretty sexy... props to almidax!
Not a good attitude to have. This thread is basically acting as a little focus group and is a staple of qualitative research used when designing new products that every good company will partake in. As a result, these opinions actually matter in the wider scope of things (otherwise they would not be so widely used), and your decision to ignore them is telling me that you just want to do your own thing regardless of what people think - if that wasn't the case, there would be no problem with moving forward with surveys to gather a wider range of opinions, right?
I think it's safe to say that, as I stated above, you don't care that people prefer the original design and you're going to do what you want regardless with the overall direction of the design. At the end of the day though, it's your product and your decision. If you wanted to maximise commercial success, however (just from a business standpoint I can't fathom someone who'd deliberately shoot profits in the foot), I'd take the qualitative research a bit more seriously.
I may seem harsh, but I just dislike it when people ignore a small 'total' of opinions, completely ignoring that it represents a large majority of a select group and will therefore likely spread out if the group size were to increase (and this is where you use surveys etc to confirm those findings as the focus group is indeed not the end-all, but it is still a very good place to begin from).
As for the case above, my opinion on it is this: It's looking better, but it's still missing the spark that made the original C4 so attractive; I doubt I'd be buying this design.
Last edited:
Well, it was harsh indeed. Dan certainly isn't dumb, there are challenges that are difficult to overcome. He's just trying different paths, nothing is set in stone.
Let's try to keep this conversation constructive, it's better if we motivate Dan rather than annoying him
Another idea from almidax ([h]forum):
While I still prefer the OG design I find this idea... acceptable. Less rounded and more "masculine".
I second everything Metro said. This looks clean, and while I prefer the angular edges, it seems like this is a nice middle ground
I've been thinking a lot about this case recently. And I think I've reached my conclusion with regards to the exterior design.
If it's unibody, in order for it to look good, it's got to be super clean, 100% flush and smooth, no io, with very well placed power button. You've gotta go all the way with that sort of futuristic look that I think most unibody cases have.
However the more I think about it the more I realize how nice the old design is. All unibody cases look the same. Make a unique exterior design to go with a unique interior design.
I think there probably is a design solution to allow for the old design to work, and I have faith in @dondan that he will find it.
Edit: also I hate the midground. Takes the best of the old design and slaps it on to a unibody and it just doesn't work. Makes me want the old design more.
If it's unibody, in order for it to look good, it's got to be super clean, 100% flush and smooth, no io, with very well placed power button. You've gotta go all the way with that sort of futuristic look that I think most unibody cases have.
However the more I think about it the more I realize how nice the old design is. All unibody cases look the same. Make a unique exterior design to go with a unique interior design.
I think there probably is a design solution to allow for the old design to work, and I have faith in @dondan that he will find it.
Edit: also I hate the midground. Takes the best of the old design and slaps it on to a unibody and it just doesn't work. Makes me want the old design more.
I believe that @Tephnos has a valid point and @Metroversal also has a valid point.
However in the end, its @dondan 's project and his decisions. Whether if his decisions lead to a terrible downfall or a success, then so be it. In the end, he made the final decision so that he can have a case that he likes 100% and not feel half ass'd about it. And I respect that. There shouldn't be shame in having a case you want to build than be a sellout and trying to please everyone with their choices.
All I can say is that, I think the fact that @dondan isn't doing the survey to see the actual numbers in people's opinions (as he used to) may be most likely because he wants the unibody more than anyone else. Maybe he wants to build his signature design or.. just see an older brother of A4... or so on and so forth.
I think all we can do is just see and how this project pans out.
If we don't see something we like, then maybe someone else in the SFF community might come around and do something we weren't able to see happen.
And by me writing this, I hope to kill the fire/discussion about the (now) controversial recent news.
However in the end, its @dondan 's project and his decisions. Whether if his decisions lead to a terrible downfall or a success, then so be it. In the end, he made the final decision so that he can have a case that he likes 100% and not feel half ass'd about it. And I respect that. There shouldn't be shame in having a case you want to build than be a sellout and trying to please everyone with their choices.
All I can say is that, I think the fact that @dondan isn't doing the survey to see the actual numbers in people's opinions (as he used to) may be most likely because he wants the unibody more than anyone else. Maybe he wants to build his signature design or.. just see an older brother of A4... or so on and so forth.
I think all we can do is just see and how this project pans out.
If we don't see something we like, then maybe someone else in the SFF community might come around and do something we weren't able to see happen.
And by me writing this, I hope to kill the fire/discussion about the (now) controversial recent news.
As a matter of fact, I might actually pick up the old design and try to build myself one as a personal project, if we don't see through the old design. Hopefully I still haven't lost my touch in Autodesk.
Last edited:
Good news guys! Seems like the good Almidax is trying everything to "save" the old design lol.
This is his latest idea: rubber pads glued to the inner frame (in order to prevent scratches)
Looks like a simple and cost-effective solution. I hope @dondan will give it a chance at least.
I'll just keep my fingers crossed!
This is his latest idea: rubber pads glued to the inner frame (in order to prevent scratches)
Looks like a simple and cost-effective solution. I hope @dondan will give it a chance at least.
I'll just keep my fingers crossed!
Sometimes you have to move a step back to recognise that the stuff you already made is better than thought. So I took the Saturday to take a deeper look at the prototypes, enjoying the design disassembly it and assembly it. After that day I got the feeling that you are right and I should focus on the current design and try to solve the problems. Maybe my reaction in the last week was a panic reaction because sometimes you come to a point where you think your product isn’t that good as thought and you have the feeling to start from zero. But I fall in love again with the current design.
So I am now back in CAD and try to optimized them and keep the design that you all love.
While working on this I have some question that maybe needs to be discussed:
So I am now back in CAD and try to optimized them and keep the design that you all love.
While working on this I have some question that maybe needs to be discussed:
- Side I/O: I found out if you plug a USB drive or a headset in the side I/O it is very dangerous. The most customers will put the system next to them on the desk if you now making a wrong movement you can break the components inside the I/O because they stick out. The top I/O version will not have that problem.
- Case stiffness: If you remove all panels the case stiffness is not very good. The reason for this is the attachment of the middle plate. I have to attach them in that way that you will not see screws in the side I/O area. If I will switch to the top I/O version the stiffness could be much better.
- Case feet’s: The angled case feet’s that you can see in the rendering in the first post of this thread has two problems: The case balance point is top-heavy. With the angled one it is very easy to bowl down the case. The problem is also bigger if you don’t install a GPU. The second problem is, that both angled bottom plates (silver and black) has the problem that they are not mate 100% proper this will result in a wobbling case because one corner has no contact to the ground. I think I will use the top plate also for the bottom part with four A4 feet’s attached.
Let me be the first to say "Woooohoooo!!!"
Sounds like the top I/O is going to solve most of the problems you listed.
I'm certain you'll come up with a solution for the case feet soon. Please just don't make it ugly hi-fi style feet that look like they were taken from a 1980s amplifier.
Sydney, Australia.
Nope. Demand still here big D.
Where do I send my cheque?
To be honest, delay hasn't hurt me. (Hackintosh project). Titan Xp should be a LOT cheaper by the time you have a shipping product, ... whatever form it takes.
Top I/O it is!
Edit: I'd still prefer no I/O in the interest of keeping clean. But I imagine I'm a very small minority.
Last edited:
@dondan I would’ve been happy with whichever design you chose, and I’m very excited to see the development moving forward!
I’ll miss the case feet if they are to be changed, but I always wondered if they would pose the very issues you stated.
As far as you worrying about people breaking things with a side I/O, you shouldn’t. It would be like knife makers worrying people are going to cut themselves with their products... if that was their mindset, we’d be cutting everything with a spoon. It’s up to the user to be careful, not up to you to cater to their incompetence.
Now, if moving the I/O to the top is a structural decision, then THAT is a good reason. I prefer the side version, but if it isn’t as structurally sound that way, then it makes sense to move it to the top.
I’ll miss the case feet if they are to be changed, but I always wondered if they would pose the very issues you stated.
As far as you worrying about people breaking things with a side I/O, you shouldn’t. It would be like knife makers worrying people are going to cut themselves with their products... if that was their mindset, we’d be cutting everything with a spoon. It’s up to the user to be careful, not up to you to cater to their incompetence.
Now, if moving the I/O to the top is a structural decision, then THAT is a good reason. I prefer the side version, but if it isn’t as structurally sound that way, then it makes sense to move it to the top.
I don’t actually think you are. I liked the side I/O b/c it hides everything, and have never really liked the looks of top I/Os b/c it looks like hell once everything is plugged in. But that’s the classic form > function debate.
Last edited:
- Status
