DAN C4-SFX - old
- Thread starter dondan
- Start date
- Status
Can your high-and-mighty attitude, bud; he's selling a product, not giving us something for free. If people prefer his first design over his later designs, then that should be expressed. He can choose to ignore it, but at the end of the day if he wants to sell a good volume of cases it would be wise for him to listen to what people want. So far, it seems a good number of people who have been following this case have been disappointed with his change in direction.
be careful with the amount and type of feedback though. For contrast: most traditional case manufacturers only A/B test or gather feedback in trade shows like CES or Computex once/twice a year, with limited but more constructive attendees (see: Hardware Canucks coverage). Threads like this is like a 24/7/365 Computex with everyone wishlisting on the process. Don't make the project lead to have to feel guilty just to iterate on the model.
Hoping people choose the former while you choose the latter? Hypocrisy is strong in this one.
Btw Hardforum thread is not dead, everyone was waiting for updates.
It's not about my personal taste, even Dan knows that if people have to choose between the Unibody VS Original Design, most will vote for the latter. That's a problem if you want your Kickstarter to succeed.
Um, this is not iteration, this looks like a totally different project both functionality wise and visually. The progress done in the previous pages is called iteration.
Nobody is hating on Dan, we all know he is a freaking genius. People have been following this thread for months, took surveys, gave suggestions, etc. invested some time as well. It's just a shame that all of this could be sort of worthless.
So don't be mad if people are quite vocal on this project, you just subscribed.
Well expressed @Metroversal, a good number of us here have been following this and been behind it for many months.
This is a supportive and positive community, which is passionate at times when it comes to discussions.
Again, it is not about personal taste; this is bigger than that.
If the C4 paintwork is a problem, could the frame be powder coated instead at a reasonable cost?
If you dont like it, you should dont speak about this more than one time. He doesn't need a reminder every page
Last edited:
If all you want to do is shit post, this isn't the place to do so.
There has already been a vote on unibody vs the 2 other non-unibody designs. I don't think even 20% wanted the unibody design.
I wouldn't buy a unibody design, and I imagine this case could lose around 30-40% buyers just going to a unibody design.
The direction this has suddenly taken has made me lose interest in this case, I really would not be happy having to wait another year for a case that's nothing of what initially hooked me. Not to sound offensive, but even if the case is going back to what it previously was, this kind of flip-flopping is too much of a risk.
What @VegetableStu said, this case probably got too much feedback, and it's really hurting the development of the case. This group of late arriving people starting to "demand" new and already excluded features set it off track, iirc custom loops etc was already agreed upon to not be catered to. It would've been much better if the input was much more limited.
It's just this: Dan goes out of his way to cater to the community, gather feedback, etc. When he hits a roadblock, he even shares it with everyone: 'X changed, so I need to explore some different solutions.'
Many respond as if sky is falling, claiming that "Dan messed up", acting like the kickstarter had been launched, funded, and promises etched in stone.
It's either a crazy sense of entitlement or really bad manners.
Many respond as if sky is falling, claiming that "Dan messed up", acting like the kickstarter had been launched, funded, and promises etched in stone.
It's either a crazy sense of entitlement or really bad manners.
We're 50 pages in, were over 40 pages in before all of these changes happened.
We went from the suggestion of ~9.8L to +11L, and went from a sleek exterior to a unibody.
All of these conversations had already been had. The water cooling chamber was increased because most wanted to have 30mm radiators with 25mm fans. The design for IO and front of the case was decided by a vote, when the unibody was an option, vast majority voted for either the drawer-looking design or the one Dan got a prototype for.
We've already been through what people wanted, there's no need to step back and start over asking the same questions again. Making it 5mm longer to allow for 2x120mm radiators isn't too big of a design change.
There's some manufacture/assembly issues that causes scratches on the inside, apparently... Also some structural issues.Then those issues should be fixed by changing the interior structural design, maybe make some compromises somewhere.
If they can't be solved and the C4-SFX design has to be scrapped, then that's too bad.
Or if Dan doesn't like the C4-SFX concept anymore, he's free to explore whatever other options he wants, but a suggestion would be to create a new thread for those new case concepts.
We went from the suggestion of ~9.8L to +11L, and went from a sleek exterior to a unibody.
All of these conversations had already been had. The water cooling chamber was increased because most wanted to have 30mm radiators with 25mm fans. The design for IO and front of the case was decided by a vote, when the unibody was an option, vast majority voted for either the drawer-looking design or the one Dan got a prototype for.
We've already been through what people wanted, there's no need to step back and start over asking the same questions again. Making it 5mm longer to allow for 2x120mm radiators isn't too big of a design change.
There's some manufacture/assembly issues that causes scratches on the inside, apparently... Also some structural issues.Then those issues should be fixed by changing the interior structural design, maybe make some compromises somewhere.
If they can't be solved and the C4-SFX design has to be scrapped, then that's too bad.
Or if Dan doesn't like the C4-SFX concept anymore, he's free to explore whatever other options he wants, but a suggestion would be to create a new thread for those new case concepts.
Yes, he hits a roadblock (scracths) and show a new proyect (literally).
ANYWAYS, lets stop the bickering and help dondan move this project forward in a productive way.
IMO most of my devices are USB-C so I’d definitely prefer that. Rather have to use dongles for a year or two and have a case that lasts me a decade than the inverse. For the power button, I’m of the mind that it should be wherever the ports are. What do you all think?
IMO most of my devices are USB-C so I’d definitely prefer that. Rather have to use dongles for a year or two and have a case that lasts me a decade than the inverse. For the power button, I’m of the mind that it should be wherever the ports are. What do you all think?
Last edited:
Question: is it possible to separate the build method – e.g. frame vs unibody – from the case aesthetics: curved vs sharp edges?
We know it's true in one direction, at least, because the A4 has curved front edges but is not a unibody case. We also know, from Dan, that the unibody build offers some important efficiencies, among them greater usable internal volume.
Question two: how sharp of an edge can be crafted with Lian Li's unibody format? In the renderings above, it appears that the top front edge has a slightly greater radius than that top rear edge.
I'm wondering if there is a way to achieve the 'established' C4 look while still benefitting from the unibody design. Wabbit pointed out his appreciation for the original "separated front panel" design in this post. I agree, as does Dan apparently. The C4 never looked better than in those first renders: simple, clean, and with a unique, almost hidden placement of the power button and ports.
So, is there any way to leverage the unibody design throughout, except on the front panel, where separate pieces would be used to achieve a specific appearance?
We know it's true in one direction, at least, because the A4 has curved front edges but is not a unibody case. We also know, from Dan, that the unibody build offers some important efficiencies, among them greater usable internal volume.
Question two: how sharp of an edge can be crafted with Lian Li's unibody format? In the renderings above, it appears that the top front edge has a slightly greater radius than that top rear edge.
I'm wondering if there is a way to achieve the 'established' C4 look while still benefitting from the unibody design. Wabbit pointed out his appreciation for the original "separated front panel" design in this post. I agree, as does Dan apparently. The C4 never looked better than in those first renders: simple, clean, and with a unique, almost hidden placement of the power button and ports.
So, is there any way to leverage the unibody design throughout, except on the front panel, where separate pieces would be used to achieve a specific appearance?
I think all this talk of unibody designs, power button and I/O locations, and radiator thickness has distracted us from the major issue. Where's the RGB lighting???
Stop there should be 0 RGB on a case like this. It has become such a tacky thing, and there are very easy ways to add it yourself.
Yes! I won't be adding RGB or under case lighting to my build anytime soon.
Someone needs to create a Sarcastica font for some of my posts.
- Status
