Slashdot Mirror


Apple Revises eMac

RadRafe writes "Today Apple revised the eMac. It now sports a 1.25 GHz G4 processor, DDR RAM, and Radeon 9200 graphics. The Combo Drive model has twice as much RAM as before, and the SuperDrive model now costs just a grand. This is the first consumer Mac update in five months."

223 comments

  1. Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Anyone know this machine with the 1.25 GHz G4 processor fares against the new Intel 3.2Ghz processor with 1Gb RAM?

    1. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by PretzelBat · · Score: 2, Informative

      This website has a test that relates to your question: Apple vs. Mac Benchmark (Barefeats.com)

      Although it doesn't show a direct comparison of the systems you mentioned, you'll notice that the P4 3.0 GHz just barely loses to a G4 1.42 (MP!) system in most of the tests and beats a G5 at 1.8 MHz in about half the tests.

      This speaks well of Apple for processor cycle efficiency, but I would wager that a Pentium 3.2 would outperform a G4 1.25 by quite a lot.

      Note that cross-system/OS comparisons must always be taken with a large dose of salt!

    2. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by amichalo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Anyone know this machine with the 1.25 GHz G4 processor fares against the new Intel 3.2Ghz processor with 1Gb RAM?

      The 1.25Ghz G4 fares extremely well - It costs a lot less!

      While the P4 3.2 costs between $300 and $400 just fo rthe chip, this $800 unit includes the 1.25 G4, Combo drive, 40GB hd, 256K Ram, CRT built in custom housing, video, networking, USB 2, Firewire800, Airport Extreme upgrade path, Bluetooth upgrade path, OS X Jaguar, iLife (Garageband, iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto, iTunes) and the cache of owning an Apple.

      You can check out this review of the 1.25 Ghz G4 when it first came out and this review of the P4 3.2Ghz vs. an Athlon

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    3. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes. It doesn't.

    4. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by yomegaman · · Score: 0, Troll

      If you're going to throw around words like "cachet" you could at least spell them correctly. Not much cachet in being illiterate, no matter what type of computer you use...

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    5. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Even if those benchmarks were true: An Apple 2.0GHz G5 machine at $3000 does not give me three times the performance of a Dell 3.0GHz P4 machine at $800.

      Having said that, I still don't believe them - the inconsistency of the results seems very artificial. The G5 didn't even win all of the benchmarks.

      It's also amusing how the G5's all seem to come last in the videogame framerate tests...

    6. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Note that cross-system/OS comparisons must always be taken with a large dose of salt!
      And are irrelevent to anybody who'd consider buying an eMac. These are people who just want to run basic Mac stuff and don't care about performance -- if they did, they'd look at something fancier.

      The Mac-versus-PC performance debate has always been kind of pointless. People buy Macs because they like them, or because they think they're more usable, not because they care about the architectural superiority of the PowerPC chip. People buy PCs because they're cheaper, or because they need low-level compatibility, not because they have a misguided love of Intel technology.

      The issue is particularly irrelevent for people who aren't performance conscious. A 1Ghz PC may have a lot less computing power than a 1Ghz Mac, but it still has a lot more than most people need.

    7. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by yomegaman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're just making it worse for yourself, amichalo. With each post you look more and more foolish. It's obvious that deep down you know you overspent for an underpowered computer, and no amount of unsupported assertions about how OSX is "so much better" than anything else or bad "M$ Windoze" jokes is going to make that feeling go away.

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    8. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, very helpful.

    9. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the link - it seems like their method of displaying the results is quite confusing ... sometime efficiency is displayed by longer lines, sometimes by shorter lines - easy to get caught out.

    10. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by amichalo · · Score: 1

      You're just making it worse for yourself, amichalo. With each post you look more and more foolish. It's obvious that deep down you know you overspent for an underpowered computer, and no amount of unsupported assertions about how OSX is "so much better" than anything else or bad "M$ Windoze" jokes is going to make that feeling go away

      For what it is worth, I did not post the "eat a dick" comment. I can see how it looks like it would be me, being that it was anonymous and I am not posting anonymously. At any rate, I had nothing to do with that and don't know who did. Perhaps someone else is on Slashdot besides you and me.

      As for your observations about my self esteme, you are simply trying to start a flame.

      Find one post I have ever made with a slang reference to MS or Windows.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    11. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by yomegaman · · Score: 0, Troll

      Sigh, it's worse than I thought. Clearly the festering pain of having been ripped off by Apple over and over is causing you to explode with rage, only to have no memory of the episodes later. Such multiple-personality disorders are common among cult members.

      (Don't take any of this seriously, I'm just feelin' goofy tonight)

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    12. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey moron, reply to this logged in too, so i can watch your karma get pushed into the shitheap.

      haha you fucking faggot

    13. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by yomegaman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Have all the karma you want, dumbass, it's worthless anyway. We non-cult-members can see that clearly as clearly as we can see that Macs are ripoffs, too bad you can't figure out either one...

      I even put my bonus point on this one, if that doesn't make you come in your diaper I don't know what will!

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    14. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      It is well known that the 1.25 GHz G4 with the standard 256 Mb of ram will smoke the Intel 3.2 GHz with 1Gb of ram.

      Don't believe the megahertz myth. Processor and bus speeds don't matter. The eMac will feel so much faster. I don't mean when you can see screen refresh, that is a feature. It's designed that way so you can enjoy more of the Apple Experience. I also don't mean the time it takes for your apps to launch. How can you enjoy the beauty of your desktop if an application quickly gets in the way? The time will seem to fly by as you wait for tasks to complete. You'll be enjoying the consistancy of the interface so much that the hours will pass like seconds.

      No, Intel has nothing on Apple.

    15. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Tell me again, How much is the cache of owning an Apple worth?

      I keep forgetting.

      Also, what are upgrade paths going for these days?

    16. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, you just got SERVED yomegaman

    17. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel makes chips, Apple makes computers.

      You, my friend, are a dumbass.

    18. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Except market share.

    19. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you're quite the genius for replying.

    20. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry if I was lazy. I was comparing platforms. I probably could have stated that better.

    21. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by CoolMoDee · · Score: 1
      architectural superiority of the PowerPC chip
      I bet quite a few people do. People that want a good powerpc machine for cheap, the easiest/cheapest way is to go is a macintosh. Of course after running on PowerPC for a while..x86 dosn't look so great ;-)
      --
      Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
    22. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by dborod · · Score: 1

      It ships with Panter (10.3) not Jaguar (10.2).

    23. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz machine by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

      These morons don't seem to realize that karma can be manufactured at will. But what would you expect from someone who pays double for translucent buttons on his UI :).

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  2. Hello... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...hello..?...consumer market...Hellooooo....?

  3. Worth buying? by psyconaut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At a grand with a Superdrive, seems like a nice little system for me to use when at home rather than setting up my Powerbook G4 when I get home...any comments on how usable it is? I'd definitely bump the RAM up from 256mbytes ;-)

    -psy

    1. Re:Worth buying? by Visigothe · · Score: 4, Informative

      The eMac is a good machine. the proc is fast enough to do most things [web, mail, WP, digital camera editing, mp3 ripping, etc.]. A few things to be aware of. The eMac is much larger than you think it is. Unlike the original iMac, the eMac doesn't have a handle, and the 17" monitor makes it rather awkward to pick up and move around.

      And yes, you'll want to up the RAM to as much as you can afford [OSX likes to use RAM as cache].

      Enjoy!

    2. Re:Worth buying? by psyconaut · · Score: 1

      I definitely wouldn't move it much...that's what my Powerbook is for ;-)

      Thanks for the comments....I think I'll go buy one!

      -psy

    3. Re:Worth buying? by merdark · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It has a CRT. I will never ever buy another CRT again. LCD is just that much better. Too bad this is not just a box, I really can't stand computers with attached monitors (laptops excepted of course).

    4. Re:Worth buying? by fm6 · · Score: 1
      At a grand with a Superdrive, seems like a nice little system for me to use when at home rather than setting up my Powerbook G4 when I get home
      You can afford to spend $1K just to save yourself from plugging in your laptop? You've weathered the downturn better than most of us!
      I'd definitely bump the RAM up from 256mbytes ;-)
      Systems are always sold without quite enough RAM. Anything to get the price past whatever sweet spot they're trying for.
    5. Re:Worth buying? by FeTrut · · Score: 1

      You'd think it would end up hurting them(the company) in the long run, skimping on the RAM. The difference between using OS X(or any modern OS for that matter) with 256 megs of RAM and 512 megs is enormous. The computer just seems much faster and smoother, thus giving the consumer a much more enjoyable, much less painful experience. I've used an eMac with 256 megs of ram before, and believe me, it needs whatever performance boost it can get.

    6. Re:Worth buying? by psyconaut · · Score: 1

      Actually, I really need a new laptop as my 2-year old G4 is falling to pieces (mind you, it's been around the world a couple of times and I use it every day). But I can't justify buying a new 15" G4-Al right now. ;-)

      As for the downturn, I was lucky enough not to have to work through most of it....I think I might have had to do a Joe-job if I did! Things seem to be picking up here in Toronto, and I work in the financial sector these days doing some rather specialist stuff, so I'm lucky.

      -psy

    7. Re:Worth buying? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 4, Informative


      Get the stand for the eMac, if you do buy one; I think they're about $60, and it really makes re-positioning the eMac a lot easier. W/o, the eMac is just so much of a 70# boat anchor.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    8. Re:Worth buying? by psyconaut · · Score: 1

      I just saw them on Apple's web store....reminds me of the tilt and swivel stand I had for my Mac SE! ;-)

      Thanks for the tip.

      -psy

    9. Re:Worth buying? by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So just hide it in a cabinet, and attach a VGA-plug LCD screen...

      --
      Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
      The purpose of that site was not known.
    10. Re:Worth buying? by somethinghollow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      At risk of getting my chops busted, here is my input:

      It is a flat CRT, not a regular CRT. I'm staring at mine now, and to the left of it is a standard CRT I got from Gateway. It's running dual display (not mirroring). Compared to my old Gateway CRT, the eMac FLAT CRT is incredible.

      My graphic design professor said flat CRTs are better for design work than LCD or regular CRTs. Having worked with all three, I can attest to that.

      As far as the "too bad it isn't just a box," I guess that is personal opinion. I don't need the extra PCI slots, since everything I interface with is USB / firewire. The monitor is great, and the only thing I'd ever want to upgrade is the internal HDD (difficult) and RAM (easy). But I look at it this way: My eMac is roughly the same dimensions as just the older Apple CRTs for PowerMacs, and I don't have to find a place to store the box. But, hey, to each his own.

    11. Re:Worth buying? by crackshoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At the moment, i would go with a CRT over an LCD. why? I don't particularly value my desktop space ( i currently have 2 19" displays and a 21". i have the room), and LCD's are tiny per cost. I've used the apple 17" display, and its gorgeous, but overpriced. I do haev a few smaller (15") LCD's i use in a 'server closer' or for portable systems, but i wouldn't want to use one everyday. But as far as attatched displays go, I agree with the exception of the iMac. We bought one for my mum, and its a great box (unless you want to get all fiddly in it). The eMac is really designed for educational entry level enterprise use. after i graduated, my highschool upgraded to eMacs, with individuals logging in and having a floating profile. they were, i believe, designed to be cost efficent (as far as apple goes - theres also a CD-ROm only version thats only available for educational accounts) all in 1 systems. while i think it is currently the cheapest available apple boxen, i would think that the affordable iBOok would be a better draw for those on the edge of switching - but for mass deployed education, you want a relatively sturdy all-in-one box. LCD's get damaged really easily (hey, ir member the joys of making permanent squiggles in the school owned laptops).

      --
      Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
    12. Re:Worth buying? by merdark · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's really just the CRT. I can't stand CRTs anymore. I don't really do much graphic design so that's not too much of an issue for me. I find LCDs to be much much easier on my eyes, and also much sharper (pixels really looks square). Not to mention subpixel antialiasing for fonts is AWSOME. I spend my entire day looking at text, so for me an LCD is top priority.

      Oh, not to mention an LCD takes up much less space on my desk and produces far less heat. Both properties are also very very important to me.

      But as you said, to each his own. Perhaps a CRT suits your needs better if you are a hardcore designer. CRTs do have better colour contrast than LCDs, but the average person would not be able to notice I doubt. :)

    13. Re:Worth buying? by merdark · · Score: 1

      I know. :) It's just that people here seemed to be suggesting the eMac for a personal use. I guess if you don't mind CRTs then it could be good.

      I hope my next machine (the one that will make me a switcher so to speak) will be a powerbook.

    14. Re:Worth buying? by Huge+Pi+Removal · · Score: 4, Informative

      FYI, the eMac is slightly shorter front-to-back than a CRT iMac :)

      It is, however, wider, higher, heavier, and a pain to move around. Good machines though, and the CRT is flat which makes it pleasant to work at.

      Oliver.

      --
      - Oliver

      The right to bear arms is only slightly less stupid than the right to arm bears...
    15. Re:Worth buying? by bhima · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This has always been one of my problems with Apple!

      I've always thought they should just pass the RAM at market prices and double or triple the RAM in base systems

      Surely the positive reviews would be worth very slight drop in the revenue stream.

      After all I love OS X but it sure ain't fluxbox!

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    16. Re:Worth buying? by Graymalkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      The eMac uses about as much power (ie produces as much heat) as a similarly sized CRT monitor. So for the heat output of a nice size monitor you get a whole computer. Even if you've got a flat panel display it is going to be driven by a little space heater under the desk. While an LCD is definitely going to be smaller than an eMac the overall power savings aren't too impressive. If you want a system that won't heat up a room or take up a bunch of space get a Powerbook. My 12" PB uses as much power as a small light bulb and has a really crisp screen.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    17. Re:Worth buying? by chrism238 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      And yes, you'll want to up the RAM to as much as you can afford [OSX likes to use RAM as cache]

      I'm a bit confused by your comment. One of the very reasons for having (lots of) RAM is for it to act as a cache. I help lots of first-time Linux users who express disappointment that the free command keeps showing that 95% of RAM is being used ("but I just bought 512MB more, and it's full again!!?!").

      Are you suggesting that using RAM as cache is somehow unusual? What are you saving it for?

    18. Re:Worth buying? by Visigothe · · Score: 1

      >>Are you suggesting that using RAM as cache is somehow unusual?

      Not at all. Merely stating fact. OSX [like all Unix(like) machines] use as much RAM as cache as it can. Where in my previous post do you find a suggestion that it is unusual? If I stated something like "unlike most OSs, OS X uses RAM as cache", that suggests something [and also happens to be false]. Stating "OSX likes to use RAM as cache" is just a fact that the OP may not be aware of.

      breathe.

    19. Re:Worth buying? by chrism238 · · Score: 1
      Stating "OSX likes to use RAM as cache" is just a fact

      Sorry, I wasn't trying to make a big deal of it, I just found it unusual that something quite normal needed to be stated, i.e. don't most contemporary OSs use RAM for cache? (to me the question is circular, though not for embedded OSs).

      Of note, is that I observe OS-X binaries (being on, sort-of, 64-bit architectures) to often be 20% larger - and here's a good reason for more RAM. That said, I'm noticing the stripped, shared, /bin/ls on OS-X to be only 18KB, and the stripped, shared, /bin/ls on my Fedora-I to be 72KB!

    20. Re:Worth buying? by Visigothe · · Score: 1

      >>Sorry, I wasn't trying to make a big deal of it

      It's all good. I would also like to apologise for the possibly-perceived-as-flame-ish reply.

      As for the binaries being larger. I am not an authority on the subject, but if you are comparing binaries from X86 to those of PPC, the reason for the % increase in size is usually due to the architecture RISC processor. Back when "Fat" binaries were all the rage, a stripped 68k binary was often [always??] smaller than the stripped PPC binary. Donnow about the anomaly that is your "ls" in Fedora.

      Not that it really matters, as modern OSs only load into RAM parts of the application that need to be loaded [this was also true in the "classic OS" [7/8/9] age. 68k binaries would load their entire binary into RAM, while the PPC version would only load what it needed [assuming you had VM turned on]

      Rock!

    21. Re:Worth buying? by bedouin · · Score: 1

      After I bought my PowerMac a couple years ago, then an iBook, I talked my dad into buying an eMac to replace the old p166 I gave him . . .

      I have to admit I always disliked computers with built-in CRTs, but the eMac is pretty slick. If I'm ever on a budget in the future and can only afford an intro model, I probably wouldn't rule out the eMac. It appears to have a goofy form factor when viewed on -line, but in person it looks pretty attractive. I'll second the other folks' recommendations about the swivel stand; the way it attaches to the bottom is very cool and sturdy.

      No complaints here so far. Though Applecare doesn't seem like a bad idea, since it's not exactly easy to service on your own.

    22. Re:Worth buying? by huchida · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For high-end graphic design you need a CRT. LCD will never get the color right (colors actually tend to be deceptively deeper and richer on LCD... Ever notice how pictures that seem beautiful on the LCD screen look like crap when you print them out?)

    23. Re:Worth buying? by merdark · · Score: 1

      Yes yes, so many people tell me. But this constitutes a very very small fraction of the population. And besides, a high-end graphic artist will want a G5, not an eMac.

    24. Re:Worth buying? by huchida · · Score: 1
      Yes yes, so many people tell me. But this constitutes a very very small fraction of the population. And besides, a high-end graphic artist will want a G5, not an eMac.

      The key word is "want." I've worked for a few major animation houses and saw more eMacs and older G4s being used for production than G5s... When a company's buying dozens or hundreds of computers, they'll tend to supply the employees with whatever does the job for the lowest price.

    25. Re:Worth buying? by the+web · · Score: 1

      the proc is fast enough to do most things [web, mail, WP, digital camera editing, mp3 ripping, etc.].

      Dude I do all my freelance web/print design on a b/w 350. While I can't say it's a speed deamon, it is sufficient, if you have a little patience. Panther helps boost its performance as well.

      To say that the eMac is sufficient for only those tasks you mentioned clearly shows you've never been broke.

      --
      __
      Thou hast besquirted me, O leotarded one.
    26. Re:Worth buying? by merdark · · Score: 2, Informative

      This still doesn't change the fact that *I* don't want a CRT. My friends don't want a CRT. Everyone OTHER than graphic design peopel don't nessesarily want an LCD. The grpahic design people are a minority.

      Attached monitors are silly. If apple made the eMac just a box, I assure you more people would buy it.

    27. Re:Worth buying? by huchida · · Score: 1
      This still doesn't change the fact that *I* don't want a CRT. My friends don't want a CRT. Everyone OTHER than graphic design peopel don't nessesarily want an LCD. The grpahic design people are a minority.

      Well, yeah. I wasn't trying to sell you an eMac. Attached monitors are silly. If apple made the eMac just a box, I assure you more people would buy it.

      I agree with you 100% there. For one thing, it's the VCR/TV combo problem... You're very likely to end up with a dead screen on a working computer in a couple years time.

    28. Re:Worth buying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good. then go buy an iMac if you want an LCD. I don't give a damn as long as the image quality is good.

  4. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This'll be a lot easier to sell at work. (CompUSA)

  5. We really need eMacs... by Reorax · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...because asking people about Emacs isn't confusing enough already.

    --
    This sig is only here so people stop skipping the last lines of my posts.
    1. Re:We really need eMacs... by Game+Genie · · Score: 1

      Wait until OS X 10.5 Lynx is released...

      -

  6. The first ever "bargain" Mac by amichalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For under $800 this Mac is a bargain for potential "switchers". It is a Jaguar system for those who don't want to invest in a $2,000+ G5 setup to give the Mac a try.

    When I wanted to try out OS X, I did so with a $1800 Powerbook Ti G4 at 400Mhz, 256k RAM, 20GB HD, and a CD/DVD reader. I found that system well equiped to flex the power of then OS 10.1. Panther and Jaguar are both responsive on my 400Mhz PB and I can only imagine that on the $800 eMac, especially if the 256k is upgraded, it would be a great low cost Mac.

    This eMac system is well equiped for experimenting with iMovie, iPhoto, iTunesMusicStore, and GarageBand - all which come with it. For just $200 more you get a DVD burning SuperDrive and twice the drive space.

    But like I say, for $800, this is a great system for those who don't want to make the investment in a G5 inorder to give OS X a try.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    1. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Llywelyn · · Score: 3, Informative

      >It is a Jaguar system

      Panther, actually.

      --
      Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
    2. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by PretzelBat · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Remember that "bargain" in this context is very relative: a similarly configured PC could be found for somewhere in the vicinity of half as much: just today I saw a complete system at Costco for less than $500 with:

      -P4 2.8
      -256 MB
      -40 GB HD
      -CD-RW
      -17 in. Flat Screen CRT
      -Windows XP Home :(

      You could argue that the better OS is worth the extra $300, but in terms of hardware, a bargain Mac is still not much of a bargain.

    3. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't need to argue the OS. I'm too busy arguing the idea of actually buying a computer from Costco's gray market.

      The cpus they sell are liquidated from batches that didn't pass QA inspections. I understand Costco has a kick ass return policy but what a hassle when the eMac is top quality (for the $$).

      The same cpu you speak of is available at mainstream retailers for $700+. I'd say Panther over XP Home is definitely worth $99.

    4. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by amichalo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      My comment was this is a bargain Mac.

      Did the Windows box come with:
      - combo drive (DVD R, CD RW)
      - wireless and bluetooth support
      - Photo, movie, dvd, and music editing software (iLife)
      - Jaguar
      - the cache of owning a mac?

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    5. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by PretzelBat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Since you ask:

      Did the Windows box come with:
      - combo drive (DVD R, CD RW)

      No, it had one DVD (not R) and one CD-RW, but it was my understanding that the eMac with a superdrive was $1000, not $800.

      - wireless and bluetooth support
      XP natively supports wireless (although I don't know why you'd need it for a desktop, in general), and SP2 will natively support bluetooth. The eMac in question does not come with the hardware for these features at the price we were discussing.

      - Photo, movie, dvd, and music editing software (iLife)
      Of course it doesn't come with iLife. It comes with crappy MS equivilents (if anything). However, there is a great deal of software (both free and $$) that approximates this functionality in Windows.

      - Jaguar
      I think I already mentioned... nah.

      - the cache of owning a mac?
      The WHAT?

      My point--which quite simply was the fact that Mac hardware still costs almost double standard PC hardware--is still completely valid. And, as I also said, you could argue that the superior OS improves the value, but the hardware is NO bargain in any realistic sense.

      Listen, I am no MS lover. I was merely pointing out that even a "bargain" Mac is no bargain in terms of what you actually get for your money, unless you really need OS X.

    6. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by PretzelBat · · Score: 3, Informative

      My parents have bought two computers from Costco, and had nary a problem with them. (Well, except for the usually MS virus/worm/insecurity nastiness, which I had to deal with for them.)

      Although personal experience doesn't negate your point, this: " I understand Costco has a kick ass return policy" is very true.

      I believe it is ONE YEAR (!!!) with NO restock fee! If it was me, I'd want it to break after 9 months (and if the proc is going to fail, it's likely to happen in the first year).

      For a cheap computer like this one, I'd be willing to save the $200 dollars by buying at Costco.

      *Your milage may vary*

    7. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what brand is that?

    8. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by iLeader · · Score: 1

      - combo drive (DVD R, CD RW) Edu price of superdrive/80gb is $899 - wireless and bluetooth support stop tripping over wires (also stops the duct tape from messing up the walls and floors) - Jaguar Not Jaguar, Panther! Different processors, can't really be compared to eachother It's nice, though I would still prefer all the features as a headless mac, the 17 inch crt without a handle makes it a bit slippery to carry around

    9. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by amichalo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The statement was that it was a bargain Mac, not a bargain piece of hardware.

      I fully disagree that one can simply exclude the cachet of Mac/OS X ownership and the benefits of such by saying "well it comes with XP so that is the same".

      That is exactly what is NOT the same. Otherwise, why would people buy Macs, because the cases look cool?

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    10. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Costco PCs are crappy, with zero "real" support and poor quality.

      If you don't get support, you might as well build your own. I put together similar Athlon-based system for about $225. Add $75 for a "Flat Screen" CRT.

      That's a whole lot cheaper than your Costco crap-box! If you're going to go with crap, you might as well get it for cheap!

    11. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by PretzelBat · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Otherwise, why would people buy Macs, because the cases look cool?

      Um... given the typical Mac owner...

      Nah, that's too easy.

    12. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by PretzelBat · · Score: 1

      For a bottom of the bin, cheap-o, just need something for email and web browsing and word processing non-techie, its not such a bad way to go.

      Although I can build a box, and you can build a box, it does not necessarily follow that Joe-on-the-street can build his own computer.

      Also FYI, The post was in the context of "bargain" computers (and "bargain Macs," which seems to mean something else entirely!). In terms of that discussion, Costco offers a better warranty than Apple.

    13. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Funny

      especially if the 256k is upgraded

      See? 640k would be MORE than enough for you... And everybody makes fun of Billy-G for that comment...

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    14. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Moofie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm. I wonder whether the build quality of the computer you got at FUCKING COSTCO is anywhere near the same as Apple's.

      Pay for quality. Or don't.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    15. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ipod mini jack failures.
      PB logic boad failures.
      PB LCD spoting/failures.

      I sure as hell hope the quality at Costco is better than apples RECENT build quality.

    16. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Moofie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd like to see statistical, rather than anecdotal, comparisons of Apple's quality versus other name-brand PC vendors.

      Which the Costco brand wouldn't be.

      Just because you happen to have heard of problems with Apple hardware doesn't mean that it's worse than other vendors'. My (personal, anecdotal, and non-scientific) experience with Apple hardware is superb. All the data I've seen seem to support that contention.

      What kind of track record does your Costco vendor have? What, you've never heard of them? Hmm...imagine.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    17. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by bhima · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Actually a last a guy had a pretty good idea for a bargain Mac. Stupid name "Core Crib" but a good idea none the less. It was basically a headless / Speaker-less eMac G4. The prototype rendering he had was very nice, very "Macish", very cheap. I believe he wanted either to buy spares or factory reconditioned parts or something like that. Of course Apple legal emasculated him and so a good idea lays by the way side.

      I had hoped that when people started to make IBM PPC 970 reference boards that something like the idea would resurge.

      But giving the whole thing a little more thought, there is no-way Apple would allow something to run Apple's OS at a lower cost that any of their offerings. Perhaps something will come out that requires mad soldering and live BIOS swapping, but not something someone not willing to sacrifice a goat would attempt. Which is too bad. I really think if they produced some at a Mail Station price point that would really increase their market share.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    18. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by putaro · · Score: 2, Funny

      But, hey, it's CostCo! If it doesn't work you can return it and get a bunch of beef jerky instead.

    19. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Countless security bugs in Windows.
      Countless virus and worms that exploit them.
      Exploding DELL notebooks.
      Display hinges breaking because DELL is too cheap to use a second screw (even though the hole is there)
      Eternaly stuck ghosts of Windows stuck on DELL displays.
      Generally crapy hardware all over PC land.

      If you think that only Apple has a problem or that is in fact anywhere as large as on the PC front, you have a problem.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    20. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      I had hoped that when people started to make IBM PPC 970 reference boards that something like the idea would resurge.

      The problem with the 970 reference boards is that they are just that. Reference boards. Designed and priced for prototyping. A 1.6GHz reference board alone costs more than a complete dual 2GHz G5.

      The machine I would like to see is a relaunched cube, with eMac specs, and a slightly sub-eMac price (or maybe the same price, with the lack of monitor being made up for by an AGP slot and maybe a couple of PCI ones.) The thing that killed the original cube (well, the G4, not the NeXT cube) was that it was priced close to the workstations, when it was a consumer machine. An updated one that could live in a living room connected to the TV (for watching DVDs etc, and maybe acting as a PVR) and also support a CRT/TFT monitor would be an excellent consumer machine.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    21. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by dafz1 · · Score: 1

      If you have access to the Education Store, Apple is making a 1 Ghz eMac with a CD-ROM, and one without any optical drive(DDR333 256MB, 40GB HD). It looks like Apple is getting serious about going after the educational market again, to compete with cheap x86 boxes.

      The next logical step would be a headless eMac. I would vote for one with a DVD drive, so IT people can boot from a CD/DVD to configure Netboot, and run hardware troubleshooting discs.

    22. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      For under $800 this Mac is a bargain for potential "switchers"


      As a person who would potentially switch ... I would buy a similarly equipped system if they sold it without the monitor. The same base system, where I can plug in my own monitor. If I'm going to switch, I'd hate having to give up my 17" LCD to move to the 17" CRT built-in.

      If they built the same system sans monitor. I'd buy it in a minute. But, they don't. So I'd either have to give up the monitor I love (because it takes up so little desk space and can sit further back than a CRT) or move up to a standard PowerMac ... but then the price becomes prohibitive for someone who isn't yet convinced to go the switch route.
      I understand that CRTs are cheap, but shipping them around isn't free, so sell the 'eMac base' for $50 less ... I'd buy it, I think others would too.
    23. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Lebooge · · Score: 4, Informative

      Another thing for people to keep in mind is that this is the 'e'Mac.... as in educational. This box is not designed for power users or even 'prosumer' high-end home users. It's designed to be a relatively cheap computer that Apple can sell in bulk to school districts.

    24. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by The+Infamous+Grimace · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Go ahead take the cheap shot. Me, I'm going to buy one of the high-end ones at with a student discount. Everyone here is talking about initial cost, but not TCO. While I'm currently using our iMac DV 400, most of the time I spend on a computer is on my PowerBook G3 300 Wallstreet. The only upgrade has been the RAM, to 320MB, which is more than is officially supported. It's also running OS X 10.3, with a little help from XPostFacto. I still boot it into OS 9.2 often because Virtual PC and Windows 98SE run faster under it. I use it for word processing and software development with Xcode, nothing fancy, and it's certainly slower than I would like at times, but hey, OS X has become more and more responsive with each new release. Show me a 6-year-old WinTel laptop thats runs XP faster (or at all, for that matter) after SP1, and faster again after SP2 .

      (tig)

      --
      Ignorance and prejudice and fear
      Walk hand in hand
    25. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Well, if you're really feeling like taking on a project, you could always gut an eMac and stick it in a box. If you can't find a way to adapt your monitor to the graphics card output, you can always use the external mirroring out. Not an ideal solution, but if you want to hack the hardware a bit it might be fun.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    26. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      If apple hardware is so much better why do they have a 10-14 day return policy and why does the shitty costco hardware have a 365 day return policy?

    27. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by raverbuzzy · · Score: 1

      It isn't a 1 year return policy. It's 6 mths for desktop and laptops and unlimited (i think) for everything else.

    28. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Oooooh! Beef jerky!

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    29. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Because Apple doesn't want people to buy a system, use it for a year, and give it back. Then Apple has to deal with a used computer.

      I guaran-damn-tee you that if Costco was just selling computers, they wouldn't have that 365 day return policy. Considering that they probably sell one or two of these boxes per store per day, it's a miniscule fraction of their revenue. That policy would kill Apple.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    30. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no cachet in owning an emac. It's a cheap, low end machine.

      (prepares to get modded down by Mac Fans who think eMacs are really grreeat computers.)

    31. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by gobbo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This box is not designed for power users or even 'prosumer' high-end home users.

      True, but that's consumerism for you. There's a high-productivity video production studio downstairs from me, and they bought an eMac just to develop interfaces and do preliminary graphics work, plus After Effects rendering on the side.

      Considering a lot of power users in the video trades are still using their tricked-out early G4's (it ain't broke, don't fix it--I even know an audio project-studio still doing their main recording and mixing on a Blue&white G3), a compact 1+GHz G4 with OS X and a near graphics-grade screen slots into the workflow just fine thankyouverymuch.

    32. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      What kind of track record does your Costco vendor have? What, you've never heard of them? Hmm...imagine.

      I just wanted to point out that Costco is probably the worst place to buy computer parts and/or complete systems. Sure you get it all at once, and that's great, and you get it while you're grocery shopping. But I have yet to price a piece of hardware at Costco that I couldn't get at 3 other places for cheaper, and the margins are quite noticeable (120GB HD = $150 at Costco, $120 at PC Club, $110 at Frye's).

      I shop at Costco all the time, but I wouldn't be stupid enough to think I was getting a bargain on something just because Costco sold it to me. ;) (Although I did get my digital camera for cheaper at Costco, but within a month it wasn't so any more, good thing I bought when I did)

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    33. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by Moofie · · Score: 1

      All the more reason to doubt Costco as a reliable vendor, particularly compared to Apple, who has one of the longest track records in the business. Even if they do get "beleaguered" all the time.

      I can't believe I'm even having this conversation. I say we let all the mouth breathers that want to buy their computers from Costco do so. And then we point and laugh as said computers halt and catch fire.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    34. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by bhima · · Score: 1
      I've been thinking of this too...

      Except I was thinking of a personal server sort of thing.

      One 10bt (Internet Connection), A 4 port GigE switch, A variety of USB and FireWire ports, Bluetooth, 802.11(b,g,n), One PCI-X slot, A very large SATA drive (with space for another) and a Fanless G4.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    35. Re:The first ever "bargain" Mac by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I like the idea, but I'm not convinced it needs space for a second hard drive. FireWire800 provides more than enough bandwidth for a a hard drive or two, and putting them in external enclosures would make cooling much easier.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. Correction by wheresdrew · · Score: 2, Informative

    The eMac has Firewire 400, not 800.

  8. iPod killer by amichalo · · Score: 5, Funny

    What a rip off Apple, no one is ever gonna buy the 40 GB iPod now - not when for just $300 more they can get a 40 GB music player with a combo drive, airport extreme & bluetooth support, and a 17" CRT for viewing cover art and playlists.

    Plus it comes with Garageband and iTMS BUILT IN!!!

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    1. Re:iPod killer by GlassMaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, but for once the battery life on the iPod would be an advantage. Not to mention that carrying around an eMac at the gym wouldn't have the same "coolness factor" as an iPod, despite it's larger color display, wireless support, GarageBand, etc.

    2. Re:iPod killer by MadChicken · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't need to work out, just carry it around. Besides, you can just tell people it's a Pocket PC.

      --
      SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
    3. Re:iPod killer by mbbac · · Score: 1

      Right, whatever... people say the same thing about the iPod Mini's supposed increased portability.

      --

      mbbac

    4. Re:iPod killer by tbone1 · · Score: 1
      Not to mention that carrying around an eMac at the gym wouldn't have the same "coolness factor" as an iPod, despite it's larger color display, wireless support, GarageBand, etc.

      Not to mention the cost of multiple hernia operations ...

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    5. Re:iPod killer by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      But people would stare and wonder what that bulge in my pants was. :)

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  9. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by amichalo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Please enjoy your windows boxes. We'll see you on the flip side when you finally give OS X a try.

    I am by no means rich, but in the grand scheme of things, a few hundred bucks to buy a system that WORKS SO MUCH BETTER THAN WINDOWS XP is worth it to me.

    The hardware specs aren't what makes the difference man, it's the SOFTWARE. OS X is the best of UNIX under a fantastic GUI.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  10. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by amichalo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dell Dimension 2400...sixhundred seventy-nine dollars....

    Dell Dimension 4600...nine hundred ninty eight dollars....

    Saving a buck of two for an inferrior user experience....priceless

    There are somethings money can't buy....for everything else, there's Microsoft.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  11. So I'm stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    But what does the 'e' in 'eMac' stand for?

    Hopefully, not for electonic as that would be a bit redundan t.

    1. Re:So I'm stupid... by amichalo · · Score: 4, Informative

      'e' stands for 'education'.

      Apple released the eMac as a more durable, less expensive alternative to the LCD iMac. Schools wanted it.

      --
      I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
    2. Re:So I'm stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the 'e' stands for knowledge

  12. PARENT IS A JOKE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Moderators are morons, the parent is a joke, not a flame

    1. Re:PARENT IS A JOKE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well really - what do you expect at apple.slashdot.org?

      One pictures the moderators as a group of whiney old women in a social clique who take a dislike to anything different.

      The problem is they all act like they have alzheimers and don't actually read what people write but simply assume everything is a personal attack and respond accordingly. If you don't own a mac then you automatically get modded down by default, praise the mac and you get modded up. Personally I like messing with them as I do own a mac, but I do critisise leaving them in a confused state. Kind of like going to church while being pregnant outside of marriage. They don't know which way to go.

  13. mod parent up by JackBuckley · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I know, another slashdot Windoze/M$ vs. "two words: Mac gamer" flamewar is just what we need, but the parent is on topic and not flamebait. For dog's sake, if the editors post an advertisement for a new mac, people should respect a post that meets the ad on its own terms.

    1. Re:mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good point - hopefully the moderators will be metamoderated correctly ... or perhaps we need some meta-meta moderators

    2. Re:mod parent up by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Come on -- drink the Mac kool-aid! Since the "value" can't really be defended, the information must be censored. Praise Big Brother!

      Speaking of which, Apple's sales are flat, their marketshare is declining... As a Macintosh fan I'm as disgusted with Apple's luxury pricing as all the PC users out there. I want the Mac platform to be around a long time, and pretending the eMac is a good low-end value is not the way to do it. They should either price the machine correctly, or give a G5 and position it at the mid-range (3Ghz Dells).

      Anyway, just because you like Apple/Macs doesn't mean that you have to go to the wall for a dubious G4 eMac.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    3. Re:mod parent up by Lebooge · · Score: 1

      Value means different things to different people. For some it's money-related, for others it's ease-of-use/quality-of-life types of things. Neither view is right or wrong. It's a matter of personal perspective to me. The hardcore gamer has a different idea of what value is compared to a person who's into graphics, movie editing, etc.

      The eMac is what it is. If you pump enough RAM into it it will run OSX 10.3 just fine. You may not be able to play games and encode DVD's at the same time, but how many people really do those things at the same time anyway? For what you get, I think the eMac is reasonably priced. Not uber-cheap like the Dells and othe boxen people like to trot out, but for a low-end UNIX workstation (which is what it really is at this point) it's fine.

      As others have commented, Apple is a hardware company at it's heart. Ipod discussions aside, they live and die by hardware sales, so they have no incentive to enter the bottom tier of the PC market where they can't compete with Dell et al. They offer what they and a fair number of other people consider to be an improved computer-using experience over what you may get with a low-end Windows box, and they charge a premium for it. Either you agree or you don't and you buy accordingly.

    4. Re:mod parent up by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      No, the eMac is a machine for people who are going to buy a Macintosh no matter what and can't afford a better one. I think it mainly exists to upsell people to the iMac.

      Frankly, with a G4, the machine is Dead End. It's 2004 now, not 2001. You might be able to squeak by and play Halo, but next year's game / video app is going to require more oomph. It's a word processor, not a home computer.

      Think of all those people who bought iMacs 5 years ago -- that machine was price and speed competitive with PCs and it sold like hotcakes. Where's the machine that will get those iMac1 users into the Apple Store? It ain't the eMac! (My sister is in this boat, and probably will be getting rid of her 400mhz iMac for a PC.)

      I'm fine with Apple selling "upmarket" machines, but let's see some upmarket hardware! Not this 3 year old shit.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    5. Re:mod parent up by Lebooge · · Score: 1

      As I've commented elsewhere in this thread, the eMac is mainly meant as a cheap Mac that can be sold to schools, as in K-12 schools, not colleges or universities. The eMac will do just fine for almost anything you need in that setting or situation. Websurfing, basic digital imaging, paper-writing, etc... It's not meant to be a game box or anything else. I am guessing that any eMac Apple sells to home users or businesses is just gravy and not expected.

      Compared to a similarly-equipped PC, the eMac isn't a bad deal. Comparing it to your $400 stripped-down box isn't fair, as a stripped down Mac is not the same animal is your typical integrated-everything cheap DOS box.

      While I don't necessarily agree with Apples overall product/pricing strategy, it's obvious that they aim the iMacs at general home users and the PowerMacs at power users and businesses. And it's also obvious that Apple either doesn't give a rip about, or has decided to not really compete in the gaming market.

      The G4 chip *may* be inadequate for high-end video games and heavy-duty digital imaging, etc. However, saying that a 1.25 Ghz chip is outdated may come as a surprise to Linux/BSD/*nix users all around the globe. Sure, an Intel CPU at that speed may groan while trying to run XP and modern games, but that is more an indictment of the OS than the CPU.

    6. Re:mod parent up by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 1

      According to the NY Times today, Apple's recent quarterly results show that profits have tripled lately. Yes, that's due largely to incredible iPod sales, but I think it does show that Apple is not completely clueless when it comes to pricing its products.

      Apple has never been the cheapest computer you can buy, in any sense of "cheapest." For many of us, this is a feature. Apple has never tried to compete with the cheapest machines on the market, either. But smart consumers know that there's a lot more to the cost of a computer than its price. If you get more value out of a PC of whatever brand, go for it. If you get more value out of a Mac, why are you complaining?

      Apple's sales are flat, their marketshare is declining...

      Assuming those two assertions are actually true, then the only conclusion one can draw is that the market is expanding. This is no big surprise, as Linux market share seems to be increasing dramatically, and Microsoft's market share is probably either flat or decreasing slightly. So what? All that matters is that there's a healthy market for Mac products. And there is.

    7. Re:mod parent up by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Not sure how you get from Flat Sales and Declining Market Share to "healthy market"... Windows sales have been doing quite well.

      I'm leaning towards the idea that Apple is trying to milk it's "legacy" base of Mac users while transitioning to a consumer device company. In which case, I hope not, but how else do you read the evidence? In that case, Apple would be just another Sony...

      The question is if you are an Apple-Fan or a Mac-Fan. I'm the latter.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    8. Re:mod parent up by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 1

      Not sure how you get from Flat Sales and Declining Market Share to "healthy market"

      According to it's press release, Apple shipped 749,000 computers and 804,000 iPods in Q2, 2004. If its sales are "flat," that'd mean Apple should ship approximately 3 million machines this year, and about 3.2 million iPods. 3 million machines alone would be a pretty decent market, but the installed base is quite a lot larger. Macs tend to have a long useful life (I'm typing this on a machine that's 5 years old and which remains quite useful), so the market that third parties can sell into is quite a bit larger than that indicated by market share alone. That is how I get from "Flat Sales" to "healthy market."

      I'm leaning towards the idea that Apple is trying to milk it's "legacy" base of Mac users while transitioning to a consumer device company. In which case, I hope not, but how else do you read the evidence?

      Why? What evidence is there to support this idea? Apple's oft-stated and well known long term plan for the consumer market is the "digital lifestyle," and every time Steve Jobs brings that up, he includes a diagram with various consumer electronic devices and a Macintosh in the middle. iPod, iTunes, iSight, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, etc. are all meant to sell Macintosh computers. They work as well as they do specifically because Apple is able to integrate those things with the Mac hardware and OS.

      So sure, you may see even more of Apple's income in the future come from consumer electronics like iPod, particularly if Apple can also sell those items into the Windows and Linux markets. But there's no way that Apple is going to give up control over the system at the heart of the digital lifestyle, not to mention the heart of its revenue, which is the Mac.

    9. Re:mod parent up by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Check out the article at arstechnica.com. Good discussion.

      Basically, over the last few years, Apple's computer operation has operated at break-even, and they make profits on investments and ipods. I'm not sure how (or if) Apple's going to change that.

      And the fact that you are using a 5 year old machine is a not healthy sign for Apple. Why don't you pickup one of these wonderful eMacs you are touting? That's right, they suck, they're way behind moore's law. I also wouldn't say a 5 year old Mac is any better than a 5 year old PC. (My Powerbook is also 5 years old -- i can't quite pull the trigger yet.)

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  14. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz -- FLAMEBAIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm curious to know why the PARENT is flamebait.

  15. Re:Answer this instead.. by amichalo · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want a game machine, buy a PS2

    If you want to run some special windows only app, buy Virtual PC for OS X

    If you want to get work done in an efficient, user friendly, secure, stable, virus-free, low stress manner, buy a Mac

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  16. Edu pricing is pretty good by iLeader · · Score: 2, Informative

    $749 for the combo/40gb, and $899 for the superdrive/80gb!!! That's $100 savings on the latter. Seems like it'll be a great buy for students who.

    1. Re:Edu pricing is pretty good by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 2, Funny
      students who.

      Ahh, these are the kids who want to become Doctor Who, I take it. ;-)

      --
      "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
  17. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz -- FLAMEBAIT? by IrRegEx · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I know this is off topic, but I don't know where else to ask... What is Karma whoring?

    And in case I'm doing it right now, please keep your dogma away from my karma.

    --
    #|
  18. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WORKS SO MUCH BETTER THAN WINDOWS XP is worth it to me.

    Have you even used Windows XP? I prefer Windows 2000 myself - it's a little more business casual in appearances and features, but it works very well.

    Windows XP works just as smoothly. Hardware is supported, drivers are updated. The system just works. If you continue to base your opinions on a copy of Windows 3.1 you once used ten years ago - OS 9 was arguably even worse (and didn't even have memory protection).

    If you think Windows has some "security problems" - you've bought into the anti-Microsoft FUD. In the modern world, anyone is asking for it if they don't have a hardware firewall and if they execute email attachments they receive from complete strangers. It doesn't matter what OS you run.

    it's the SOFTWARE. OS X is the best of UNIX under a fantastic GUI

    If you want Unix, install Linux or FreeBSD. Install SuSE, install Debian, Lycoris or even Lindows for that matter. There are choices in the Windows world.

    There's no need to pay Apple for a decent Unix experience.

  19. Re:Answer this instead.. by crackshoe · · Score: 2, Informative

    well, in order. A different proccesor architecture, theres a fuckload of software, and almost any gnu app can easily be ported (or, if you don't insist on tying apple products to their OS, you can run linux or BSD just fine), blizzard dual releases and other companies eventually port (but if you only own a computer for games, why do you read the apple slashdot page... oh, you're an AC. this post doesn't really matter.) I use a g3, a dual g5, an ulstra sparc, 1 althon box and 3 pentium III's. I like my macs better. oh well.

    --
    Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
  20. Re:Ridiculous by iLeader · · Score: 1

    except that you don't actually NEED that, if you really want to raise it a bit, sit it on a phonebook

  21. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz -- FLAMEBAIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Karma whoring typically involves

    * Reposting material from the articles linked to. This works famously because Slashdot readers often don't actually read the article before responding to it or moderating. Thus, karma whores look like they are providing useful information when they are just regurgitating common material.

    * Reposting common links, especially those that get around the "free registration required" to read articles on the NewYorkTimes? web site.

  22. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz -- FLAMEBAIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Karma Whoring is the act of posting something that you know will get modded up high, thus increasing your Karma (see below). The difference between Karma Whoring and just making a good post is that you do something like re-post the content of a slashdotted site from an article or something likewise mindless that doesn't really add to the discussion but gets you mod points.

    Karma is a concept the moderation system uses to rank posts. Positive mod points increase Karma and vice versa. For people with good Karma, your posts automatically start off at a higher rating (2) than neutral karma users (1) or negative ones (0).

  23. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Even with their update, the entry level Macs are still not even remotely competetive with today's cutting edge Intel machines.

    since when is a 2.4GHz celeron cutting edge?

  24. Re:Answer this instead.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want a game machine, buy a PS2
    If you want to run some special windows only app, buy Virtual PC for OS X


    Can I have some of your money please?

    You obviously don't care how much you spend on computer equipment if you're buying a $1000 Mac that sucks for multimedia applications.

    If I do as you suggest, I'm looking at a $180 Playstation 2. A TV is, say $200. Virtual PC: $130. That's an extra $510 tax just to play games and run windows applications.

    I can actually buy an entire PC for $510. And it won't even be bottom of the range.

    If you want to get work done in an efficient, user friendly, secure, stable, virus-free, low stress manner, buy a Mac

    Let's look at the Windows experience, shall we:

    + Friendly. Check. XP is easy enough for my mom to use.
    + Secure. Check. Get a cheap hardware firewall / router on your internet connection and you'll have zero intrusions - even if you don't run Windows Update.
    + Stable. Check. I last saw a bluescreen crash about 18 months ago - due to a network card that failed. Yes, a hardware problem.
    + Virus free. Check. I'm sorry, but if you run random attachments you receive in the mail, you're asking for trouble.
    + Low-stress. Check. Windows just works.

    Mozilla is actually the most unstable app on my system - I use it primarily as a development workstation, for games and for occasional document processing and photo printing.

  25. Re:Answer this instead.. by amichalo · · Score: 0, Troll

    + Virus free. Check.

    You're on crack

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  26. Re:Answer this instead.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    blizzard dual releases and other companies eventually port

    I hate to break your bubble, but EBGames (a major videogame retailer with brick & mortar stores throughout most of the continental US) - currently has three Mac games on sale.

    Yes. That's THREE (3!) games (and one strategy guide to a game they no longer sell).

    (but if you only own a computer for games, why do you read the apple slashdot page... oh, you're an AC. this post doesn't really matter.)

    I really, really hate iSteveJobs.

  27. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    since when is a 2.4GHz celeron cutting edge?

    Since people stopped caring about how much a large cache improves performance.

  28. Re:Answer this instead.. by iLeader · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    so, get an xbox instead $149, then you can play Ninja Gaiden, the best game ever. xbox is way better then ps2:P also, you don't already have a TV? not even a commadore 64 monitor to use as a TV occasionally with a vcr? nothing? what it wrong with you!

  29. Re:Really how fast is this 1.25GHz -- FLAMEBAIT? by zerv · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Positive mod points increase Karma and vice versa. For people with good Karma, your posts automatically start off at a higher rating (2) than neutral karma users (1) or negative ones (0).

    i believe you're a little off there

    Excellent gets +2 (you have the option to not include the extra +1 with each post you make)
    Neutral /Positive / Good gets +1
    Bad / Terrible -1 (anonymous posting disabled)

    The extra +1 for users with Excellent karma is actually just a threshold preference for registered users and the set display mode for someone who has not logged in. if you are a registered user it is by default to add an extra +1 for registered users with excellent karma, which you can change (most don't)

  30. Re:Answer this instead.. by PretzelBat · · Score: 3, Funny

    XP can easily be virus free. Three easy steps:

    1) Start with a fresh install of Windows.
    2) Plug in monitor, power, keyboard, mouse.
    3) Stop.

    So long as you follow these three steps EXACTLY, you will not have a single virus on your computer.

    DISCLAIMER: I cannot make any promises if you attempt any other actions with the PC.

  31. Re:Answer this instead.. by crackshoe · · Score: 1

    would you go to a best buy to get a sparc station? that would be ridiculous. you'd go to a vendor that had what you want. a single vendor is never a good example of anything. considering i currently own 10 or so mac games (ha!), i'm quite sure theres more than 3. but it is a point that there simply aren't as many games for mac. this does mean that a lot of the stinkers don't cross over, though.

    --
    Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
  32. The cache of owning an Apple? by GrahamCox · · Score: 4, Informative

    Cache = store, etc. I think you might mean cachet. That's pronounced "kash-ay" for you Americans that don't speak foreign.

    1. Re:The cache of owning an Apple? by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Actually kash-ay or kach-et are both correct pronunciations for the word. look it up.

    2. Re:The cache of owning an Apple? by GrahamCox · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Duh. I know. And your point is?

      My point was that it isn't cache - that's pronounced "kash" (or maybe "kaysh", if you're Australian (but what do they know?)

    3. Re:The cache of owning an Apple? by chrism238 · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      That's pronounced "kash-ay" for you Americans that don't speak foreign.

      Pah! Foreign, who needs them? As George Bush said when going into Iraq "one of the problems with the French is that they have no word for entrepreneur".

    4. Re:The cache of owning an Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to your website, you're "a British European male born in the early sixties". In that case I think you'd fit in really well in Australia...

    5. Re:The cache of owning an Apple? by tbone1 · · Score: 1
      That's pronounced "kash-ay" for you Americans that don't speak foreign.

      A lot of Americans speak foreign. Y'all ever been to New Yawk? Them people talk funny.

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
  33. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is an obviously bogus comparison. Since when is a 2.4 celery a 1.25 ppc? Even worse, motherboard integrated el cheapo graphics don't compare to a Radeon 9200. This is not even considering the iLife suite, the comm ports on the mac, and os x. The high-end dell machine is nice, I'll admit, but what it gains in terms of hardware is compensated for by things like the iLife suite on the mac.

  34. 1.25 Ghz G4 faster than Intel's 3.2 Ghz by nuckin+futs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    specially when you're trying to run OS X on Intel's processor.
    A lot of people I know bought a Mac because of OS X, it didn't matter if it was "slower" than a comparable Intel processor in certain functions. Show me an Intel processor than can run OS X (not just Darwin) then we can start talking about speed comparisons.

    1. Re:1.25 Ghz G4 faster than Intel's 3.2 Ghz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, can't do that. We wouldn't want people to know how crappy the hardware really is, would we?

  35. Nice little system by hattig · · Score: 5, Informative

    At last a reasonably priced Apple computer. And the international prices don't have the standard 50% Apple International tax, they are reasonably close to the US prices after currency conversion!

    For a laugh earlier I configured a system on Dells site with similar features. This was a 2.6GHz Celeron 2400C system. It came out higher priced than the eMac (eMac 549, Dell 580) for as close a match of specification as possible (and I made sure that warranties, etc, were minimal on the Dell, I'm not an Apple owner so I won't cheat like that!). Certainly not a bad deal in my opinion, especially with iLife and Panther included (after a year of using XP, I realise how much I loathe it). The Dell looked like a turd as well, if that matters to you! :)

    1. Re:Nice little system by ratsnapple+tea · · Score: 1

      "At last"? The eMac's been available for years. This is a speed bump, nothing more.

    2. Re:Nice little system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      At last"? The eMac's been available for years. This is a speed bump, nothing more.

      It's a bit more than just a processor speed bump. Yes, the G4 now runs at 1.25GHz instead of 1GHz. It also runs on a 167MHz FSB (instead of 133MHz), and also has 512K of L2 cache (instead of 256KB). The memory subsystem is now DDR333 based instead of PC133 SDR. The graphics chip is now a Radeon 9200 instead of a Radeon 7500. The USB ports are now USB 2 compliant instead of 1.1. The SuperDrive is now 8x instead of 2x. It also ships standard with 256MB of RAM instead of 128MB. And the price has been reduced.

      So apart from the CPU speed, CPU cache, front side bus speed, memory subsystem, graphics subsystem, I/O ports, optical drive, standard memory and the price, yes...you are right. Not much else has changed.

    3. Re:Nice little system by hattig · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it is cheaper than it used to be whilst getting a speed bump. Instead of being overpriced and underpowered for being a budget system it is now a reasonable priced budget system that will compare reasonably well with other OEM budget systems (not white box systems though).

    4. Re:Nice little system by bhima · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That "standard 50% Apple International tax" is enough for me to go back the US, say hello to some old friends, pick up a new PowerMac & Display (When they finally come out) and drag them both back. For a net savings!

      So I wind up giving my money to KLM rather than Apple.

      Disclaimer: Part of this is caused by the Dollar Euro conversion rate and the fact that I Still have US dollars.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    5. Re:Nice little system by hayds · · Score: 1

      At last a reasonably priced Apple computer.

      It always seems to be the myth that apple computers are expensive, but really in the last couple of years they have become quite competitive price-wise. Not sure of US pricing, but here in Australia you wont find a better quality laptop for $1900 AUD than an iBook. Ive used all different brands and in that price range the iBook kicks ass. Everything else Ive used is either really big and heavy, really slow hardware, or really crappy build quality.

      The G5 is also pretty competitive. Yes they're expensive but if you're in the market for a high end workstation the Powermac is certainly not the most expensive, and many would argue the best or one of the best machines in its class.

      Admittedly the Powerbook and iMac are a bit overpriced for what you get but the PB is still a very nice machine and you'll get more bang for your buck when the g5 model comes out.

  36. Re:Answer this instead.. by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

    If I do as you suggest, I'm looking at a $180 Playstation 2. A TV is, say $200. Virtual PC: $130. That's an extra $510 tax just to play games and run windows applications.


    I'm willing to bet $5 he already has a TV. And a $180 PS2 will set you back almost as far as a decent videocard... oh and you don't have to pray your game starts whenever you want to play it either.

    Stable. Check. I last saw a bluescreen crash about 18 months ago - due to a network card that failed. Yes, a hardware problem.


    Windows XP... Stable... funny, never thought I'd see them in the same sentence together. I personally have NEVER seen an XP bluescreen... my WinXP never gets that far, just freezes up.

    Virus free. Check. I'm sorry, but if you run random attachments you receive in the mail, you're asking for trouble.


    Want some crack? 'Course you do! If you think opening email attachments is the only way to get a virus in Windows, you probably have never been on a corporate network where they spread like wildfire.

    Low-stress. Check. Windows just works.


    Stress is the reason I dumped my Windows PC after being a strict user since Windows 3.0. If MS can't make a decent OS, I don't want to give them any more money.

  37. Fast DVD burner, too! by jimlau · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the "Tech Specs" page:

    SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW); writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed

    8X DVD-R speed, that's twice what they're putting in the G5s! Bonus points for that. It's nice that it's not a bare-bones low end model.

    1. Re:Fast DVD burner, too! by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 5, Interesting

      To me, this is an iron-clad sign that the entire lineup of desktop Macs is about to receive an update.

      I mean, making the second-cheapest computer have a faster drive than the top of the line PowerMac? And making this new eMac better or equal to the iMac in every way at a significantly cheaper price? This can't stand for long. Either LCDs are so expensive that they're not making much of a profit off the iMacs, or the iMac is about to be updated.

      Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if everything else but the iBook gets an update within two weeks. (This also signals to me that the iMac will either receive a noticeable speed bump, or go G5.)

      --
      Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
      The purpose of that site was not known.
    2. Re:Fast DVD burner, too! by milkman_matt · · Score: 1

      Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if everything else but the iBook gets an update within two weeks. (This also signals to me that the iMac will either receive a noticeable speed bump, or go G5.)

      Don't tease me like that, i've had my eye on a 12" powerbook for the past few months. I'm sure there will be no revision in the next couple weeks, because I'm not going to buy one until another month or so, THAT is when they'll release the new line, 2 weeks to a month after I finally crack down and buy my powerbook.

      -matt

    3. Re:Fast DVD burner, too! by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

      hehe.. Yeah, I bit the bullet and bought a 12" PowerBook. One month later, they released the 1GHz/DVI model. Oh well. (I doubt I'd ever use the DVI port anyway, but the extra 133Mhz would have been nice, as I do video editing, and USB 2.0 would have been a nice bonus.)

      --
      Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
      The purpose of that site was not known.
  38. Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by Nice2Cats · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The hardware specs aren't what makes the difference man, it's the SOFTWARE. OS X is the best of UNIX under a fantastic GUI.

    I tend to think that people who write in CAPS are trolls, but since I can't mod you down, I guess I'll have to answer:

    Yes, OS X (10.3 at least) is a very, very good operating system -- I own an iBook G4 -- but only if you agree with the design philosophy. OS X was designed for completely different people who want to do completely different things with computers than, say, Linux users. Lots of people in these discussions don't realize this and get their panties in a knot about which system is "better". This is sort of like asking if a bread knife is better than a scalpel.

    Apple provides you with a flashy, very consistent, closed, minimal-options operating system that starts with the idea that choice is bad and will confuse the user. Steve Jobs tells you what you can and can't do, and in return, you don't have to deal with the computer as such: You just plug things in, and they work (or they don't). It is ideal for people who just want to listen to music, surf, do some email, and chat -- that is, 90 percent of the population. If this is all you want from a computer, by all means, go buy a Mac. It is what I recommend to my computer-illiterate colleagues when they complain about the latest Microsoft virus or crashing Windows.

    However, some people think choice is good, and want to be able to decide for themselves just where they want to be in the big computer trade-off of ease-of-use and efficiency. To take the cliche example, one mouse button is not confusing, but when you do lots and lots of cut-and-paste, three buttons kick ass all over the place. One single desktop is not confusing, but virtual desktops give you more room to move without having to invent flashy tricks like Expose. A mail program without TLS support is one less option for the user, but if your provider happens to require that extra layer of security, you're screwed.

    This is the reason why I will be installing Linux with KDE 3.2 on my iBook: I like choice, I am willing to learn things so that I can be more efficient, and the cozy, closed world of OS X is just too limited for what I want (and like) to do. Does this mean that I hate OS X or dispise it? No, it is just the wrong tool for the job in my case. No need for flames (or caps), just a rational assessment of my needs vs. those that OS X provides. Go forth and be happy with OS X, just realize that it is not the uberOS of the Gods. And please stop shouting.

    As for the "best of Unix": Apple did the right thing from a business point of view. They realized that they could make all kinds of money without having to give anything in return by using BSD, and then even get to charge premium for a glossy GUI pasted over that. Basically, this is another case where the BSD people are helping a major corporation get richer (remember Micorosoft and the TCP stack?) while getting peanuts in return. If Apple had used Linux for the base system, they would have been forced to be part of the community and give full value in return instead of getting away with dropping a bone here and there. And they still could have sold that flashy GUI on top, made lots of money, made their users happy, whatever.

    It is Apple's job (no pun intended) to be greedy: They are bound to shareholder value just like Microsoft. I just wonder if it should be our job to give them a free ride -- for any meaning of "free".

    1. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You write:

      "They [i.e., Apple] realized that they could make all kinds of money without having to give anything in return by using BSD, ... Basically, this is another case where the BSD people are helping a major corporation get richer (remember Micorosoft and the TCP stack?) while getting peanuts in return."

      Just show us the Darwin equivalent from Microsoft - Open Source, freely available for download and all. Otherwise you have missed your point.

    2. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by MadChicken · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, OS X (10.3 at least) is a very, very good operating system -- I own an iBook G4 -- but only if you agree with the design philosophy. OS X was designed for completely different people who want to do completely different things with computers than, say, Linux users.

      Uh. I run PostgreSQL and Apache on my eMac, as well as an IMAP server. Same thing I would do if this was a Linux box. I keep a terminal in my dock. GIMP is there too.

      There's tons of choice in OS X. Install Fink and pretend it's a Linux box.

      There is a difference though, I can do (almost) all of my Linux stuff PLUS have iTunes and GarageBand -- Ardour+LADSPA+Jack-rack+Hydrogen are amusing but horrible hacks in comparison.

      Oh yeah and I can't run Wine. Is that a bad thing? :)

      --
      SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
    3. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by xconslash · · Score: 0

      You can run KDE on OS X just fine. I've done it myself. I found that I prefered OS X because it felt snappier. However, I routinley fire up the Terminal to write scripts, or whatever, just because I have the choice to do so. While I can't do much to the window server or anything else, I don't need to, because it works to begin with.

      --


      .sig error: carrier signal lost.
    4. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by ztirffritz · · Score: 1

      actually, you can run WINE, sort of... http://darwine.opendarwin.org/download.php

      --
      Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
    5. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by bfg9000 · · Score: 1

      Darwin had like 50 downloads last year. It's a token giveback. I've tried it, it's *crap*. The Linux kernel, esp. 2.6, kicks Darwin's ass all over the place.

      Darwin is *useless* without Aqua. Aqua is what "makes" OS X. 99 out of 100 Mac users don't know what kernel OS X's on and don't care. They just want Aqua. Darwin by itself won't run anything I can't run faster elsewhere, and it's slow, crashy, badly designed, and is basically out there in the open due to a licensing agreement and so that the Apple Zealots will fix it for free for Apple.

      I know the paid shills are going to mod me down for this, but what the hell, it's the truth. Darwin *does* suck. It's not *nearly* best of breed. And every time you mod down a true post, you prove your own bias and dedication to promoting Apple, not promoting the truth.

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    6. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      And Aqua is pure Apple, so why do they have to give it back to the community? They gave back darwin which includes all the changes they made to the BSD base, install your favorite WM and you have a system.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    7. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by bfg9000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exactly. Apple made Aqua by themselves *for themselves*. They're not giving it back, and I don't expect them to. If they did, they'd be stupid (they'd quickly have to compete strictly on hardware specs, which, historically speaking, they've shown they can't do) and, at the same time, heroes of the FOSS movement, much as IBM became when they made a serious (to us, anyway) investment and commitment to free software.

      Giving back Darwin is fine. I'm sure it's helped half a dozen people who've made the choice to run that as their system. I don't know why anyone would want to, since it's technically inferior to the Linux kernel, and has a lot less people working on it, but I'll assume it's benefitted somebody. So that's good. Apple's testing the waters. I like it. I hope they continue down the road towards openness, rather than closed-ness. It's better for the consumer, and that's *me*. Knowing Apple extremely well, I highly doubt they will continue towards freedom, however. Darwin really *is* a token gesture, designed to get them PR and increased conversions from the FOSS camps. Remember "Come on in, it's open!" on their OS X website? Hell, *I* thought they were putting out a BSD-licensed OS until I read the fine print.

      So basically, what irritates me is the salesman-type spin people here put on Darwin, like it's the greatest gift to the FOSS community that ever existed. I've tried it, and it *sucks*. I don't have any problem at all with Apple themselves, but their overzealous little followers on here are making it out like Apple is an open-source company, like they're a charitable organization. They're not, but the amount of noise made by shills claiming that they *are* an uber-ethical corporation is overwhelming. I am the anti-shill. People I can only assume are paid shills (they're often so far from reality they have to *know* they're lying) try to convert Linux users to Mac OSX by pointing out the technical similarities and the fact that Apple has left Darwin open instead of opting to close their version, causing a fork. They conveniently make it sound like moving from Linux to Apple results in no vendor lockin and no loss of freedoms. This is incorrect, and should be clarified. There are a lot of good things about OS X, but its "openness" isn't one of them.

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    8. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Making Darwin freely available to download and install isn't the point. It's a bare bones system that nobody really uses without OS X on top. What's the point then? It's something that Open Source weenies always love to chant about. Having the source available. I see people here all the time saying "I wouldn't use any proprietary software, what if it breaks, I'd be at the mercy of the vendor to fix it, if they feel like it! I can fix open source myself!"

      Well, guess what? Let me tell you a little story.

      A couple months ago we got a dual-2.0 G5 with OS X Server and a maxed out Xserve RAID. I found a bug in the NFS automounter in OS X. In a similar case with Microsoft, all I could do was report the bug (do they even have a central bug reporting place? I don't know) and hope they would fix it. With OS X, I downloaded the Darwin source, pinpointed the cause of the bug, fixed it, recompiled my own automounter, and reported the bug to Apple with the fix provided to them. How cool is that?

      Apple doesn't have to give back anything with the BSD code they used. It was specifically licensed so that commercial companies could use it and improve on it without endangering their profits by releasing their versions. Apple did anyway. The BSD people have this philosophy that they'd rather give away their code for the good of all software, rather than restrict its use and have crappier commercial software because the companies couldn't use it. It's a different mindset from the paranoid GNU weenies.

      I have to laugh every time I see someone ranting about how Apple "stole" the BSD source without opening up everything they ever wrote. What a bunch of nonsense! They didn't do anything dirty or underhanded. They simply made use of a great available resource that the original creators willingly provided for that purpose. It's like giving away free fruit at the local market and then complaining that people took it and got nourishment from it without paying you. Duh!

    9. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by bfg9000 · · Score: 1

      I found a bug in the NFS automounter in OS X... I downloaded the Darwin source, pinpointed the cause of the bug, fixed it, recompiled my own automounter, and reported the bug to Apple with the fix provided to them. How cool is that?

      Welcome to open source. I'm sure Apple's happy you fixed it for them.

      I have to laugh every time I see someone ranting about how Apple "stole" the BSD source without opening up everything they ever wrote. What a bunch of nonsense!

      You're responding to me? Strange. I never said they did. And that's exactly why Apple chose BSD instead of GNU/Linux. They need to maintain control and they don't *want* to give anything back. And with BSD, they don't have to.

      They didn't do anything dirty or underhanded.

      I agree. But they didn't do anything *Saintly*, either, which is what I gather from the salesdroids raving about Apple giving away Darwin like it's the Fountain of Youth. Read this thread at +5. Everybody who gets modded up sounds like a one-sided unrealistic shill. As always, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If BOTH sides would agree on that, we'd all be better off. That's why I find myself forced to respond to zealots so often instead of engaging in intelligent conversation. But it's hard telling the Apple Zealots that Apple is a good company, but is not especially worthy of all-out worship -- especially when they've already tattooed themselves with Apple's corporate logo and have a collection of Apple posters, brochures, mousepads, and advertisements, and they think that every word that comes from Steve Jobs' mouth is straight from the mouth of God himself.

      Read the RMS/Java thread from yesterday. You'll find that the Linux people, famous for their zealotry, are FAR more balanced in their opinions than the Mac people. Are the Apple Zealots on Slashdot paid shills or a religious cult? I can't explain their fanatical-to-the-point-of-utter-stupidity devotion any other way. Because when my Mac crashes, I'm pissed off for a minute as I reboot. When their Mac crashes, it's like Steve is telling them he loves them. They smile and reboot in tearful adoration, basking in the blue glory of blessed Aqua, pledging their undying love for their chosen Savior.

      In short: All this undeserved zealotry makes me sick. I liked it better when nobody else used Macs. Because all these newbie idiots are f*cking nuts and are wrecking Apple's culture.

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    10. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by LoFat+ByLine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmm. Options. Well let's see.

      Multiple button mouse. Yep, these exist for Macs. That option is available.

      Virtual desktops. Not in Aqua, although you can kind of simulate it by creating multiple users & doing fast user switching. But I agree, that's not really the same thing. Or you can run X11 in fullscreen mode & have as many X desktops as you want ... gee, kind of like Linux in that respect. So I guess that option is available too.

      And yep, Mail.app doesn't do TLS ... why not set up mutt & procmail?

      In general you appear to be describing pre-OS X versions of Apple's OS. It's just plain silly to imply that OS X is only useful if you want "listen to music, surf, do some email, and chat" ... You're just trolling, right?

    11. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by bnenning · · Score: 1

      Apple provides you with a flashy, very consistent, closed, minimal-options operating system that starts with the idea that choice is bad and will confuse the user.

      Ugh, this again. For some reason there's a common meme that a computer platform can be user-friendly or powerful, but not both. Perhaps this just comes from looking at Unix and Windows, but it's not a law of nature. What choices do you lose when you run OS X? You can fire up a terminal and build Linux apps, run an X server, even dispense with Aqua completely.

      To take the cliche example, one mouse button is not confusing, but when you do lots and lots of cut-and-paste, three buttons kick ass all over the place.

      For the 1477th time: plug in any 3-button USB mouse, and it works automatically just like you'd expect. Right button gives you context menus (including cut and paste), scroll wheel scrolls, middle button opens browser links in new tabs, etc, etc. Note that Apple went to the trouble to specifically add support for multibutton mice, even though they don't ship them. Not exactly what they'd do if they were intent on denying you choice.

      One single desktop is not confusing, but virtual desktops give you more room to move without having to invent flashy tricks like Expose.

      So use a virtual desktop app for OS X. Personally, I find keyboard launchers like LaunchBar and Quicksilver superior to both virtual desktops and Expose.

      A mail program without TLS support is one less option for the user, but if your provider happens to require that extra layer of security, you're screwed.

      Um, so get another mail client that does what you need.

      I just don't see any support for your assertion that OS X denies choice to the user. Sure, the defaults are set up in a way that Apple considers best for nonexpert users, but so what? Apple's philosophy is that you shouldn't have to open the hood if you don't want to, but it's not welded shut.

      I just wonder if it should be our job to give them a free ride -- for any meaning of "free".

      Of course not. Apple's goal is to make money, exactly like Microsoft, IBM, and RedHat. When I say "I like Apple", that's just shorthand for "Apple's interests are aligned with mine at this moment in time", and it's subject to constant reevaluation as events progress.

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    12. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by MadChicken · · Score: 1

      Virtual desktops. Not in Aqua, although you can kind of simulate it by creating multiple users & doing fast user switching.

      Or just run Desktop Manager. OSS and very very good.

      --
      SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
    13. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      It's not just Darwin that they are "giving back" you know. They have added considerable drive to KHTML as just one example.

      And improvements to things like zeroconf - they didn't just splash a flashy French name on it and use it to sell computers.

      Apple exists to make money, first and foremost. As a sideline, I think they're doing a pretty good job giving back the community that helped them get a leg up (but isn't solely responsible) toward their success with OS X.

      Besides, if you don't like OS X for that reason, Apple still makes great hardware that you can stick Linux on. You can even buy Macs with YDL pre installed so you don't have to pay the "tax" for an OS you won't use.

    14. Re:Depends on your philosophy, doesn't it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "The hardware specs aren't what makes the difference man, it's the SOFTWARE. OS X is the best of UNIX under a fantastic GUI."

      I tend to think that people who write in CAPS are trolls, but since I can't mod you down, I guess I'll have to answer:

      The only word in what he wrote that was CAPS when it shouldn't be was "software". All of the others are supposed to be in caps (UNIX, OS X, and GUI). So what the hell are you complaining about?

  39. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by logicat2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Windows XP? I prefer Windows 2000 myself
    If you continue to base your opinions on a copy of Windows 3.1 you once used ten years ago - OS 9 was arguably even worse

    I didn't post above, but I currently use both XP and 2000 daily. Make your own decisions but I also use OS X daily and it's far and away the most pleasant working environment I've encountered to date. That doesn't mean it's perfect, by any stretch of the imagination, but that's not the point now, is it.

    As for "OS 9," um, who's talking about OS 9?

    If you want Unix, install Linux... FreeBSD... SuSE... Debian... Lycoris... Lindows... There are choices in the Windows world.

    Well, by the time I've finished clicking through the (Continue) buttons in an OS X install I've managed to install both the entire GUI environment and the entire Unix OS. I can also install other Unix systems on Mac hardware, but frankly I've got everything I need right here.

    I don't need to install anything else except Logic Pro 6, Ableton Live, MetaSynth, ArtMatic Pro, MetaTrack, Voyager, VTrack, Absynth, OmniGraffle, OmniOutliner, OmniDiskSweeper, Studiometry, FileMakerPro, Adobe Creative Suite, LaunchBar, MySQL, Perl 5.8.3, Fink, Plone, Keynote, BBEdit, FastTrack Schedule Pro, Sonasphere, Toast 6, ZBrush, and a few more but I'll get to those tomorrow.

    I run all these (plus my email, internet, contacts management, calendaring, etc) in the same operating environment; not an emulation shell, not after dual-booting, but in the very same operating system and simultaneously.

    To top it all off OS X comes with a full set of developer tools, documentation and optimization utilities, plus Cocoa+Obj-C is a match made in heaven.

    There's no need to pay Apple for a decent Unix experience.

    Well, I believe there is. I enjoy the ability to support quality whether it's a film, a restaurant, a music venue, a book, clothing, my neighborhood, an artist, etc. every single day.

    The hardware is just a hunk of material until you've discovered/designed an interface with which to use it. Solely on a base consumer level, I'm very happy to pay Apple for what is, in daily practice, a superior computer operating system. From the level of both a technology consultant and a media creator, the solution is very simple.

    OS X is a very impressive "Holy Grail" for all my current activities. Strap me in because I'm ready to get to work.

  40. I just hope by mst76 · · Score: 1

    that the fan isn't as loud as in the previous model. It uses the newer G4, so there is some hope. But the quiet old fanless iMacs were really nice.

    1. Re:I just hope by King+Babar · · Score: 1
      I just hope that the fan isn't as loud as in the previous model. It uses the newer G4, so there is some hope. But the quiet old fanless iMacs were really nice.

      Yes, the fan noise of the early eMac is my *only* complaint about the thing. Hell, even the speakers aren't *completely* sucky. I agree with you that the fanless iMacs were incredibly nice...but they weren't silent unless you got one with a hard drive much quieter than the one I have. I'm guessing this one will be very similar in noise properties to the current models, so the question goes out:

      How loud is the current eMac in a quiet room?

      By my reckoning, if it is half of the apparent loudness of a first generation eMac, the SuperDrive model would be a stupendous machine for any situation where you don't need to lug it around. People are *not* kiddling when they point out this sucker is heavy and handle-less.

      --

      Babar

    2. Re:I just hope by grahamlee · · Score: 1
      But the quiet old fanless iMacs were really nice.

      And which were they? I've taken apart both flavours of iMac and they both have a fan in. The fan in the CRT iMac is in the bottom, just behind the CD-ROM drive. The fan in the LCD iMac is right at the top, pointing up toward the monitor stalk.

    3. Re:I just hope by mst76 · · Score: 1

      > And which were they? I've taken apart both flavours of iMac and they both have a fan in.

      There were a lot more than two flavours of the iMac, the CRT iMacs alone had a dozen of revisions. The earlier versions had a fan, but I believe all versions between 350mhz and the LCD iMacs didn't. In any case, the 350mhz and the 500mhz were fanless.

    4. Re:I just hope by miller701 · · Score: 1

      I believe the fan went away when the slot loading G3 iMacs came out (Tangerine, Lime etc.)

  41. Re:Ridiculous by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    A phone book?

    Wouldn't that ruin the 'design' that apple spend so much time on? But this is apple so when they nickle and dime you to death it is a Good Thing!

    Just Damn.

  42. Too long a wait? by rixstep · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is the first consumer Mac update in five months.

    What are they up to? Where is my dual G5 PowerBook anyway?

    1. Re:Too long a wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Where is my dual G5 PowerBook anyway?

      In the same warehouse as the quad G6 PowerMacs, in Area 51.

    2. Re:Too long a wait? by milkman_matt · · Score: 4, Funny

      What are they up to? Where is my dual G5 PowerBook anyway?

      It's scheduled to be released immediately after your purchase of a G4 powerbook.

      -matt

    3. Re:Too long a wait? by Ixitar · · Score: 1

      Then it must be coming out real soon. I just upgraded to the 15 inch model with the SuperDrive.

    4. Re:Too long a wait? by milkman_matt · · Score: 1

      Then it must be coming out real soon. I just upgraded to the 15 inch model with the SuperDrive.

      Oh well any day now then I'm sure! I hope that when they revise the powerbook line the 12"ers get backlit keyboards too.

    5. Re:Too long a wait? by mingust · · Score: 1

      They tried to make one, but they had enough problems keeping the 12" PowerBook cool enough sit on Yao Ming's lap without burning his legs.

      With how hot the wrist-rests (not to mention the rest of the parts) get on 12" powerbooks, I'm surprised someone would consider a dual processor.

      "ICU? Yeah. We got another PowerBook user here in the ER."

      --
      ~mingust
    6. Re:Too long a wait? by Ixitar · · Score: 1

      I was right. I bought my new powerbook less than a month ago and they announce a speed increase. I am happy with what I have, so I am not too disappointed that I did not wait.

  43. Actually, it's $59 US. by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 2, Informative

    .. then I found that this clear plastic eMac stand COST $95 (you can find it when you select the eMac; price is from apple.ca)

    Note to readers: that's 95 Canadian dollars, or 59 US dollars. US$95 would indeed be a lot, but US$59 seems reasonable for a well designed accessory that does its job well and adds certain convenience. Feel free to skip it and buy an aftermarket stand, or make your own, or use an old text book.

  44. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by torpor · · Score: 1

    There's no need to pay Apple for a decent Unix experience.

    Just like there was no need to pay Sun, or SGI, or MIPS, or DEC ...

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  45. $679? What kind of crack did Dell give you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Add some software to your precious Dell, bucko:

    $679 will get you XP Home instead of Pro, no office suite, no movie software, no firewire & no optical mouse.

    Add all that stuff and you are looking at $898 now. Your Dell is a whopping $100 cheaper, which will be quickly eaten up by your Anti Virus & Firewall software you'll have to buy and you still don't have anything close to iDVD or Garage Band. Add Adobe Photo Album to make up for your lack of iPhoto and your Dell becomes $925

    I'd bet that a high percentage of entry level consumers, if presented with both alternatives in a FUD free enviroment would pick the eMac over the Dell.

    Ta-da yourself.

  46. Not quite. by RadRafe · · Score: 5, Informative
    If Apple had used Linux for the base system, they would have been forced to be part of the community and give full value in return instead of getting away with dropping a bone here and there.
    Sigh. In the process of turning OPENSTEP into Mac OS X, why in the name of salted peanuts should Avie and his team have ripped everything out and started again with Linux? Or do you not even know the history of NextSTEP?

    Besides, what source doesn't Apple share already, that a GNU license would force them to? Darwin is totally open. You can download the source here.

  47. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

    If you want Unix, install Linux or FreeBSD. Install SuSE, install Debian, Lycoris or even Lindows for that matter. There are choices in the Windows world.


    Pssst. Linux isn't Windows. Just thought you should know.

  48. Will this eMac support monitor spanning? by mzs · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here is a link that I probably found on macosxhints.com some time ago:

    http://www.rutemoeller.com/mp/ibook/ibook_e.html

    It tells about how you can use an nvramrc to change graphic-options on your mac to enable monitor spanning (as apposed to monitor mirroring). It works on Radeon 7500 eMacs but it is unclear yet whether this trick will work on these new eMacs. Let's hope so....

    1. Re:Will this eMac support monitor spanning? by grocer · · Score: 1

      Note that the "new" iBook G4s use an ATI Mobility Radeon 9200 graphic chip...while the revised eMac uses an ATI Radeon 9200. And it works on the G4 iBook, so it should work fine on the eMac.

  49. EMac / IMac WO Monitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I don't understand why apple does not produce something like the eMac without the hassle of a monitor. I don't expandability, nor do I need another screen to clutter the desk. All that I want is a small box that has the guts of the eMac that I can connect to the monitor that I all ready have. One would think that apple could produce something like this with a single pci slot and make it available for less than the price of a comparable eMac.

    1. Re:EMac / IMac WO Monitor by BadMrMojo · · Score: 1

      They (sorta) did. They just couldn't lower the price on the Cubes to sell enough, however. The specs were too close to the towers.

      . . . I can't believe I just said they were too fast. . . You know what I mean.

    2. Re:EMac / IMac WO Monitor by beattie · · Score: 1

      Yea! That's what we need, g5 cubes! Nevermind the heat problems with the old ones, these new g5's run super cold! Seriously though, if they can fix the heat problems with the cube design, or even have a different case design and a way to buy it without a monitor built in, that'd be great.

    3. Re:EMac / IMac WO Monitor by General+Sherman · · Score: 2, Informative

      They did make this once, it was called the cube, and it was a complete failure. It didn't have much in the way of expandability, but it was completely silent, and it looked very nifty. Unfortunately, it didn't sell very well.

      They do have cards that can upgrade a cube to an 800Mhz G4, but you're still going to be hampered by the rest of the hardware. It runs OS X just fine though.

      Apple probably won't make something like it for a long long time.

      --
      - Sherman
    4. Re:EMac / IMac WO Monitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They did make this once, it was called the cube, and it was a complete failure.

      That may have been due to the fact that they priced it at $1800-$2800.

  50. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by mcwop · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No iMovie,iDVD or GarageBand on the Dell is there? Those apps kick the crap out of comparible apps for Windows. Those are the apps I use a lot. I consider more than just cost when buying a machine.

    --

    "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

  51. Re:Answer this instead.. by crackshoe · · Score: 1

    No Virtual PC yet for my g5, though. My solution was to build an athlon system, in case i desperately need to do something in x86 land (specifically, play GTA:VC, but hey, i could do work on it too)

    --
    Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
  52. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by RatPh!nk · · Score: 1
    To be fair and balanced =)
    Let's compare:
    I picked the Dimension 2400 ($599 US as of 4/14/04)
    • Pentium® 4 @ 2.66GHz w/533MHz front side bus (I'll give you this one, probably slightly faster in some respects than the 1.25GHz G4)
    • XP Home Edition (no contest to 10.3, but for $70 you can have XP Pro.
    • No digital media pack included (add $30 or $20 w/o MS Plus)
    • Only 128 MB Ram standard (add $70 to bring it up to 256)
    • 40GB HD (equal there)
    • 48X CD-ROM Drive (Combo Drive add $89)
    • basic burning package for both
    • productivity pack is about the same (Wordperfect v. AppleWorks, MS Money v. Quicken)
    • 1 Year Limited Warranty plus 1 Year At-Home Service (Dell wins here with the 1 yr at home standard)
    • 17" monitor (I'll call that a draw, I have no way to verify the quality)
    • Integrated Intel® 3D Extreme Graphics (no dell option to change, I am going to give this one to the 9200 and dedicated VRAM)
    • Integrated Audio (tie for same reason as monitor)
    • stereo speakers (tie)
    • keyboard (no USB ports on keyboard)
    • mouse (dell wins, 2 button IMHO, but it is not optical)
    • For the sake of argument I will say the preloaded Dell Jukebox powered by MUSICMATCH and Dell Picture Studio, Paint Shop Pro Trial, Photo Album Starter Edition are functionally equivalent (otherwise it is a $20 and $30 upgrade respectively)
    • No IEEE 1394 (add $50)
    • Both have 56k modems and 10/100 ENet
    • Grand Total? $808
      Note: I did not do the XP Pro update, the Digital media pack update (w/o Plus!), JukeBox/Picture Studio Updates.....if I did?
      Grand Total? $948 Dollars.

      The conclusion is this, the eMac is competitively priced, fully featured and is aimed at the same market as the Dimension 2400, people who are probably buying their first computer ever or want a second computer (or third =)) for a child/spouse etc...


      Similarly the 4600 can be done this way, but the price ends up at $1109 using the same criteria as listed above with the following exceptions on which Dell has the lead:


      In the 4600 the following are superior and standard: Intel ® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.8GHz w/533MHz FSB Integrated 5.1 Channel Audio

      The big weakness is the Integrated Intel® Extreme Graphics 2 but at least with the 4600 you can upgrade it through Dell with the:

      1. 128MB DDR NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Graphics Card with TV-Out and DVI (add $60)
      2. 128MB DDR ATI RADEON 9800 PRO Graphics Card with TV-Out and DVI (add $200)

      Again these machines (especially the 2400 and the eMac) are geared to people who want Dell/Apple to ship them a computer that just works, out of the box. You could swap in better components (RAM, HD, Optical Drives (for both), PCI cards/processors for the Dell (I am speaking general components) but this is not in the scope of my comparison as I would imagine they are not of concern of the intended purchasing audience. I hope you find this to be an interesting read, and take it with an open mind.


      I also want to acknowledge that I know the previous post was intended to be funny =)
      -pH1nk
    --
    Argh. The laws of science be a harsh mistress.
  53. Re:Answer this instead.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Stress is the reason I dumped my Windows PC after being a strict user since Windows 3.0. If MS can't make a decent OS, I don't want to give them any more money.

    Heck, even if you pirate Windows, you're still giving them market share, and that's bad in itself.

    Go Apple! ...now, do I buy that new eMac, or do I wait for the new iMac (or even its replacement)?

  54. Re:Answer this instead.. by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

    Get into your time machine and go get a G5 eMac for $600!

  55. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dammit, why did my last mod point expire yesterday??

    A Pentium 4 is much faster than a P3 at the same Mhz.

    Bull. Fucking. Shit.

    Sorry, Intel significantly increased the pipeline length of the P4 so they could more easily ramp up the clock speed and sell "faster" processors to the ignorant public (like you, apparently). What does a longer pipeline mean? Much higher penalty when the CPU predicts wrong and has to throw out the whole thing and start over (this is an extreme simplification). In real world terms, it means the P4 is measurably SLOWER than the P3 at the same clock speed. I remember this was a pretty big deal when the P4 first came out.

    Jesus, if you're going to troll on a Mac story, at least get your facts straight. Intel processor generations were generally faster than the previous generation up until the P4. 286->386, 386->486, 486->Pentium, Pentium->Pentium Pro (except for 16-bit code). Pentium Pro->PentiumII was a slight step back due to reduced cache speed. PentiumII->PentiumIII I guess was some improvement, though my recollection was that it basically just added a few more multimedia instructions and bumped up the clock speed. PentiumIII->Pentium4 was a significant step back.

    Still, my real world experience tells me that for compute-intensive applications, nothing but a G5 on the Mac side can come even close to equivalent Intel/AMD. My 733 MHz G4 does most things much slower than a 750 MHz Duron I used to have. MP3 encoding, compiling the same code, running simulations, etc. I honestly wonder if that whole "G4 is twice as fast as a similar P2/3" that was being pushed 4 years ago was a bunch of hogwash. Not in my experience. Altivec, maybe, but nothing else. Like I said G5 is another story though. That fucker screams.

    I use Macs because of the user experience, like most people here. I get my cake (great interface, commercial apps) and eat it too (Terminal). Weee!

  56. Emacs NOT worth buying by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Funny

    You'll be much happier with vi.

    1. Re:Emacs NOT worth buying by psyconaut · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'm happier with vim, actually ;-)

      -psy

    2. Re:Emacs NOT worth buying by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Which, incidentally, is pre-installed on eMacs...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  57. except, now it's 'everyone'... by javaxman · · Score: 2, Informative

    the eMac was originally introduced for "education", it was in fact only available via edu channels, i.e. at your university bookstore or via the Apple Store after you proved you were a teacher, student or school administrator. After initial sales, they opened up the buying to 'everyone'.

    Think of it as the VW bug of the Mac line... the sad thing is it's now 30% or so faster than the original iMac that I spent a cool grand more on a couple of years back... that's tech for ya.

  58. And it's not dual-boot... by huchida · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ... Unfortunately. I was hoping Apple's lowest tier would still allow us to boot into 9 when necessary... Another case of Apple dragging us into the future, whether we like it or not.

    Unfortunately there are many applications (including a few decent games) that don't boot, or run buggy from X running "classic." My faithful laser printer doesn't print from X running "classic." I can understand why it wouldn't work with a G5, but how difficult would it really be to allow dual-boot with the remaining G4 computers?

    1. Re:And it's not dual-boot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I was hoping Apple's lowest tier would still allow us to boot into 9 when necessary...

      OS 9 is as dead as Windows 3.11 (or at the very least, Win95)

    2. Re:And it's not dual-boot... by huchida · · Score: 1
      OS 9 is as dead as Windows 3.11 (or at the very least, Win95) No, it's not. 7.5-8 is their Windows '95. 9 was the up-to-date OS until Jaguar came out a few years ago. And I still see it running in major design and animation houses, because a) many high-end printers and scanners just don't run on X, b) networking is still a bit of a bitch, and c) many essential applications such as Quark have yet to be updated.

      I'm all for X, but I still have to re-boot in 9 a few times a week and I'm not the only one. Making current G4's (not talking G5, that's a different processor of course) X-only was an arbitrary from Apple to force their customers to conform whether they were ready or not. They recently lost a sale from me, I would've bought a new Mac last month but settled for a used one instead because I nneded access to 9.

    3. Re:And it's not dual-boot... by DJ+Jesus · · Score: 1

      http://quark.com/products/xpress/ Quark has been out for severel months of X.

      --
      Let it ring www.aural-bliss.com
  59. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was a pretty big deal when the P4 first came out. But that was 3 years ago -- now the P4 has better IPC than the P3 -- faster bus, improved branch prediction & register allocation, etc

  60. An easy fix to the cubes overheating problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ADD A FAN! Put a nice 120mm fan at the bottom of the case that is thermally controlled. The cube may have to be a little bigger this time but I would still buy it.

  61. Re:Still way outdated, Apple fanatics please read. by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Toast 6 is indispensable to me, and far and away the best CD burning app I've ever come across on any platform.

    BBEdit was nice, but I prefer SubEthaEdit for what I do (mainly html and css).

    My list of apps to go on after a nuke and pave:

    NcFTP - can't live without it. CLI only, but that's the way to go with ftp for me. Used to have to build from source, but there's an OS X binary installer available now to make my life easier.

    SubEthaEdit - great icon, great app. Does exactly what it says on the tin. Works great as a standalone editor, but the shared edit features have been useful from time to time.

    Toast Titanium 6 - indispensable. Perfection in a CD burning app.

    Adium - necessary on my humble 600Mhz iBook which is still going strong. It has a small footprint and is much less CPU heavy than iChat or and of the other clients.

    TinyFugue - again, used to have to build this from source, but no longer. I've tried other MUD clients, but this one keeps me loyal.

    Photoshop 7 - can't afford the Creative Suite yet, so on the old one (which is still perfectly fine). Runs pretty well on my battered G3 iBook.

    XRegion - simple app that allows me to change the region code on my DVD drive (firmware upgraded to unlock/uncripple it).

    That's pretty much it - music, mail and browsing is taken care of with the apps Apple provides.

    Oh, I almost forgot: Quake III Arena. Ok, so it's a little ropey on my iBook, but it's good for a couple of quick DMs on q3dm17 while waiting in airport lounges.

    It plays better on my G5 box, but then I'd expect no less! The vital app install list is the same for the G5 except for two more apps that facilitate my living: Final Cut Pro 4 and DVD Studio Pro 1.5.

  62. You forgot something very important: by motown · · Score: 1

    Make sure the machine is not connected to the Internet when the installation completes!

    Otherwise, you'll get a virus anyway, even if you don't touch the computer.

    Yes, my friends: it's that pathetic.

    --
    "Oooh, does that mean we get to kick some puffy white mad zionist butt?"