That would significantly raise the price, as well as being less convenient. To fit a 3.5" drive without making the 'keyboard' too big and heavy the machine would have to be a 2 piece design with separate keyboard. 2.5 W max for a Conner CP-2044 42MB 2.5" vs 4.2 W for a CP3000 40MB 3.5"), and they were more shock-proof - important when the computer is in the 'keyboard', and so is likely to be bumped and moved around while in operation. 2.5" drives also had lower power consumption (eg. The reason for using 2.5" drives in the A600 and A1200 wasn't just that a 3.5" drive wouldn't fit in the case (in an approved orientation). No, 2.5" drives didn't cost twice as much, they just had half the capacity.
Again they saved a dollar by providing an upgrade opportunity that cost the user twice as much as the cheaper alternative. A 3.5" harddisk would have required a slightly bigger housing and one of the older power supplies they used for the A500.
0 kommentar(er)
