Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Blast from the past!!! Teh Rubik's Cube!!

Q

Queso

Suspended
Original poster
Mar 4, 2006
11,821
8
I bought a Rubik's Cube off Amazon a couple of weeks ago and can now complete it in under 2 minutes :) Is there a better 1980s related piece of geekorama you could possibly go wasting your time on? I think not. Anyone else still playing with these things, and if so, can you beat 1m 47s?

200px-Rubiks_cube.jpg
 
i have one. i toy around with it every now and then.

however, i'm blonde, so i cannot at all complete it. i suck.
 
My spatial skills are non-existent. As are my mathy ones. Such that:


I've never completed even one side. :eek:
 
PlaceofDis said:
i have one. i toy around with it every now and then.

however, i'm blonde, so i cannot at all complete it. i suck.
Click to expand...
Keep toying with it and eventually the patterns begin to jump out at you. Then it's just a case of repeating the moves that get the bits in the right place.
DJMastaWes said:
I got one that's 5x5 instead of 3x3. It's a challenge, and I've given up.
Click to expand...
So there IS a better piece of geekorama!! I'd only ever do that once. It would be too scary to mess up again after I'd completed it :)
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/1A469a Safari/419.3)

I had one. I gave that annoying POS to my parrot. He sorted it right out. ;) :D (meaning he chewed the stickers off and it was an all black and very mangled cube)
 
I can do it in about 10 minutes
i found mine again few years ago and i was amazed i could still remember the moves needed to complete it
 
dynamicv said:
So there IS a better piece of geekorama!! I'd only ever do that once. It would be too scary to mess up again after I'd completed it :)
Click to expand...
I've fiddled with one that had quite a few more than five squares-- and get this, it's slightly spherical, and worse?


The colors have to form a gradient. :eek: Like, it went from white to a pale pink, to a red. So that each square had to be in a specific spot as opposed to any square of the right color being on the right side.
 
That sounds WAY too intimidating devilot. Playing with that for a couple of days would have me yearning to buy a parrot :D
 
devilot said:
I've fiddled with one that had quite a few more than five squares-- and get this, it's slightly spherical, and worse?


The colors have to form a gradient. :eek: Like, it went from white to a pale pink, to a red. So that each square had to be in a specific spot as opposed to any square of the right color being on the right side.
Click to expand...

The thing is, devilot, the cube is the same way. Each red square DOES have a specific spot, and you can only solve it when it is there.
 
tobefirst said:
The thing is, devilot, the cube is the same way. Each red square DOES have a specific spot, and you can only solve it when it is there.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have known. Note my first post saying I've never solved even one side. ;)

But that's too bad that the color gradient was just eye candy. Poo. But at least it was bigger than the typical size (er, meaning more squares overall). :eek:
 
devilot said:
I've fiddled with one that had quite a few more than five squares-- and get this, it's slightly spherical, and worse?


The colors have to form a gradient. :eek: Like, it went from white to a pale pink, to a red. So that each square had to be in a specific spot as opposed to any square of the right color being on the right side.
Click to expand...

To be fair, even a standard rubik's cube requires each square to be in a specific spot (beaten by tobefirst). One middle square of each color and from there every other square has at least one other color that has to be placed correctly to solve another side... the gradient would just make figuring out where each square had to be. If your like me and typically ignore subtleties in color that could make things really interesting (impossible) if the gradient was slow enough...
 
iBlue said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/1A469a Safari/419.3)
Click to expand...
Show-off. ;)

I had a Rubik's Cube as a kid, and I could solve it then (although I have no idea what my best time was). I doubt I could do it now.
 
I have a Rubik's cube keychain that is attached to my laptop bag. The closest I've ever made it was one complete layer. After that I couldn't figure out how to get anything in the right place without messing up my layer. Then, one of by friends messed up all that progress I had made. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back