Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Revises eMac

Posted by timothy on from the flatscreen-would-rule dept.

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."

33 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. 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!

      --
      Blocklevel: Practical Information Architecture
    2. 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
    3. 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.

    4. 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.
    5. 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. :)

    6. 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...
    7. 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.
    8. 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?

  2. 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.
  3. 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: 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*

    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.

  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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 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.

  12. 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.
  13. 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 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
  14. 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.

  15. 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 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

  16. 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.