meh
Join Date: May 2004
|
PC magazine complains about the emac G4. Saying how the 9200 GPU in there can't play all the new Mac games, how the 40 GB HD is pathetic, and how pathetic the design is. He also complains about how the eMac doesn't come with a DVD burner so he can't transfer files to DVD's. What he misses the point is that the eMac was for education market but, was brought out due to demand. The eMac isn't designed to handle the latest games. The eMac isn't designed to be a hardcore gaming machine.
I have a 40 GB HD in my 12" powerbook. This is a pro machine and I have only used 9 GB (28.62 GB free) for the 11 months of me using it. Now for an entry level Mac the 40 GB HD should satisfy the customer. I will give him some points about the design. It is sort of a stale design since it looks like the jellybean imac G3 on steroids. But, other than that it still holds apple's innovation design. The emac can trounce almost any brand PC in looks even with its stale design. Yes, the $799 emac doesn't come with a DVD burner. Maybe he missed the $999 eMac? Or he could of thought the superdrive was something else? Anyway, most consumers still use CD's to tranfer and back up files. I do not know anyone who uses DVD's for backup yet. Overall, I think this person is just ignorant like a friend at my school is. He doesn't look at the details of the specs, he doesn't know how apple setup their Mac line up, and he won't listen to mac people. Maybe that is just my opinion. I also expect that once the eMac goes G5, the specs will improve a little bit. http://www.forbes.com/technology/fee...ahoo&referrer= giggity |
Member
|
Quote:
It's great for people who really don't do a whole lot with their computer but want the experience of using a mac. It could use a spec update for sure. |
|
I shot the sherrif.
|
yeah, 32MB of RAM seems like crap compared to the 64 that machine over there has. oh, what's that? it's shared RAM? oooh.
just think it's a little stupid to say the eMac is the worst desktop of the year. i promise you i could find A LOT worse. Google is your frenemy. Caveat Emptor - Latin for tough titty I tend to interpret things in the way that's most hilarious to me |
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope. Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington, DC
|
It's certainly more than capable for most school computer labs, kiosk setups, receptionist desks, and most home tasks. It's certainly better than the bottom-rung Wintel boxes, too. Certainly better than a "Bottom 10" designation.
|
Member
|
Or do something about the noise? Sure the machine was designed for the EDU market but I can't imagine dozens of these things droning away. When I had my Power Mac at home (1.33GHz, Radeon 9800, WD Raptor, complete with 120mm case fan and 80mm PSU fan) the "quality" of sound was easier to handle then the eMac's.
Speed-bump and redesign with a more effort in the acoustic category por favor. /* styling for my posts */ .intelligence {display: none;} |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
|
Hey, I've got a 1GHz eMac here at work and I love it. I hardly get anything done... It takes hours to import or export video.
Photoshop? The beachball of life, man... "Is it done yet?" Of course not! I surf and surf to my heart's delight. If the morons want some real work done, they can buy me a real Mac. |
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The 'Nard
|
iMac is far more appealing after the G5 bump, but until that happened, the eMac was a smart buy. Even if eMac is a monster on the desk, my mother-in-law loves her large, bright screen set at 800-600 for her bad eye-sight.
I am completely lost when people 'need' gross power to write letters, surf the web, and look at email. My grannie is still using a Performa and manages to forward and write more mail than any 'most-wanted' spammer in the world. Ulo. |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Quote:
...into the light of a dark black night. |
|
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
The eMac is a great value, frequently cited by many as Apple's "best bang for the buck".
I'd love to see it trimmed up, a G5 and a64MB VRAM...who wouldn't? But it's still a damn better machine than any similarly (or lower) priced PC, if only because of the OS it happens to have on there. And yes, having iLife pre-installed and available to EVERYONE, out of the box, is only that much nicer! Find the PC equivalent of iLife...you can't. Anything close won't be preinstalled (or $49) and work that well together. If it can get a slightly smaller/slimmer case, a G5 and double the VRAM and still occupy an $800 area, it will be awesome. For what it is, what it does, who it's intended for, etc., it's wonderful. If you TRULY can't surf, e-mail, chat, write, use the iLife stuff, Sherlock, other iApps, etc. on today's eMac (with appropriate RAM, of course), then you're either doing something wrong, or you just need something a bit more in line with your expectations on speed, specs, etc. (an iMac G5 or tower...or a Fast™ PC of some sort). Anyone acting like they can't do the above tasks on a 1.25GHz G4 (again, with sufficient RAM, which is important) is delusional. Or making stuff up. Or battling a severe, terminal case of Specwhoritis. |
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
|
Yes, the eMac is a bit dissapointing, but remember, it's due for an update- maybe even a major one, in the near future...
Apple recognizes the fact that the eMac may need some more power, and will update it accordingly... I'm thinking a 1.5GHz G4 , 64MB Graphics Card and possibly an 80GB HD (Probaly not)... Remember the eMac is not high end... or even mid-range... |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Was "1.5GHz G4 " meant in a good way (as in "that's AWESOME!") or a bad way (as in "are you KIDDING me?!?")
I honestly couldn't tell. I tend to use that face in a positive, good news type of way. I use the to denote disgust, sarcasm, "yeah, whatever...", etc. |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
I was more thinking of the form factor than anything else. It's just a clunky piece of hardware now compared to everything else Apple sells IMO. Needs to go on a diet. Maybe keep a similar form factor but with an LCD screen inside. One of decent but lower quality (hence affordable for all invovled) than what's in the iMac...
...aren't there "cheap CRT comparable" 15" LCDs out there at about $300 or so now? ...into the light of a dark black night. |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Maybe that's one of the things slated for MWSF?
How would you guys feel about a widescreen 17" eMac? That just crossed my mind today for some reason. But I don't know if they make 17" wide CRTs. But I was thinking something like a white, opaque version of that cool 17" ADC mobius strip display from a few years ago (in other words, a permanent, integrated tilt/swivel stand). I guess "going wide" (in addition to maybe not being 17" widescreen CRTs) might add expense? In my head, however, an eMac-white widescreen 17" with a cool, clear acrylic integrated base doesn't offend me. Pack it with respectable specs (those of the $1299 or $1499 iMac G5) and you'd have a nice machine, with a pallete/GarageBand/iMovie-friendly widescreen, a built-in tilt/swivel base and iMac G5-level power/performance. It would sell. |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Nah, it's easy to imagine this one...no visual assistance needed:
Take the eMac (color, pricing), that cool 17" ADC CRT monitor (base, sleekness) and a 17" iMac G5 (specs, 17" widescreen) and toss them into a blender. Add a dash of Ive seasoning, to taste. Voila! |
Shiny, Musky, Fleshy Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Beer Store
|
But the emac is so... sweet. Mine runs photoshop and flash mx fine. It's screen is perfect. And I run halo on it decently. Any non spec whore mac user should knoe that the eMac is fine. Maybe even a little too powerful for a standard school computer.
EDIT: Hope you know this is an exaggeration Founder of the Applenova Folding Team Last edited by Zodiac : 2004-12-22 at 17:50. |
Fro Productions(tm)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London Town
|
Quote:
... |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Those of you that seem to be defending Jim Louderback against criticism for calling the eMac one of the 10 worst computers might want to read what he said again. For example, he said "the lack of a DVD burner makes offloading files impossible". Did you get that? IMPOSSIBLE. Are you sure you want to defend comments like that? Then he bitches about the Radeon 9200, despite the fact that the Dells in that price range have even worse integrated, shared-ram video. I'm sure he just forgot about that part, rather than intentionally omitting it.
And he's recommending that you buy a Dell instead of an eMac - despite the fact that any Dell you buy for less than $799 won't have a DVD burner or a HD over 40 GB or a Radeon 9200, or a monitor as good as the eMac's either. This guy is a tool. Whether you believe the eMac is due for a refresh or not is irrelevant, read this fool's article again and tell me you agree with everything he says. Then, go to Dell's site. Customize the Dimension 3000 that starts at $499 so that it matches the eMacs's specs. Add XP Pro, a combo drive, a Firewire card, speakers, Microsoft Works, Norton SystemWorks and the Anti-spyware bundle, and voila. Now the Dell costs $821, with an inferior monitor, an inferior OS and nothing even close to iLife. oh noes, pc magazine R teh pwned111!!11!one!!1 |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
|
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The future of the eMac? | ja0912 | Speculation and Rumors | 28 | 2005-01-10 15:14 |
No Desktop Mac between $799-$1299? | bborofka | Speculation and Rumors | 50 | 2004-09-29 10:29 |
Could next eMac to be low end G4 based iMac? | Satchmo | Speculation and Rumors | 33 | 2004-09-14 15:39 |
Trade in desktop for laptop - when? | Luca | General Discussion | 0 | 2004-09-14 13:12 |