It's a cube. The only challenging element here is that it's seated off-axis. I'm amazed that such a simple translation of form has provoked such markedly vehement negative responses from a certain cross-section.
Again, I think this is probably evidence that Boxee has targeted a very specific market segment. I doubt they're interested in appealing to "sensible female spouses" - those people already have an entertainment center and are signed up for netflix or blockbuster by snail mail.
I'd encourage all the folks immediately tempted to rage on the design of this device to take a step back and realize that if their first reaction upon seeing it is violent revulsion and nausea, it's probably wasn't intended for them in the first place.
Think about the market segment who, in recent history, has dominated CD purchases and what this device might mean as a distribution system targeted at them - but for tv, film, etc.
It seems as though there's much less incentive for an individual with a rack full of legacy entertainment equipment to purchase an all-in-one device.
Specifically regarding the visual cues we see in the design - the box is literally breaking the plane of whatever it's placed on; the cube sinks into or emerges from what's below it.
The aesthetics of the product seem to indicate that it's aimed at an audience who doesn't own a collection of hardware it wouldn't "fit in" with; for these folks it might function as a centerpiece, rather than a tumor in a homogenized amalgamation of units.
What makes you think there is a "rack full of legacy equipment", or that you're dealing with a "homogenized amalgamation of units"? You're just lining up straw men.
What multitude of devices does the Boxee Device replace that makes it an "all-in-one" device? It's one of many media streaming devices being released (though one based on very good software, granted), but all-in-one means it replaces a current multitude of devices. It does not.
I'd also like to point out that "literally" is not a term to be used when you want emphasis, the word you are looking for is "visually". Unless the device is a physical cube that you stab into the surface, it does not literally break the plane.
I think there are legitimate justifications for the design, if only that it needs to stand out in a market of plastic rectangles, but I don't think the reasons you gave are at all valid.
I also think you must have missed the comment I was responding to, so I'll excuse what sounds like a case of unbridled pedantry as mere ignorance. Take a minute to read the parent comment and see if you can divine the logical connection between my "straw men" and the context the comment came from. Is it possible that "sensible female spouses" might inhabit a household that already has an entertainment center?
I posit that if you can see past your nose, you can see that for people who aren't already burdened with a hoard of physical media they want to continue to consume, Boxee has the potential to stand-in for everything in an entertainment setup except the TV.
And yeah, I'll concede that I should have qualified "literally" with "appears to" - I just didn't imagine that anyone here would be douchey enough to quibble :P
No, I'm a big fan of design and find marketing very interesting. What I think is that your comment is full of pseudo-design nonsense with infomercial-style marketing, which is why I put "design and marketing" in quotes. It's not real design and marketing, it's some kind of cheap knockoff.
You use vaguely negative terms to describe existing equipment ("legacy", "homogenized amalgamation of units", that new devices don't "fit in" with) and vaguely positive terms to describe what you're promoting ("all-in-one").
Your argument is vapid nonsense, it reads like a Snuggie informercial.