20 years ago, Steve Jobs built the ‘coolest computer ever.’ It bombed

PLUS: An interview from the archives, the most-read story in WIRED history, and bottled-up screams. [View this email in your browser]( | [Manage newsletter subscriptions](newsletter=wir) [WIRED Plaintext with Steven Levy] 07.24.20 We hope you enjoy this special free edition of Plaintext. [Subscribe to WIRED]( to receive Steven Levy’s exclusive column in your inbox every week. [SUBSCRIBE: 50% OFF]( Hi, all. There ain’t no cure for the [summertime blues](—but then again, no one gave Big Pharma billions to find one. I hope they’ll do better with Covid-19. [This Week's Big Moment] The Plain View This month marks the 20th anniversary of the [Power Mac G4 Cube](, which debuted July 19, 2000. It also marks the 19th anniversary of Apple’s announcement that it was putting the Cube on ice. That’s not my joke, it’s Apple’s, straight from the headline of its July 3, 2001, [press release]( that officially pulled the plug. The idea of such a quick turnaround was nowhere in the mind of Apple CEO Steve Jobs on the eve of the product’s announcement at that summer 2000 Macworld Expo. I was reminded of this last week, as I listened to a cassette tape recorded 20 years prior, almost to the day. It documented a two-hour session with Jobs in Cupertino, California, shortly before the launch. The main reason he had summoned me to Apple’s headquarters was sitting under the over of a dark sheet of fabric on the long table in the boardroom of One [Infinite Loop](. “We have made the coolest computer ever,” he told me. “I guess I’ll just show it to you.” He yanked off the fabric, exposing an 8-inch stump of transparent plastic with a block of electronics suspended inside. It looked less like a computer than a toaster born from an immaculate conception between Philip K. Dick and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. (But the fingerprints were, of course, Jony Ive’s.) Alongside it were two speakers encased in Christmas-ornament-sized, glasslike spheres. “The Cube,” Jobs said, in a stage whisper, hardly containing his excitement. He began by emphasizing that while the Cube was powerful, it was air-cooled. (Jobs hated fans. Hated them.) He demonstrated how it didn’t have a power switch, but could sense a wave of your hand to turn on the juice. He showed me how Apple had eliminated the tray that held CDs—with the Cube, you just hovered the disk over the slot and the machine inhaled it. And then he got to the plastics. It was as if Jobs had taken to heart that guy in The Graduate who gave [career advice]( to Benjamin Braddock. “We are doing more with plastics than anyone else in the world,” he told me. “These are all specially formulated, and it’s all proprietary, just us. It took us six months just to formulate these plastics. They make bulletproof vests out of it! And it’s incredibly sturdy, and it’s just beautiful! There’s never been anything like that. How do you make something like that? Nobody ever made anything like that! Isn’t that beautiful? I think it’s stunning!” I admitted it was gorgeous. But I had a question for him. Earlier in the conversation, he had drawn Apple’s product matrix, four squares representing laptop and desktop, high and low end. Since returning to Apple in 1997, he had filled in all the quadrants with the iMac, Power Mac, iBook, and PowerBook. The Cube violated the wisdom of his product plan. It didn’t have the power features of the high-end Power Mac, like slots or huge storage. And it was way more expensive than the low-end iMac, even before you spent for a necessary separate display required of Cube owners. Knowing I was risking his ire, I asked him: Just who was going to buy this? Jobs didn’t miss a beat. “That’s easy!” he said. “A ton of people who are pros. Every designer is going to buy one.” Here was his justification for violating his matrix theory: “We realized there was an incredible opportunity to make something in the middle, sort of a love child, that was truly a breakthrough,” he said. The implicit message was that it was so great that people would alter their buying patterns to purchase one. That didn’t happen. For one thing, the price was prohibitive—by the time you bought the display, it was almost three times the price of an iMac and even more than some PowerMacs. By and large, people don’t spend their art budget on computers. That wasn’t the only issue with the G4 Cube. Those plastics were hard to manufacture, and people reported [flaws](. The air cooling had problems. If you left a sheet of paper on top of the device, [it would shut down]( to prevent overheating. And because it had no On button, a stray wave of your hand would send the machine into action, like it or not. In any case, the G4 Cube failed to push buttons on the computer-buying public. Jobs told me it would sell millions. But Apple sold [fewer than 150,000 units.]( The apotheosis of Apple design was also the apex of Apple hubris. Listening to the tape, I was struck by how much Jobs had been drunk on the elixir of aesthetics. “Do you really want to put a hole in this thing and put a button there?” Jobs asked me, justifying the lack of a power switch. “Look at the energy we put into this slot drive so you wouldn’t have a tray, and you want to ruin that and put a button in?” But here is something else about Jobs and the Cube that speaks not of failure but why he was a successful leader. Once it was clear that his Cube was a brick, he was quick to cut his losses and move on. In a [2017 talk]( at Oxford, Apple CEO Tim Cook talked about the G4 Cube, which he described as “a spectacular commercial failure, from the first day, almost.” But Jobs’ reaction to the bad sales figures showed how quickly, when it became necessary, he could abandon even a product dear to his heart. “Steve, of everyone I’ve known in life,” Cook said at Oxford, “could be the most avid proponent of some position, and within minutes or days, if new information came out, you would think that he never ever thought that before.” But he did think it, and I have the tape to prove it. Happy birthday to Steve Jobs’ digital love child. [Looking Back] Time Travel My [July 2000 Newsweek article]( about the Cube came with a sidebar of [excerpts]( from my interview with Steve Jobs. Here are a few: Levy: Last January you dropped the "interim" from your CEO title. Has this had any impact? Jobs: No, even when I first came and wasn't sure how long I'd be here, I made decisions for the long term. The reason I finally changed the title was that it was becoming sort of a joke. And I don't want anything at Apple to become a joke. Levy: Rumors have recirculated about you becoming CEO of Disney. Is there anything about running a media giant that appeals to you? Jobs: I was thinking of giving you a witty answer, like "Isn't that what I'm doing now?" But no, it doesn't appeal to me at all. I'm a product person. I believe it's possible to express your feelings and your caring about things from your products, whether that product is a computer system or Toy Story 2. It's wonderful to make a pure expression of something and then make a million copies. Like the G4 Cube. There will be a million copies of this out there. Levy: The G4 Cube reminds a lot of people that your previous company, Next, also made a cube-shaped machine. Jobs: Yeah, we did one before. Cubes are very efficient spaces. What makes this one [special] for me is not the fact that it's a cube but it's like a brain in a beaker. It's just hanging from this perfectly clear, pristine crystal enclosure. That's what's so drop-dead about it. It's incredibly functional. The whole thing is perfect. [Reader Question] Ask Me One Thing Candice asks, “I read your second [Larry Brilliant interview](, and this has been bugging me all day: What is the most-read WIRED article?” Candice, your question is well justified. It makes me crazy when someone pulls this trick—mentioning who won the second-most Olympic gold medals, or who is the second-most annoying movie director—and not telling us the first. So I apologize for the tease of mentioning that the first [Brilliant interview]( was the second-most-popular article in WIRED history. Here [is number one:]( a dive into the science behind the Dress—you know, that garment someone wore to a wedding in 2015, and someone else posted to Tumblr, and someone at BuzzFeed wrote [an item]( about, which broke the Internet. The popularity of Adam Rogers’ analysis of the mystery of why some people see blue and others gold certainly has something to do with the insanely viral nature of the schmatte heard round the world. But it also caught on because Adam, as an obsessive in the science of color (he’s [writing a book]( about it!), was the perfect person to explain what was up with the Dress. His 871 words on the subject made WIRED history, and Larry Brilliant’s epidemiological wisdom is but a distant second place. You can submit questions to [mail@wired.com](mailto:mail@wired.com?subject=ASK%20LEVY). Write ASK LEVY in the subject line. [Notable Links] End Times Chronicle You [can now record]( the heart-wrenching scream that’s been bottled up inside you and send it to [a website]( run by folks from the Icelandic tourist trade. They will then replay your audio anguish through loudspeakers placed in that country’s wilderness area. [Looking Back] Last but Not Least Garret Graff goes [inside the war]( on Huawei—and Chinese tech. When—if?—a vaccine comes, it will be a struggle to get everyone to buy in. Let’s hope the [side effects]( aren’t so bad they scare people away. Taiwan has an [amazing digital minister](. It also has a great Covid-19 record. Not a coincidence. You haven’t subscribed to the [Get WIRED podcast]( yet? It’s already a week old! [This Week's Big Moment] [Subscribe to WIRED]( [Get 1 year of WIRED access for 50% off.](  [Tech news and analysis you won’t find anywhere else, plus exclusive access to Steven Levy’s column.](  [Subscribe now]( [Illustration of wifi symbol hanging from china branded marionette strings]( [Could Trump Win the War on Huawei—and Is TikTok Next?]( BY GARRETT M. GRAFF [In a plot twist, the administration’s assault on the Chinese telecom giant is gaining traction. At heart, the US has an interest in its own electronic surveillance capabilities.]( [Close-Up Of Syringe Against White Background]( [Covid-19 Vaccines With ‘Minor Side Effects’ Could Still Be Pretty Bad]( BY HILDA BASTIAN [The risk of nasty side effects in the Moderna and Oxford trials should be made clear now, before it ends up as fodder for the skeptics.]( [Audrey Tang with temporary tattoos of computer ports and power buttons on her face, arm and hands]( [How Taiwan’s Unlikely Digital Minister Hacked the Pandemic]( BY ANDREW LEONARD [Audrey Tang says tech can build trust, tame misinformation, and strengthen democracy. Her plan might even work in the US.]( [Manipulated photos of various accidents]( [Inside Citizen, the App That Asks You to Report on Crimes]( BY BOONE ASHWORTH [From its need to make money to its ever-changing relationship with law enforcement, the hyperlocal news reporting app faces growing pains.]( [(image) Condé Nast Spotlight | What you need to read now. All in one place. The most popular stories from Vogue, GQ, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, Wired, Architectural Digest and more. GO NOW]( [(image) WIRED Logo]( [(image) WIRED on Facebook]( [(image) WIRED on Twitter]( [(image) WIRED on Instagram]( [(image) WIRED on LinkedIn]( [(image) WIRED on YouTube]( [Podcasts]( This e-mail was sent to you by WIRED. To ensure delivery to your inbox (not bulk or junk folders), please add our e-mail address, wired@newsletters.wired.com, to your address book. If you buy something using links in our newsletters, we may earn a commission. Learn more in our [affiliate link policy](, and view our [privacy policy](. [Unsubscribe]( or [manage your newsletter subscriptions](newsletter=wir)