Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
iMac Businesses Apple Hardware

Zettabyte Shut Down 67

Posted by pudge from the no-superdrive-for-you dept.
jpt.d writes "Zettabyte (those who put the SuperDrive in the eMac) have been shut down without detailed explaination. They only say, 'Due to Legal Restrictions we will no longer be able to sell our SuperDrive equipped eMac.' Does anyone have any more details about this?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Zettabyte Shut Down More

Zettabyte Shut Down

Comments Filter:
  • This news is about a week old, but there's still no information. Taken from http://www.yourdailymac.com/ [yourdailymac.com]

    (07/20/02) : Due to legal entangelments provided by Apple and their legal partners, Zettabyte Solutions is no longer able to offer the SuperDrive equipped eMac in its current state. We will fill our existing orders and provide warranties for all eMacs sold under our name.

    Zettabyte is a solutions provider and was trying to fill a need in the Macintosh community. We will continue, to the best of our ability, to furnish solutions wherever there is a need. Please look to us in the future for product upgrades, enhancements, and solutions for your Macintosh.

  • Sigh... (Score:1)

    by sofo ( 18554 )
    Apple, you are such a good company when you want to be. Why can't you allow people to assist you in giving the people what they want?

    I used to agree with Bob Metcalfe that "Steve Jobs could do no wrong" but every now and then I have to eat his words and it is getting tired.
  • It could be an issue with the eMac being for eductional markets. Apple has had a long standing policy that resellers cannot sell Educational-market models to the general public, and so this could be where they were bitten. ( a good example is the "All-in-one G3" -- you can buy it from private sellers, of from eductional institiutions that are selling their, but you wuoudln't buy them from an Apple reseller unless you were and educator)

    I can see why Zettabyte would not think this was an issue because Apple is selling them to the general public -- but they're still "educational products", methinks.
    • That is not the reason. Apple has publicly released the eMac to consumers (link) [apple.com]. Apple probably did this to prevent Zettabyte from infringing on iMac sales, but I have no idea as to what legal basis they would have for doing this (reselling end user software licenses maybe?).

  • An educated guess.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by quantax ( 12175 ) on Monday July 29, 2002 @03:25PM (#3973798) Homepage
    Apple has maintained strict control over its distribution rights regarding Macs. I would imagine that they felt that Zettabyte was 'out of bounds' by selling their 'customized' macs. I was unaware of Zettabyte before this, but I am assuming they just added parts to existing macs and resell them. This would be no surprise, given Apple's iron grip on the control of the Mac in general, from design to distribution. I personally think this is dumb of Apple, since more macs being sold = bigger market share = more people buying mac stuff now & in the future. It has its disadvantages and advantages, but in light of Apple's financial situation (they have not been on really solid ground for a couple years), I would say the long term benefits of wider usage outweigh the short-term problems & loss of control. Just my $0.02.
    • From the days of the original Mac, it's this type of crap which has kept the Apple machines behind the curve, technology-wise. That is, slow to adapt to changing markets and technologies. Sure they control everything about their machines and the market, but look at the price they pay. It's going on twenty years since the first Macs came out and look where they are in the market -- hey, about where they were twenty or so years ago.

      Let's just say they're content with tiny market share and pat them on their little heads and IGNORE THEM like we've been doing for, oh, about twenty years.

      Oy, I'm really cranky today, sorry.

      • Re:An educated guess.. (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Schart ( 587279 )

        First of all, I tend to agree that this is a less-than-good idea (not a bad one mind you) - but I can understand it. My gut-reaction is that Apple is thinking, "If they want a SuperDrive, they're going to get an iMac/G4 Tower. If they want inexpensive, eMac/CRT iMac." It all boils down to Money. Which many will say is bad, but Apple is in it to make money, no matter how cool I think Apple is, they still mainly want some of my money (which I'm happy to give considering what I get). So I can understand it. Here's a grain of salt, though: I have no desire to buy an eMac - SuperDrive or no.

        That being said, I'd like to briefly comment on a few of the comments made in this post (the one I'm replying to) and it's parent:

        1. Quantax wrote: "...they have not been on really solid ground for a couple years..." Which I don't think is entirely fair. Nor is it entirely accurate. Apple has been doing pretty darn well, as far as I'm concerned, in the past few years. Many consecutive quarters with black ink (even if it could have been blacker), 4-5 billion in cash in the bank, many industry-shaping products introduced (original iMac, PBG4, iBook, iPod and now the flat-panel iMac, OS X) to excellent sales AND reviews and some wickedly awesome applications (iTunes rocks the pants off a horse with the "search field" alone). I wouldn't exactly call that shaky ground. Sure, before a couple years ago things looked bad, and sure, the industry as a whole is slumping, but I think Apple is doing a bang-up job providing a great user experience - not just "bigger, faster, better" hype.

        2. eyepeepackets says a. "[Apple is] ... slow to adapt to changing markets and technologies... I would humbly state that this may be almost exactly the opposite of truth. They got rid of the insipid floppy (good riddance), made USB what it is today practically single-handedly, FireWire. Not to mention the way the rest of the industry tends to follow Apple's footsteps in many ways: colorful cases (one could argue for or against this, I'll leave that for another discussion), the whole "Desktop Video" thing, I'll not even mention This little thing [forbes.com] (oops, I just did). I believe it is misinformed to say that Apple is behind the curve, or that they don't innovate.

        3. eyepeepackets also seems to completely ignore the fact that the Mac was the "first" "personal" computer when he/she states: "It's going on twenty years since the first Macs came out and look where they are in the market -- hey, about where they were twenty or so years ago. It's simply irresponsible to even attempt to compare the marketshare they had when the first Macs came out (which, I would imagine, was somewhere around 100% of the 4 people that could afford such a thing back then) and today.

        4. eyepeepackets then went on to write: ... Oh wait, your second-to-last statement was just flamebait, so I'll pat you on your little, patronizing head and IGNORE IT. (Mostly because of your "cranky" disclaimer! ;)

        Perhaps I have Apple-tinted glasses on, I'm not trying to attack anybody here, but, please, try to give Apple credit where credit is due. Even if you are wearing penguin-(or more likely, MSFT-)tinted glasses.

        • "2. eyepeepackets says a. "[Apple is] ... slow to adapt to changing markets and technologies... I would humbly state that this may be almost exactly the opposite of truth. They got rid of the insipid floppy (good riddance), made USB what it is today practically single-handedly, FireWire. Not to mention the way the rest of the industry tends to follow Apple's footsteps in many ways: colorful cases (one could argue for or against this, I'll leave that for another discussion), the whole "Desktop Video" thing, I'll not even mention This little thing [forbes.com] (oops, I just did). I believe it is misinformed to say that Apple is behind the curve, or that they don't innovate."

          Yes, you make some good points in defense of Apple and I'll agree that my statement is a bit over the top.

          "3. eyepeepackets also seems to completely ignore the fact that the Mac was the "first" "personal" computer when he/she states: "It's going on twenty years since the first Macs came out and look where they are in the market -- hey, about where they were twenty or so years ago. It's simply irresponsible to even attempt to compare the marketshare they had when the first Macs came out (which, I would imagine, was somewhere around 100% of the 4 people that could afford such a thing back then) and today."

          Umm, wrong, way wrong; check your history.

          "4. eyepeepackets then went on to write: ... Oh wait, your second-to-last statement was just flamebait, so I'll pat you on your little, patronizing head and IGNORE IT. (Mostly because of your "cranky" disclaimer! ;)

          Perhaps I have Apple-tinted glasses on, I'm not trying to attack anybody here, but, please, try to give Apple credit where credit is due. Even if you are wearing penguin-(or more likely, MSFT-)tinted glasses."

          You're a kind soul and I thank you for your generousity. I'll go on record here and now by saying that whilst I would never allow Apple to lock me into their proprietary hardware hell, I do really appreciate the fact that they've been in the market over the past thirty years or so; in many ways they have helped keep the game interesting even if more so at some times than others.

          Thanks for the interesting (well thought and well fought) reply.

          • One quick note, as per your response to #3: I don't really know what I was thinking with that 100% thing. I admit that I didn't research it, but I'd still be willing to bet that Apple had more than 2.7-5% market-share in the "Personal Computer" market. But I digress...

            Side note: eyepeepackets, thanks right back at you for not flaming my very first post on slashdot!

            (Damn, I actually get a 2 [on an Apple-related thread, no less!] on my very first post and what do I follow it up with? A -1 offtopic... Shoot! Oh well, best not to think too hard on it, it'll be another 6 months before there's something else for me to say that hasn't already been said.

            • You could consider the Apple II the first Personal Computer,

              The Mac was not the first personal computer... but it was the first personal computer with a REAL gui.

              At one time the Apple II series did in fact dominate the market... and then IBM saw that market... and wanted in :)

              I suppose the Mac did dominate the graphical user interface market fairly well for a while...

              And from there, it grew to dominate the page layout, graphics, video etc markets...

              ie, any market which relied on a visual rather than textual representation.

              And then windows happened ;)
            • I admit that I didn't research it, but I'd still be willing to bet that Apple had more than 2.7-5% market-share in the "Personal Computer" market.

              20 years ago, Apple had a much bigger share of a much smaller market. These days, 5% of the computer market is enough to be considered a "playa". A lot of PC makers wish they could do 5%, especially with Apple's margins.

        • "That little thing" looks nothing like the iPod! It's a different color! ;-P

    • ummmm (Score:3, Insightful)

      by linuxbert ( 78156 )
      apple is one of 2 pc makers to turn a profit this year. dell is the other.

      ibm also did, but they do lots of things other then just pc's
    • I currently have five Intels (1 Win2K, 1 Win98, three Linux boxes). My kids are really pushing to get a Mac for Christmas. I like tinkering with new software, but I really dislike companies that think I'm A) Made of money B) Stupid This is true if you are talking computers, cars, bicycles or anything else I like/have to spend money on. An eMac with a SuperDrive would be perfect. But I can't get one. I have no use for the iMac concept of a nice LCD display permanently attached to a system unit that will be obsolete in two years. If I am directly or indirectly paying for an LCD display, I'm going to use it to watch DVD's and I'm going to keep it for a while. This means the minimum cost of entry for an iMac would be $1600. With a SuperDrive to burn, $1800. Using Apple's pricing structure, I should be able to get a SuperDrive on an eMac for +$200. The 'iMac premium' over an eMac is $3-400 depending on the models. I'd rather have a SuperDrive than a cutesey bubble base and an LCD that I cannot attach to anything else. And save $200 in the process. So it looks like maybe I'll just avoid the brain damage, get a Wintel with a nice SEPERATE LCD display and a firewire DVD burner, and spend a couple hundred less in the process.

  • No Kidding... (Score:4, Informative)

    by gabe ( 6734 ) on Monday July 29, 2002 @03:43PM (#3973950) Homepage Journal
    Go read MacCentral.

    You will learn that Apple told them to stop selling the upgraded devices, and that now they are going to sell kits instead, and perhaps a service where customers can send in their eMac to get it upgraded. They are not "shut down" or closed, or out of business by any means.

    I don't see the big deal in this at all. If someone were to take boxed Dells and modify them and resell them, I think Dell would have a problem with that too... But, then again, what about the rack mounted Quicksilvers that Terra Soft [terrasoftsolutions.com] sells as the GVS 9000? They're repackaged Power Macs.

    Honestly, I don't see why the heck people don't just buy an external DVD-R. SuperDrives are too slow anyways. It's convenient, yes, but limiting. The built-in CDRW is 24/16/32 or something like that. Aren't the SuperDrives 4 speed?

    Ironically enough, you can still get to the order page by going here [zettabytesolutions.com]

    • Re:No Kidding... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by WatertonMan ( 550706 )
      How is reselling a new Dell or Apple different from reselling a *used* Dell or Apple. I don't understand the distinction. (Nor how there could be a legal question unless they were advertising them as "new")
      • I would guess the distinction to be that the used computers are usually older models, and have seen some wear and tear. The computers that Zettabyte were selling are not used, they purchased them from Apple, or Apple resellers. I think the problem is that they probably did not have any kind of formal "reseller" agreement with Apple. It certainly seems this way from reading the article on maccentral...

        "We filled most of the orders; there was a certain point in time where I was not able to acquire any more eMacs and because of that some of the orders did have to be canceled and the money refunded to the customer," said Thompson.

        I'm guessing that they were just purchasing them either from Apple directly, through Apple stores or perhaps other resellers like MacMall, MacWarehouse, etc. Then again, I could be completely wrong about this.
        • If, as the other poster mentioned, they had a resellers agreement with Apple, then this makes sense. However if they were purchasing them from Mac Warehouse and just adding to them I honestly don't see what Apple could do. How much "wear and tear" a computer has seems irrelevant. There are plenty of stores that purchase computers or other equipment in bulk from resellers to sell themselves. (Typically when that reseller is stopping sales on that material) Something odd is going on.
      • How is reselling a new Dell or Apple different from reselling a *used* Dell or Apple.

        A reseller has a relationship with the manufacturer which allows them to acquire the computers at wholesale prices. Somebody selling a used box probably bought it at full price.

    • For reference... (Score:2, Informative)

      by jeblucas ( 560748 )
      Here's a link [yahoo.com] to the MacCentral Story from Yahoo.
    • I don't see the big deal in this at all. If someone were to take boxed Dells and modify them and resell them, I think Dell would have a problem with that too... But, then again, what about the rack mounted Quicksilvers that Terra Soft [terrasoftsolutions.com] sells as the GVS 9000? They're repackaged Power Macs.
      The rackmounted PowerMacs are distinguished enough from actual Apple products enough by their trade dress. In the Zetabyte instance, the computer's case was not altered significantly enough to not confuse buyers into thinking they were getting an official Apple products.
  • . . . that Apple is their Un*x loving saviour from Bill's Evil Empire and Palladium would do well to note that their actions indicate they want to be just like Microsoft. They're just not as good at it.
  • Can someone explain (for the benefit of those of us who are confused by such stuff) how company A can sell me product P, but then have the legal force to tell ME not to re-sell my P to someone else?

    I don't get it. I can buy paper, write stuff on it, and sell it to someone else without a paper company coming after me. Why couldn't I buy a computer, modify it, and resell it? (provided I wasn't purporting to be Apple, etc...)

    Or am I missing the point here...
    • they were calling it an emac, but were not apple..
      thats why apple went after them
      • It is an eMac, originally purchased from Apple... what's wrong with calling it one? If they were calling their white box PC clone an eMac, I could see the problem, but there's nothing wrong with calling an eMac and eMac.
        • it is a modified emac, if i ordered the part listed on the box, i would not get one with a superdrive.

          your right it is an emac, made by apple, however the product as sold is not an apple model, and should not be called one.

          calling the product an emac causes confusion because consumers will go into stores and ask for the superdrive emac, which does not exist.

          apple sold an emac to zettybyte. zettybyte changed it from its original form, and design options, and therefore shouldnt use apple marketing names for their product.

          it would be perfectly ok to tell people its a modified emac with a super drive (that is what it is) it just should nto be marketed as an apple emac, which it was
          • The "right of first sale" the subject refers to says that once you buy something, you can do whatever you want to it, and you can resell it to someone else. Whether consumers will think that the modified eMac is from Apple seems irrelevant to me; I'm more interested in the legal aspects--what legal right does Apple have to stop Zettabyte from selling modified computers?

            People buy computers, make upgrades, and resell them all the time and nobody complains. Usually they resell it months or years after they buy it, whereas I assume Zettabyte tries to sell their computers as quickly as possible, but I don't see what the difference is legally.

            The same situation happens with cars, and I haven't heard any complaints there either... you can buy a Honda Civic, put in a fancy CD player and hang fuzzy dice on the rear view mirror, then put an ad in the paper saying that you're selling a Honda Civic, and I doubt Honda is gonna complain that you can't call it a Civic anymore because it has a Blaupunkt stereo in it. (And I also doubt other people are gonna go to a Honda dealership and ask why none of the Civics there have fuzzy dice :)

            it would be perfectly ok to tell people its a modified emac with a super drive (that is what it is) it just should nto be marketed as an apple emac, which it was

            It was marketed as a Apple eMac modified to include a SuperDrive... I still don't see any problem.

            • It's not a "right of first sale" issue, as Zettabyte in not a consumer but a reseller. From what I've seen, they're being sold as new, so what about your Apple warranty? Suddenly, it becomes Apple's problem, which is why they're stopping it.

              In your example, you're not an "authorized Honda reseller", so there are fewer guarantees to the buyer. In fact, I believe you would be required to sell the Civic as "used" because you, as a consumer, did get the "right of first sale."

              -J

              • From what I've seen, they're being sold as new, so what about your Apple warranty?

                That's not the impression I got... from what I remember, Zettabyte was going to provide the warranty and service on their modified machines. I just tried going to their website to see what they say, but their home page seems to have been replaced by a 9 megabyte MPEG!? (FWIW, I have no idea what the MPEG is of, but it looks interesting :)

                Anyways, some guy in the previous discussion [slashdot.org] did say that Zettabyte was providing their own warranty.

                • zettybtye may be warrantying the machines, but if they include original documentation, then it points th econsumer back to apple, and thus causes confusion.

                  the point about the honda civic expresses my idea, better then i did. once it is modified, and resold, the original warranty is no longer applicable.
                  • The used cars I've bought and sold have all come with original documentation (all the manuals and stuff are in the glove compartment). I still don't see how it points the consumer back to Apple--the consumer bought from Zettabyte and I'm sure they knew what they were getting.

                    Anyways, it's weird that their web site is completely gone... it'd be nice to have some facts about what happened instead of all of our speculation :)

    • Simple. Sign a reseller agreement that defines who, what and where you can sell the products. This is/was pretty common, and a good thing, because as a reseller you didn't have to worry much about out of town competition, or someone who had an only educational sales agreement wouldn't be able to undercut your comercial sales agreement.

  • Using Apple trademarks most likely.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by linuxbert ( 78156 ) on Monday July 29, 2002 @04:56PM (#3974474) Homepage Journal
    i think the big issue is with someone selling a modified product, and calling it an emac.

    the company that makes the rackable g4's doesnt call them powermac g4's, they have their own model name. and package them differently.
    Apple sells the emacs to Zettybyte, apple doesnt care what happens to them, what they likely have the issue with is people buying these, thinking that they are supported by apple, when they are not.

    Zettybyte doesnt call them the z-1000, they call them an apple emac, and likely ship the modified units in apple boxes, with apple documentation.
    and buyers (at least a percentage) call apple for support on these machines, with voided warrantys.
    this likely causes customer confusion, and dissatisfaction with the Apple Brand and is the reson for the halting of production.
    • I think you probably hit the nail on the head with this. People are too quick to assume evilness.

      "They're just like Microsoft!" whatever... Often times, things happen for legitimate reasons. Like it or not, if this product breached legal or contractual restrictions, then Apple did exactly the right thing.

    • Maybe I'm a little slow here (almost 2.30 am over here again *sigh*), but:

      If I got it right, they buy eMacs from Apple, put in the drive, and ship it on. So it IS an Apple eMac plus the Superdrive that isn't from Apple, a point that should be absolutely clear to the buyer (which is the reason they go to Zettybyte in the first place). It's not that they take some crap parts of their own, stuff them in a faked eMac case and sell it as an original eMac to unsuspecting customers. So I don't see any problems calling the eMacs what they are, eMacs.

      Admitted, the warranty question is tricky. OTOH, I don't know how invasive swapping the drive is for the machine, but if it is just a question of taking out one drive and putting in the other, in a professional way in a professional workshop (no welding, no cutting things, whatever bad things one can do to a computer), the question really is if this really voids the warranty.

      At least by German law, e.g. doing the same to a G4 tower shouldn't void the warranty as the drive (as well as PCI cards, RAM etc.) is meant to be end-user swappable by design (if not, adding parts to your new Mac or PC like more RAM, PCI cards, whatsoever would always void the warranty. Some PC companies over here tried to pull that stunt a couple of years ago and failed miserably in court, as a PC (and a G4 tower just the same) are designed with the purpose of changing parts in mind). So the core question is: Is the drive in the eMac meant to be changed by a customer or not ? The warranty for the superdrive certainly has to come from Zettybyte, but come on, where is the problem ? It can't be that expensive for Apple phone support to tell exactly that to people, and they made money by selling the original system in the first place anyway.

      In any case I don't like Apple's behaviour in that case. It is one of those somewhat childish wannabe-big brother attempts of Apple to dictate to their customers what they should buy and what they should use in, on or with their computers. When will they start going after retailers selling Macs with RAM-upgrades, graphics cards or other stuff not from Apple (exactly same situation and a AFAIK not very uncommon practise) ?
      • Im apple Authorized to preform service, and emac optical drives are not user serviceable. they are burried quite nicely in the system, and are a pain to get at if need be.

        yes they are emacs, but they are modified to an unsupported config

  • Hello? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by BitGeek ( 19506 )

    Well, Apple did something to protect itself and now everyones goign to go screaming about how "its just this type of stuff that keeps macs costing $10,000 and rquiring a refrigerator compresser to cool them" or some equivilent nonesense.

    Think about it.

    This company was taking new machines, modifying them, and selling them.

    How is apple supposed to provide warrantee work for them? How is apple supposed to deal with the damage to its brand when these machines don't work and the warrantee is violated?

    If you're going to sell apple technology-- and this is true of Dell, and other brands, and any seller from TechData down to CompUSA you HAVE To have a license. No license, you don't get to sell.

    Just as I can't go out and start selling high end Sony car stereos -- a license they only give to their biggest volume dealers-- Apple protecting its brand in this way is exactly what every hardware manufacturer in the world does as well.

    Course this won't mean anything to the bigots that see apple as evil and don't understand business at all so they conjecture up some moral law that this supposedly violates. "SEE! This is what happens when you don't sell yourh ardware under GPL! You're a SLAVE TO STEVE JOBS!!!!"

    Even the GPL is a *license*!

  • Steve Jobs had an incredible blind spot about internal, built-in hard drives. I don't know just what the deal was. Apple NEVER offered one for the Apple ][ AFAIK. And even in the late eighties, he tried to sell the NeXT cube with a magneto-optical removable as its only mass storage device... In the 1995 time frame, when internal hard drives were common in PC's, Apple had NO internal hard drives for the Mac (and no decent external drives).

    GCC in Cambridge started cobbling together Macs with (big!) internal 10 megabyte drives. I don't remember whether they had any legal issues with Apple; IIRC there were minor skirmishes but Apple permitted them to do it with appropriate disclaimers.

    I won't go so far as to say the HyperDrive saved the Mac, but certainly it helped. An awful lot of people who needed to do serious work on Macs (using that hot new program, PageMaker, for example) needed a hard drive and used the HyperDrive, and it was a very good proof of concept in showing everyone what the Mac was like with a decent hard drive instead of a 400K floppy.

    • What?! (Score:1)

      by gabe ( 6734 )
      The Quadra 700 Macintosh that I got in 1991 had a 500MB hard drive. Unless you meant 1985, not 1995? Then again, in 1985 you could get a Mac XL with a 10MB hard drive.
    • 1995? Funny, in 1993 I bought an LC III (just a touch under $900 at the time when most systems on either side of the fence were $2000+) and it had an internal 200MB hard drive... maybe you're thinking 1985? The SE/30 I used at a publishing job had a hard drive in it, but the system had to be ordered that way. Of course, this is around the time that a 20MB (yes, I said MB, not GB) hard drive would cost you a ton of money.
    • I remember the documentation that came with the hard drives in IBM's and Compaqs back then: "Don't attempt to move your computer across the room. The Jiggling will cause drive errors... And for God's sake, don't bump the desk your computer is sitting on, or every last scrap of data will be lost forever!!!! Do not store anything on your hard drive that you might want later, unless you also saved it elsewhere. Do not taunt the hard drive..."

      Early hard drives were so famously unreliable back in the Apple ][ days that I can understand why some companies were slow to jump in.

    • I'm picking nits but I think you mean 1985. And it couldn't have taken them too long to realize their mistake as I used to have a Mac LC from 1986 with a 40 meg HD in it.
    • Every NeXT box ever made had at least the option of an internal HD. The Lisa had an available internal HD and would run Mac apps by 1985 (aka Macintosh XL). The Thin and Fat Macs had a serial connected HD available, and SCSI appeared on the SEs in '86. Sure no internal, but look at the size difference between a PC AT and a Mac SE some time. When Macs came in bigger cases - starting with the II series in 1987 - they had internal HDs.

      • Just to clarify, you forgot my trusty ol' Mac Plus (introduced Jan. 1986). That's the model without an internal HD, but it did come with a SCSI (DB-25) port. The SE (basically same form factor as the Plus) came on the market March 1987, and during its lifetime there was the option for an internal HD. (Dates courtesy of Mactracker [members.shaw.ca])
  • The Zettabyte Foundation [zettabyte.net], a New Hampshire Non-Profit Technology Research organization is just fine.

    You wouldn't report "McDonald's goes Bankrupt" when "McDonald's Foreign Auto Body of Kenosha" folds, right?

Slashdot Top Deals

When you make your mark in the world, watch out for guys with erasers. -- The Wall Street Journal

Close