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."
Anyone know this machine with the 1.25 GHz G4 processor fares against the new Intel 3.2Ghz processor with 1Gb RAM?
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.
Moderators are morons, the parent is a joke, not a flame
since when is a 2.4GHz celeron cutting edge?
Since people stopped caring about how much a large cache improves performance.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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?)