[HN Gopher] Mac Plus made of legos at 1:1 scale
___________________________________________________________________
Mac Plus made of legos at 1:1 scale
Author : lisper
Score : 90 points
Date : 2021-04-18 18:14 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ideas.lego.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (ideas.lego.com)
| kwertyoowiyop wrote:
| "The Macintosh was the first home computer from Apple."
|
| Sigh.
| racl101 wrote:
| Maybe the first one Steve considered his real baby. Unlike his
| biological daughter.
|
| Hiyo!
| dylan604 wrote:
| I'm sure the "other" Steve didn't feel that way.
| dev_tty01 wrote:
| Yeah, that's a big miss. A single web search would have easily
| cleared this up.
| dwohnitmok wrote:
| By "big miss" I suspect you mean that this is a miss by Lego
| System A/S, but this is in fact a post by a random Lego user,
| not the company itself.
| mproud wrote:
| Yep, absolutely not true.
| Someone wrote:
| and color screens. That alienates old-timers and misinforms
| youngsters.
| crooked-v wrote:
| Now if only it had building instructions or an LDraw or BrickLink
| Studio model file.
| evolve2k wrote:
| Lovely product. One thing though;
|
| I would have preferred if they had stuck with gray on gray to
| simulate a black and white monitor for the display screens.
|
| The "hello" from Steve Jobs launch event would have been nice a
| nice inclusion, but looks simple enough to change for any user of
| this "kit" in future.
| sneak wrote:
| I recently was surprised to discover that original Macintoshes
| and Mac Pluses and the like are actually easier to get on eBay
| these days than Power Mac 8600s/9600s.
| incanus77 wrote:
| I got a Mac Plus recently locally via Craigslist for about
| $150, including the original rainbow logo carrying case.
| Getting an 800K system floppy together, though... that took
| some work.
| gjvc wrote:
| "Lego", not "Legos", please.
|
| Sigh.
| jjeaff wrote:
| I don't think corporate marketing departments get to demand
| changes to the English language. It seems like the much more
| common usage in the wild is legos, regardless of what corporate
| and pedants want people to use.
| Marazan wrote:
| Only in America.
|
| The UK uses lego as the plural for lego.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| But isn't it more kind to respect the wishes of the people
| who created and named it in the first place?
|
| Yes you've got every right to continue to be ignorant after
| it's been explained to you... but I mean why aspire to do
| that?
| hrktb wrote:
| I'd be with you if there was any kind of consensus on this.
|
| For instance GIF's creator clarifying the pronounciation of
| his file format was mostly met with a mild middle finger.
| Is the Lego company meriting more bending backwards than
| him ?
| crooked-v wrote:
| It's basically the same treatment that any company wants:
| "Kleenex tissues", "Google searches", "Band-Aid
| bandages", "LEGO bricks", etc. This is for trademark
| reasons, because not vigorously defending the 'proper'
| use of the term can lead it to becoming genericized and
| usable by anyone. For an example of this happening in
| practice, "aspirin" was originally a Bayer trademark that
| was lost through genericization.
| matja wrote:
| > NEVER add a possessive "s", plural "s" or hyphen, e.g.
| LEGO's design, more LEGOs to play with, LEGO-bricks.
|
| reference: https://www.lego.com/cdn/cs/legal/assets/blt1a
| 4c9a959ce8e1cb...
| hu3 wrote:
| This reply is disproportionately mean. Please don't call
| people ignorant because they disagree with your opinion.
| hanoz wrote:
| I've never heard anyone say Legos, it sounds nonsensical to
| my ear. Lego is the system. You've got Lego men, Lego wheels
| and Lego bricks. If you're referring to a Lego brick as 'a
| Lego', then fair enough. But who does that?
| hnlmorg wrote:
| Exactly this. Lego is the construction brand. The
| individual pieces are bricks et al.
| fnord123 wrote:
| Legos refers to the lego bricks like waters can refer to
| multiple glasses of water even though water is a mass
| noun and usually doesn't exist in plural. Same with
| peoples meaning multiple groups of people.
| sturadnidge wrote:
| Sheep is perhaps a better example for comparison with
| Lego. Unless you know of an example where 'sheeps' has
| legitimate usage.
| ncallaway wrote:
| Every person I've ever interacted with has said "do you
| want to play legos?" or some variant of it. I've never once
| been asked "do you want to play with Lego bricks?"
|
| So, in answer to your "who does that?" question my
| anecdotal response would be "everyone"
|
| Language probably just varies a lot from place to place
| sneak wrote:
| I don't capitalize mac and I regularly use definite and
| indefinite articles to describe the iPhone.
|
| Sometimes I even call them MacBook Pros.
| toast0 wrote:
| > MacBook Pros.
|
| MacsBook Pro.
| ziml77 wrote:
| I prefer seeing fully lowercase mac over MAC
| hnlmorg wrote:
| MAC is something entirely different:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address
| dylan604 wrote:
| naturally, mac isn't an acronym, it's just shortened. I
| would have to ask the GP if they write steve in place of
| Stephen or cat in place of Catherine. A name is a name; use
| a cap.
| lostlogin wrote:
| Lego have confirmed this.
|
| https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/10839/what-is-th...
|
| https://mobile.twitter.com/lego_group/status/842115345280294...
| EamonnMR wrote:
| From the chosen answer:
|
| > Of course everyone is free to comply with these corporate
| demands, but the Lego Group has no authority over the English
| language to regulate it in this way. So if you want to feel
| guilty about using "Legos", understand that the only thing
| you are guilty of is not obeying the demands of a Danish
| corporation, not for violating the rules of English grammar.
| OJFord wrote:
| *American English grammar.
|
| It's firmly 'Lego' in the UK.
| Svip wrote:
| Considering there is English grammar authority either, I
| guess you can never be violating English grammar rules? You
| are merely in conflict with some of the English
| dictionaries out there. So even if the scale is different,
| it's sort of the same.
| OJFord wrote:
| Yes, and I find this argument quite tiresome (mainly due
| to its frequency) on English.SE - Google ngrams are
| really interesting, but it's not all I'm interested in.
| If something's a modern 'corruption' (by whoever
| considers it such) then all an ngram's going to show you
| is yes (or no) it has (resp. not) been corrupted.
|
| Imagine if English (Language) teachers took the same
| stance. A+ everyone, if that's how you say it, you're
| correct, there is no wrong.
|
| (And then is ESL different? Seems like racism is the
| effective conclusion!)
| OJFord wrote:
| [Given the nature of this thread, I'm sorry, but I have to do
| this ;)]
|
| > Lego have [...]
|
| [the company] *has.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| It's a plural - groups of people are traditionally plural
| in English.
|
| Apple have announced a new iPhone. The New York Yankees are
| playing tonight. The Board were due to meet yesterday. Etc.
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| In _UK_ English. American and Canadian English treats
| groups as singular, even when the name itself is a
| plural. "Apple has", "The United Nations has", etc.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| It's not _wrong_ to use British English. People using it
| don 't need to be corrected to use American English.
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| So why are you trying to make a counter-correction?
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I'm not telling them to use a plural.
|
| I'm telling them that people who use a plural aren't
| doing so out of ignorance and don't need to be corrected
| as if they're making a mistake.
| OJFord wrote:
| It's (it! You said it yourself!) not a plural, it's a
| singular company.
|
| It's perhaps clearer if you add a description of _the_
| company:
|
| > Apple, an American company, has announced a new iPhone.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > it! You said it yourself!
|
| 'It' refers to the word there. The thing the word refers
| to is a plural.
|
| > It's not a plural, it's a singular company.
|
| That's just not traditional in English. What is a company
| except a group of people? That's what the word 'company'
| literally means.
|
| Most people in English speaking countries outside US
| influence would say:
|
| > Apple, an American company, have announced a new
| iPhone.
| OJFord wrote:
| I strongly disagree, as does the aforementioned style
| guide, as does Google Ngram Viewer (BrE even): https://bo
| oks.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=company+have%2...
|
| What about 'only one of the companies [...]', what'll you
| say next?
|
| A singular company is formed of a plurality of parts,
| yes, just as _a_ millipede _has_ many _legs_.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I don't understand - are you claiming it's just more
| common to use the American grammar in all venues? Yes I'm
| sure it is. But it doesn't make it _wrong_ to use British
| English that you need to go out of your way to correct
| them as if they 're making a mistake and don't know any
| better.
|
| Or are you claiming it has never been commonly accepted
| British grammar to make company names plural? If you
| think that then I'm afraid you're just factually
| mistaken.
| burke wrote:
| This is a difference between British and North American
| English. Americans consider a company to be singular;
| Brits, plural.
| OJFord wrote:
| I'm British.
|
| (And The Economist's 'Style Guide' 10ed. concurs. (I'm
| not being selective beyond the extent to which I already
| am by only having _that_ style guide.) It is of course a
| global publication, despite 'being' British, but it's
| entry on 'Americanisms' makes it pretty clear
| ('sparingly') it prefers a BrE starting point. I can't
| find anything more explicit on that.)
| burke wrote:
| Alright. Clearly it's not a consensus view then. Still,
| every time I've heard things like "Google have", it's
| been (ESL, or) British English speakers. I don't think
| I've ever encountered it in American English.
| 15charlimitdumb wrote:
| The largest lego market,(states) refers to them as legos. See
| amazon, NPR, ect https://www.google.com/search?q=%22legos%22
| bloopernova wrote:
| Somewhat off-topic: I built a Python from Elite: Dangerous out of
| Lego: https://imgur.com/gallery/QNY3fbX
|
| And the Rebrickable custom build page from the designer:
| https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-69260/TheRealBeef1213/elite...
|
| Apologies if this is too facebook-like. I'll delete the comment
| if it's too off-topic.
| dwohnitmok wrote:
| Some commentators seem to think that this is an official Lego
| set. This is a user-contributed idea that is not in any way
| endorsed by Lego itself. It would first need popular support and
| then acceptance by Lego before it became an official set.
| chrononaut wrote:
| I feel like there was a missed opportunity to put the Sad Mac
| icon on the screen: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Sad_Mac
| DonHopkins wrote:
| >"The different screens can be stored in the back of the Mac when
| you don't use them."
|
| Don't all Macs have a compartment in the back to store all the
| files in the computer?
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_o_O7v1ews&ab_channel=James...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj5HdGjvXcE&ab_channel=AlexM...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2uHBhKTSe0&ab_channel=Movie...
| everyone wrote:
| Wow.. A site that actually does GDPR well.
| ChickeNES wrote:
| Reminds me of this blast from the past:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20030404112546/http://www.applef...
| berniemadoff69 wrote:
| are the pictures even real? it looks like a render. what's the
| point of making it if the end result is photographed in a way
| that it looks like CGI, in some fake green space? the screen
| being in color makes no sense either.
| logbiscuitswave wrote:
| > It's the platinum case color version.
|
| For a _true_ retro feel it should be a shade of yellow.
|
| In all seriousness, I love this. This is incredibly well done.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| Now put a raspi in it, and mechanical key switches in the
| keyboard!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-18 23:01 UTC)