Apple today announced a faster, more affordable line of eMac desktops for home and schools, including faster PowerPC G4 processors running at up to 1.25 GHz, 333 MHz DDR memory, faster ATI Radeon graphics and USB 2.0 connectivity to peripherals.
Apple Announces Faster, Cheaper eMacs
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I am looking at selling a bunch of my stuff on ebay to get one of these for my wife. It seems like a really well rounded little machine.
No more complaints about Mac systems being too expensive. I think people just overlook the iBook/iMac/eMac line (they’re aimed at home users) because those seem nicely priced for the features they offer. Now that there’s G4 CPUs across the board and better graphics cards, it just makes sense. The Pro line are indeed pricey but they’re aimed at professionals, hence the premium in price.
Panther would run great on these machines, so long as you up the RAM to at least 512MB. I have an old 667Mhz powerbook with 512MB that I have pretty much zero complaints about (I guess the HD could be a little faster, but that’s always true of portables… and Word is a hog, but luckily I don’t have to use it too much). Then again, I don’t play games…
Is switching RAM chips in a Mac as simple as it is in pc? Same availability?
Switching ram is very easy. You can get ram from crucial.com without any problems.
“Is switching RAM chips in a Mac as simple as it is in pc? Same availability?”
They use the same RAM, and it’s actually easier in most Mac models.
The towers don’t have any screws to take off, the doors just unclip and come off.
The bottom of the iMac unscrews.
The portables usually have it under the keyboard.
The eMac has 4 screws on the bottom panel, then it comes off and you have access to everything inside.
I received my emac two weeks ago, my first modern mac
Its a very nice machine and yes, the eMac should work with most PC ram, as long as it is the same type.
BTW I have 384mb of ram (1GHz G4) and 10.3.3 runs very nicely.
We have around 200+ eMacs and they have all ran fine. For a period there was a monitor issue but that has not been resolved.
As for RAM, I get by with 384mb on one running panther. No real problem at all.
As for adding RAM, you simple put the machine on it’s top, unlatch the latch, stick in the memory, latch the latch, put the machine on it’s bottom, and you are done. I upgradded 60 of these machines in one day, heck it took less than an hour.
The monitor issue *has* been resolved.
I blew all my extra cash on PC upgrades (getting 95fps @ 1600×1200 on UT2K4
)
Once I save up enough I’ll try a mac.
My girlfriend got an eMac (the 1 Ghz kind back in January). She then went out and picked up 1 Gig of RAM for $150 CAN from someone she knows. Installing the RAM was easy, and the machine works nicely. It’s very quiet when it goes to sleep, and starts up quickly. She absolutely loves the eMac, and just despises working again on a PC.
On a side note, she recently confessed she would rather learn SodiPodi and use Linux then deal with Windows and 44 security updates. And this coming from someone about to graduate school and move on to the world of design for print shops.
The old model iMacs were very quiet since they didn’t have an internal fan. I heard an eMac in a shop and they seemed pretty loud. Maybe I’ll get one of these if they are more quiet now, since they use the newer less power-hungry G4 chips. Fanless seems a bit too much to hope for, unfortunately. (Or maybe I should get a used 600mhz G3 iMac?)
hmmm, yes they are still radically overpriced and underpowered.
Compare:
SuperDrive Model for $999
M9461LL/A
Processor 1.25GHz PowerPC G4 (How long has the 1.25ghz g4 been on the market?)
System bus 167MHz
Memory 256MB of PC2700 (333MHz) DDR SDRAM; supports up to 1GB
Hard disk drive 80GB Ultra ATA/100
Optical drive Combo SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
Display 17-inch (16-inch viewable) flat CRT
Graphics support ATI Radeon 9200; 32MB dedicated DDR SDRAM video memory
VGA video mirroring (3) Yes (Apple VGA Adapter required, sold separately)
S-video and composite video output (3) Yes (Apple Video Adapter required, sold separately)
Ports Two FireWire 400 ports, three USB 2.0 ports (on computer), two USB 1.1 ports (on keyboard), mini-VGA output port, headphone jack, audio line in jack
Networking Built-in 10/100BASE-T Ethernet and 56K V.92 modem (4)
Wireless Networking (1) AirPort Extreme ready; internal Bluetooth module available as build-to-order option
Speakers Integrated stereo speakers
System software Mac OS X version 10.3 “Panther”
Software Classic environment, Mail, iChat AV, Safari, Sherlock, Address Book, QuickTime, iLife (includes iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, GarageBand), iSync, iCal, DVD Player, AppleWorks, Microsoft Internet Explorer, EarthLink (includes 30 days of free dial-up service with activation), Quicken 2004 for Mac,World Book 2004 Edition, Sound Studio,Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 4, Deimos Rising, Zinio Reader, Apple Hardware Test
Hardware Accessories Apple Keyboard, Apple Mouse, modem cable
Service and support Your eMac comes with 90 days of telephone support and a one-year limited warranty. Purchase the AppleCare Protection Plan and get three years of service and support. Only the AppleCare Protection Plan provides you with direct telephone support from Apple technical experts and the assurance that repairs will be handled by Apple-certified technicians using genuine Apple parts. For more information, visit Apple support or call 800-823-2775.
versus
Compaq sr1050nx for $739.99 on sale this week at Circuit City
17″ flat screen CRT model fs7550
color inkjet dj3650
jbl stereo speakers
AMD Athlon XP processor 3200+ (2.2GHz)
512MB of PC2700 DDR SDRAM (expandable to 2GB)
2 RAM Slots (0 avail.)
200GB 7200 RPM Hard Drive
DVD Writer – 4x DVD+R / 2.4x DVD+RW / 5x DVD-/+R/RW (read) / 8x DVD-ROM / 16x CD-R / 10x CD-RW
48x CD-ROM Drive
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX graphics with 64MB of RAM
Integrated Audio (6 speaker configurable)
Ports – 10/100 Ethernet, 5 USB 2.0 (1 front), 2 FireWire (1 front), 9-in-1 Memory Card Reader (front), Microphone, Headphone, & Line-In
Slots – 3 PCI (2 avail.) & 1 AGP (avail.)
Bays – 2 External 5.25″ (0 avail.) / 1 External 3.5″ (0 avail.) / 1 Internal 3.5″ (0 avail.)
Includes: Compaq scroller mouse, Compaq keyboard, Windows XP Home, Works, Money 2004, Encarta Online (w/ 1yr. trial), Office 2003 (60 day trial), RecordNow, MusicMatch Jukebox, WinDVD SE, WinDVD Creator, Adobe Photoshop Album Starter Edition, Quicken New User’s Edition, Norton AntiVirus 2004, Norton Personal Firewall, SPAM Subtract Basic & more
so you get a cpu faster in clock by 1ghz
a hard drive 2.5x larger
2x the ram
2x the video ram
stand alone replacable speakers and monitor
a free hp color inkjet printer
an upgradable agp slot
more expansion options via more ports and pci slots (and they sure are easy to get access to)
a 9 in 1 memory card reader
5.1 audio
+ and – dvd burning
2 optical drives for copying from one disc to another
all for $260 less (use that to buy a Creative Labs Nomad MuVo 4 GB MP3 Player for $200 and you still have $60 left for 60 tracks from the napster store.
in other words eMacs are slow, overpriced, and hard to expand over the life of the machine.
they are made of nice plastic though.
I’m glad they did this. I am tempted to get this as my next computer, though i’ve been promising myself i’d get an ibook when i could afford it.
I think the most important item you get with the Compaq is Norton AntiVirus 2004, The extra $260 is worth the hassle of viruses on Windows alone.
Seems to me that they are overcharging for legacy computer parts that they are trying to push. Shouldn’t they be much cheaper than a top of the line intel machine?
“all for $260 less (use that to buy a Creative Labs Nomad MuVo 4 GB MP3 Player for $200 and you still have $60 left for 60 tracks from the napster store.”
Then you are stuck running Linux or Windows, and listening to a Nomad (those things really are a joke), and 60 low quality WMA files. Then you have to run those really awful applications, and on a computer that is so ugly you would never want to put it anywhere but in a dark corner of closet. No thank you.
Hey Slash, what parts are legacy? The G4? PC2700 Memory? Firewire 400? USB2.0? The SuperDrive? Sure the HD could be larger, but I’d hardly call it “Legacy”? Sheese…
Compaq sr1050nx for $739.99 on sale this week at Circuit City
I think the virus/spyware/security hassles/inconsistent user experience/20 new Microsoft vulnerabilities admitted just today/driver issues make the Compaq less of a value than the eMac.
“you still have $60 left for 60 tracks from the napster store.”
ROFLMAO! The Napster store! hahahahaha…. Good one, mate.
Anyhoo, you seem so concerned with black and white numbers. I think there are a lot of intagibles in this equation that you are omitting, including the difference in the vastly superior software that comes with the Mac (like iMovie, Garageband etc.), the ease of use and integration the whole iLife suite brings to the table for digital creations, plus the inherent stability of the system, plus the fact you don’t need to buy crap like antivirus software each year, plus all the other little odds and ends (e.g. super easy bluetooth capability — I surf via bluetooth over my T616 and Cingular GRPS — even PC World recent said Macs do bluetooth much better than PCs) that make Macs, Macs and that make OSX, OSX.
It’s the intangibles that make the difference. If you can’t see that, then you’ll *never* understand. I’ll take the $999 eMac over that Compaq any day of the week.
and the monitor is most certainly included.
model fs7550, go check it out.
of course the point is this is just sitting here in a pile of papers. if i worked at it i could get an even better machine for the same amount or if i went up to the eMacs price point i could truly get an awesome rig rather than some generic home user PC or a dinosaur speed Mac with cute icons and fancy plastic.
sorry.
These machines are almost comparible price/performance wise with dell’s lowend offerings, maybe now Apple can start competing with x86 on the high-end notebook offerings. The latest-greatest powerbook is still woefully underpowered compared to the latest x86 highend notebooks.
It says it *twice* on the page “MONITOR NOT INCLUDED”
http://www.circuitcity.com/detail.jsp?c=1&b=g&u=c&qp=0&bookmark=boo…
The legacy is the underpowered G4 running at 1.25 ghz.
if the machines were so good and the software so stellar, then more than 1.8% of computer buyers would be using Macs.
yeah legacy.
i got my first 32mb video card in 1999. that ati card is sick joke to be put in a $1000 machine. Its called taking advantage of unaware consumers in my book. Especially considering that replacing it 2 or 3 yrs from now is either not doable or near impossible.
I must be using the same internet as you, dude, because my internet also says “Monitor not included.” In fact, here is the text of that ad:
“All of the multimedia tools you need are packed into this Compaq Presario desktop. You get a mighty AMD Athlon™ XP processor to power programs, as well as a huge 200GB hard drive to hold your growing library of files. The 9-in-1 memory card reader, DVD+RW/CD-RW drive and tons of creative software get you started on almost any multimedia project imaginable. Plus, Nvidia GeForce4 graphics make games, movies and even everyday programs look amazing. MONITOR SOLD SEPARATELY”
That last line sure is telling…
Yet the posted used the plural “legacy computer parts” which gives a very different impression than just one part (The 1.25 G4). Just trying to clear up the exaggeration.
Yeah, I too also got a 1999 flashback when seeing that 32 meg ATI card, but hey these people aren’t going to be playing Doom3 on a underpowered G4 1.25 ghz even if they did have a top of the line card.
1. If you walk out of Circuit City with this, The total would be $804 after tax
2. But any eMac and you get a free Epson printer at almost all magazine retailers, Macmall, Macwarhouse And free shipping with no sales tax.
3. Ad in the all-in-one design, OSX and bundled software.
And most importantly
4. The computer you quote is missing something important, like a MONITOR!
http://www.circuitcity.com/detail.jsp?c=1&b=g&u=c&qp=0&bookmark=boo…
“All of the multimedia tools you need are packed into this Compaq Presario desktop. You get a mighty AMD Athlon™ XP processor to power programs, as well as a huge 200GB hard drive to hold your growing library of files. The 9-in-1 memory card reader, DVD+RW/CD-RW drive and tons of creative software get you started on almost any multimedia project imaginable. Plus, Nvidia GeForce4 graphics make games, movies and even everyday programs look amazing. MONITOR SOLD SEPARATELY
Nice try though
Well,
For years I have searched for that elusive alternative OS. Linux and BeOS have great merit, but the former cannot replace WinXP, and the latter is deceased (some wailing and gnashing of teeth). I have found WinXP Home to be very stable, and I can do all I need to do with it, but I have a strong loathing of Microsoft. I regret having to be a customer of a company that behaves like a rabid dog AND continues to prosper into the bargain. And WinXP is dangerously-boring, and antagonistic of creativity.
For years I have wanted to get my hands on OSX, but could never justify the price tag of about NZ$4000 (yeah, I would need the hardware bit to go with it). I had decided that salvation would come in the shape of OSX being ported to x86 (and that may happen if there is a god). And then I heard about the Apple eMac.
Could this really deliver OSX unto me? The eMac I purchased was equipped with a 1 gig processor and 256 Meg of Ram, and came with a price tag of NZ$2500. I was painfully aware that I had spent a good deal of credit on a machine that was a fair old distance from the cutting edge of technology. However, many Mac zealots had assured me that owning a Mac is a nothing short of a spiritual experience, so I had decided to take the risk. After all, specs aren’t everything are they?!
Once unpacked, I discovered that the eMac can easily put your back out of joint if you are not careful. It weighs about as much as three separate, mature gorillas, and it’s cooling fan sounds like a large hover-craft is moving around your garden. The CD drive mechanism appears to have been made by Clunky Parts Inc, and the machine should have an audible warning that says something like “Please keep fingers clear of the door”. For creative audio (one of the primary uses to which I put my trusty old Celery 1 gig PC) all of this noise bodes-ill, I thought. But, what the hell, no machine is perfect.
Anyway, at least OSX looked stunningly attractive, and I was convinced that it was going to feel like the best OS on the planet. First, I decided to migrate my docs and sound files from the PC to the eMac via a CDRW. When I inserted this into the eMac it had a complete and utter seizure. Nothing I could do with mouse, keyboard or hobnail (just joking) could retrieve it, so I had to pull the plug on it. When it rebooted, it went straight back into the crash state, and I had to power it up with one finger tapping the CD-eject key to extract the CDRW and thereby stop the whole distressing process. Even WinXP can simply tell me when it doesn’t like a CDRW without throwing a wobbly about it! But I wanted to persevere and so I opted not to risk showing the eMac any more CDs formatted elsewhere.
I transferred a few important files with my USB drive, which the eMac didn’t seem to have a problem with. Then I fired up Appleworks to do some word-processing and was greeted by a singularly ugly user interface (quite in contrast to the rest of the Aqua experience). I purchased Clarisworks 5.0 for the PC some years ago, and later I purchased Gobe Productive for BeOS also. Essentially, these are all the same product but I would have imagined that Appleworks would be the best and most up-to-date. Well, I’ll take the older packages (particularly Gobe) anyday. Appleworks did not improve with font changes or different views. And, I resent the idea of having to purchase MSOffice from the very Evil Empire from which I was tying to escape.
I own and love Propellerhead’s Reason 2.5. It runs almost flawlessly on my PC (very occasionally it taxes the venerable Celeron with resource hungry songs). And best of all, the package contains both the Mac and PC versions. Installation was easy enough, but the eMac simply did not run Reason as well as the PC! On top of poor performance with my audio app, the inboard speakers also had a bit of a job drowning out the hovercraft in the garden!
256 Meg of Ram is no use on the eMac. It should not even be sold with this much memory, because one is duty bound to buy some more to avoid apps firing up as fast as watching paint dry. So, somewhat peeved that this was so, I decided I could live with it until I increased the memory to at least 512 meg.
I decided to install the hot-sync software for my old Palm m515. But OSX had to install it in OS9. This seemed ugly but useable, yet I was disappointed that I would have to go looking for an OSX version of the Palm Desktop and hot-sync software.
At this point I began to feel the pressure of the NZ$2500 price tag on this machine. However, I was still willing to accept a somewhat less-capable machine in a final effort to escape Microsoft once and for all.
Then I noticed a curious colour interference effect on the screen. Browsing the net I came across a woman who advised that iMacs (and eMacs) were (are) well known for their “screen problems”. Oh shit, I thought! NZ$2500! Apparently, there is a design fault in that the inboard speakers are not properly screened and they interfere with the screen, causing magnetic interference and such. This can reduce the life of the monitor it would seem. What concerned me most about what I read here, was that the writer was well aware of these faults and still regarded her eMac as virtually one of the family.
That’s when I began to wonder about Apple’s goals in producing this ‘cheaper’ machine. Was it simply to target a cheaper market and benefit those of us without large IT budgets at all? Or have they arrogantly thrown a cheap system out there knowing that the Apple Zealots amongst us will unquestioningly ‘upgrade’ as nothing more than an issue of faith!!
I am bitterly disappointed with the Apple eMac. It went back to the shop as quickly as I could haul it’s huge bulk there. Fortunately, the store kindly cancelled the credit arrangement. As for the future, I think I will stick with good old x86 hardware, and will be consigned to the next 5 years of waiting for Linux or some form of BeOS to take over the world. That makes me sad, but not as sad as doing the same thing with an obsolete and cheapo computer draining my interest free credit for two years. I actually felt embarrassed to have been fooled by Apple’s shameless eMac ploy.
If you want a decent Mac, I think you must spend the NZ$4000 or so on a real one, or, if you are like me, accept that NO ‘home’ computer these days can justify such a price tag. That is unless, of course, you are one of the cheerfully oblivious, blind faithful.
Mmm
And an Intel Pentium-M 1.3 GHz is underpowered? Intel says no. 🙂
Oh, if you know more about Intel processor than Intel itself… 😀
http://www.circuitcity.com/bundledetail.jsp?OID=90792&bdlid=249
Compaq Presario Desktop PC with AMD Athlon ™ XP Processor 3200+, Compaq 17-inch Flat-Screen Monitor & HP Color Inkjet Printer
Brand/Model: CPQ SR1050NX / CPQ FS7550 / HP DJ3650
regular price $1,059.97
you save -$20.00
you pay $1,039.97
mail-in rebate(s) -$300.00
package price after rebate(s) $739.97
The ATI Radeon 9200 was released in April, 2003. Only a year old. And the eMacs were not *designed* to have upgrades of this type, that is what the Powermac line is for.
If you look at the “Weekly Ad” on the Circuit City website, it clearly DOES come with a monitor and printer…
“Compaq Presario Desktop PC with AMD Athlon ™ XP Processor 3200+, Compaq 17-inch Flat-Screen Monitor & HP Color Inkjet Printer
Brand/Model: CPQ SR1050NX / CPQ FS7550 / HP DJ3650”
I have a compaq 2800+ w/512 ram, 80gig hd 17″ monitor, thing runs well, but I still like my older iMac better. Windows has nothing on OS X, i like both, but Mac OS much better.
This is great news,,,,,,,people have been complaining about lower prices all along. I’m considering the eMac now,,,,especially with my college discount.
“Is switching RAM chips in a Mac as simple as it is in pc? Same availability?”
Rams easy to replace on a mac, actually I’ve tore my iMac down a few times, just for fun. Easy a sinch to do.
Hey Bro,
There’s no need to yell. Think reasonably for a second here. A Compaq system was quoted here with a specific price. I went *to the source* to verify your claim and found something different. Is it my fault that Circuit City doesn’t advertise their paper sales on the internet? Quite not.
There’s nothing I didn’t “UNDERSTAND”, you simply have a different sale paper than what their website says.
Again, no need to get loud and start screaming.
> The legacy is the underpowered G4 running at 1.25 ghz.
What’s legacy about that? AFAIK the fastest G4 Apple sells has 1.33Ghz. My AMD64 laptop has only 1.79Ghz either, and I bet you wouldn’t call an AMD64 legacy.
its on the website too
http://www.circuitcity.com/bundledetail.jsp?OID=90792&bdlid=249
sorry
Good price for a PowerPC chip based computer. And for once they didn’t skimp out on the video card. IMO the previous ATI 7500 was a weak video card for gaming.
G4: 1.25GHz -> 7 pipeline stages
P4: 3.06GHz -> 20 pipeline stages
So what is more legacy G4 or P4?
In case you don’t know what pipeline stages are – Google is your friend.
I stand corrected on the monitor, searching for that system the first time, I got the link I found above.
The problem I have with the original poster is that he made no reference to the fact that the price he gave included $300 worth of rebates that are only being offered for a limited time. The fact of the matter is that that particular Compaq system retails for over $1000 and is more than the eMac. So the original poster was being a little disingenuous, IMHO.
Who know what sorts of rebates will be offered with the eMac from third party vendors? As others have said, you can often get free RAM and/or a free printer when you buy from third party resellers.
I think you need to compare apples to apples (no pun intended) and compare MSRP’s of products if you are going to make that type of comparison.
In any event, I still believe that even with those rebates, the intangibles that come with using a Mac and running OSX are worth the extra $250 that the original poster would otherwise use to buy a Nomad and songs from the Napster store.
If i worked at it i could get an even better machine for the same amount or if i went up to the eMacs price point i could truly get an awesome rig
Well, as it was said before: It’s the intangibles that make the difference. If you can’t see that, then you’ll *never* understand.
I, too, have a pretty good and recent x86 “rig” (I hate that word – it reeks of Poserism) at home, and yet I spend almost all my home-computing time on my two-year-old iMac which cost more and has less ‘bang’ – because of its less tangible benefits.
(And don’t get me wrong: nobody here wants to convert you to the Mac – just make you understand that other people have legitimate priorities other than hardware price alone).
but when the current high end amd and intel chips (including even the athlon xp 3200+ non athlon64 chip) beat the dual 2ghz g5 in nearly all benchmarks, the old and tired 1.25ghz g4 is shown to be that much worse.
the g4 is a dog chip.
i used macs from 84 to 03. bought my last one in 98.
apple converted me the other way. and ms helped out by making ever better products.
10 yrs ago apple had about 10% market share, now they have less than 2%. the conversion is still going towards ms.
🙂
“so you get a cpu faster in clock by 1ghz
a hard drive 2.5x larger
2x the ram
2x the video ram
stand alone replacable speakers and monitor
a free hp color inkjet printer
an upgradable agp slot
more expansion options via more ports and pci slots (and they sure are easy to get access to)
a 9 in 1 memory card reader
5.1 audio
+ and – dvd burning
2 optical drives for copying from one disc to another ”
Now explain that to your grandmother, dad, aunt, little sister or any other “average” consumer. The eMac is Apple’s consumer solution. It is their tool to do office work, movie editing, photo archiving, music archiving/shopping, and dvd burning. Numbers and techie terms don’t matter, they would rather have an affordable attractive solution.
if the machines were so good and the software so stellar, then more than 1.8% of computer buyers would be using Macs.
I’m sure BMW could care less that only 5% of the world’s folks drive their “overpriced” cars and that everyone else drives a Ford Taurus. However, like Apple, BMW makes good money and has loyal customers who are enthusiastic about their purchase.
Allways the same missinformed argumentation.
And I give a shit on benchmarks. You can show me some from Intel/AMD that say their CPUs are faster and I can show you some from Apple/IBM that say their G5 ist faster – so nothing to winn here 😉
@TASTYTASTE (IP: 64.207.57.—)
I’d rather have the functional one. Having to “fix” or help setup computers is a pain and annoying.
I disagree with using MSRP to compare. You need to compare using the prevailing market prices. Even though the price for the Compaq was a limited time “sale price”, it seems like these deals are the norm every week from places like Circuit City and Best Buy. If there are sales, discounts, rebates, etc on the Mac’s, then that should also be taken into consideration.
I still don’t understand why there are always so many arguments about Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux. I know most of us are sort of loyal to one platform or another, but that doesn’t make any other system or the persons using them inferior in any way. It is all just a matter of personal preference and comfort levels. We can all really do the same things on all of the platforms. There just might be different ways of doing them.
and thats why ordinary consumers buy hp and compaq and dell (online) and emachines by the millions at retail stores for a lot less money than what apple sells for.
and they get by with
windows media player and all the other bundled non iLife apps just fine to do their pictures, videos, songs etc.
Well I could buy 3 Linux PCs for the price of a Mac or Windows PC!
Why waste hard earned money on a Windows PC that’s nothing but a problem child when you can get do the same stuff on a Linux PC?.. and for a lot less?!
“I still don’t understand why there are always so many arguments about Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux. I know most of us are sort of loyal to one platform or another, but that doesn’t make any other system or the persons using them inferior in any way. It is all just a matter of personal preference and comfort levels. We can all really do the same things on all of the platforms. There just might be different ways of doing them.”
I agree with you totally, which is why it’s sad that the troll with ip (—.chvlva.adelphia.net) feels it necessary to invade a nice thread that us Mac users can enjoy about a new updated eMac to announce to the world that, in his words, Macs “are still radically overpriced and underpowered.” We all doing just fine until he showed and trolled his ugliness.
But, back to your point, you are totally correct. It is a matter of personal preference. It’s just that when a troll comes in an attacks *my* choice of computer, I feel I have to defend it.
Now, to the trollmeister himself at ip (—.chvlva.adelphia.net) who just stated that ordinary consumers can use “windows media player and all the other bundled non iLife apps just fine to do their pictures, videos, songs etc.”
If you think windows media player and the other non iLife apps are the equivalent to the iLife apps, then you have never used the iLife apps. There is a reason why big movie studios use Apple software like Shake and Final Cut Pro. They are the best of breed. And the features in thos pro apps get filtered down into the consumer iLife apps. I know more people that have gotten more done in the way of movie editing, music editing, etc. on Macs than on PC’s. It’s so easy!
So, you can’t just wave your hand and say the bunded apps with that Compaq are equivalent to the bunded apps with the Mac because they really are not. And those bunded apps with the Mac are worth something. I personally think iMovie is worth at least $100 by itself and Garageband is worth something like $200. But they both come free with the eMac.
Anyway, I’m done here. These flame wars get boring. Sayonara.
i said folks get by without them just fine and dont care
i used macs for a long time and stopped at 10.2.4
ilife apps are for kids and grammies. i could care less about them.
i know after effects, premiere, canopus, discreet, steinberg, all those work just fine on 2k and xp and i think movie and sound studios use them quite a bit. check their sales on non mac platforms.
“ilife apps are for kids and grammies”
Exactly the target market for the eMac. See, it all makes sense in the end now doesn’t it? Little Johnny Mathlete isn’t running Matlab, he’s got some Fun Math Game with bunnies. That, exactly, is the eMac target market, the G4 is more than adequate for this type of computing.
Little Johnny doesn’t wanna have to tell Mommy that the Klez Virus just broke his favorite game.
While we’re talking about new releases.. ever wonder why no other computer manufacturer gets press hype like Apple about hardware updates?
Apparently none garner the type of excitement that Apple does…
I think the only thing that would make people get sweaty is if HP or Dell decided to introduce a PC model with the firewall in XP enabled, plus have Mozilla Firefox as the default browser and iTunes as the default media player.
“i said folks get by without them just fine and dont care”
People can get by without Windows as well and just use Linux!
“ilife apps are for kids and grammies. i could care less about them.”
Actually the iLife suite makes anything on Linux or Windows look more like childs play; iLife rules the multimedia scene for the amateur/consumer handsdown!
“i know after effects, premiere, canopus, discreet, steinberg, all those work just fine on 2k and xp and i think movie and sound studios use them quite a bit. check their sales on non mac platforms.”
Why waste your hard earned dollars on those pesky apps when you could use Cinelerra (Broadcast 2000), Jahshaka, Blender and other great special/visual effects and video editing apps for free?
“i know after effects, premiere, canopus, discreet, steinberg, all those work just fine on 2k and xp and i think movie and sound studios use them quite a bit. check their sales on non mac platforms.”
After Effects is used about equally on both platfoms. Premiere is a joke, and any pro studio would never, ever consider it. Canopus isn’t an app, it’s a company, and none of their products are near professional…you are limited to DV and MPEG 1/2. Discreet is another company, and if you look at their sales, they used to be mostly to the Mac…until FCP 4 came out, and nothing they had was on par anymore. Steinberg is another company, not a product. I’m not sure which product they make that you were refering to, but if you think Windows has anyone on a Mac in the audio department, so you are sorely mistaken. Nobody, and I mean nobody, in the pro audio industry uses Windows.
“Why waste your hard earned dollars on those pesky apps when you could use Cinelerra (Broadcast 2000), Jahshaka, Blender and other great special/visual effects and video editing apps for free?”
He was talking at the time about studio apps, and those don’t cut it. Nothing against Linux though, I enjoy using it daily.
“Sorry if I sound very pesimistic, but my only first-hand experience with Apple-products I have, is with iTunes for Windows and my 40Gig iPod. And both are fare from being worht the 500euro I payed.”
iTunes on Windows really, really, really sucks by comparison.
Does Richard Stallman know that people are charging money for his text editor?
Do these posters just paste in text that were saved from all the previous threads?
jeebus, this is getting way old.
A new model comes out and the trolls flock to diss it to hell.
get a life.
It seems to me that Mac stories really bring out all the trolls. Why do people feel the need to attack apple so harshly?
The GHz thing is a silly point. Two identical PCs, one with a 1.5GHz, the other with a 2.5GHz Pentium chip, will be as fast as eachother. A faster system bus, more and faster RAM and a faster Hard Drive will make a bigger performance boost than getting a processor with 0.5 more GHz. The PowerPC and x86 chips are completely different processors anyway, so simply saying that a P4 2.5GHz is faster than a 1.25GHz G4 just because the P4 has more clock cycles per second is silly.
Obviously the emacs will need more RAM in order for them not to hang while having several apps open but RAM is so cheap nowadays. Even Debian with KDE 3.2.1 would need more than 256MB of RAM.
Apple are completely different to Compaq. Compaq offer a PC with WindowsXP preloaded on it and that’s it. Apple develop their own hardware and also integrate 3rd party hardware tightly into their systems while engineering their own OS so that everything inter-operates and works perfectly.
I hear people who own WindowsXP boxes rave on and on about how great iTunes is, how simple and elegant it is. Apple make sure that everything they sell works as well as iTunes.
the price isn’t to bad, the specs arn’t to bad. One problem, the built in monitor. I don’t want a monitor with my mac, i have one, most people do. If they removed the monitor, and thus made the caseing into something of a small computer, and maybe chopped 100 bucks of the price, i’d probably buy one. But there is no way i’m downgrading monitors, nor am i going to put such a goofy thing on my desk. Even for 800 bucks I might buy it if it didn’t have the monitor. Apple needs to understand that a built in monitor is not a plus. For something like the iMac its ok. But having just a simple model that isn’t more then a box and some basic hardware is what people are looking for. I don’t care if it doesn’t have much expandibility, doesn’t have to be superpowerful. Just put it in a format that makes sense. I don’t need a flashy looking mac or anything like that, a small basic cheap box will do me and many others just fine. The emac is great for schools or offices, but i don’t see people wanting one of them in their home, maybe for a kid or something.
Apple, you have just about all bases covered, except one. I’m not asking for some super cheap mac. But plenty of people would be happy with a Powermac light, no or one expansion slot, simple video card. single cpu, relitively basic computer for 800 or so bucks.
As a Mac user, I am very sad to see all the trolling by anti-Mac people in a news story about a new Apple product announcement. I just don’t get it. Whenever there is a new Linux announcement or a new Intel/AMD announcement I don’t feel it necessary to go into those threads and post anti-Linux or anti-x86 crud. What is it with you people? Why must you attack so much?
Just go away and let us enjoy our product announcement, ok? Geez.
it’s the jealousy.
You are right, but maybe you should not compare both computers cos then we can always start usual comments; cost of ownership, software included…
The facts, without considering the price are
256 MB is inacceptable shuld be x2 no matter how much they should charge for it.
32 MB video card is just crap. Today you can buy a 128MB for 100€. My old PC has 32MB and I bought it 3 years ago! C’mon apple put a real graphic card on eMacs. Make them more expensive by 70€ but put something competitive on it!
Anyway the eMac is not really cool, we all want a G5 Cube without LCD (maybe at 1,4MHz) for 999€, am I right?
$1000 for a non-expandable slow machine with a CRT? In this day and age?
If the Apple clone market were still alive, the Mac market would be vibrant will all sorts of better value machines.
Until Apple decides to trim their tax, I will stay away. I’d pay $1000 for a G5 Cube-type computer (w/o monitor), but not for technology that is three years old (or older).
Now explain that to your grandmother, dad, aunt, little sister or any other “average” consumer.
“It’s a faster machine, so it it will be more responsive to use, time consuming tasks like ripping MP3s will be faster and games will run faster and look better. It also has much greater capacity for storing things like MP3s, photos, movies and other things your might download off the Internet. Additionally, since the parts that go out of date most quickly and have the greatest influence on speed in the PC are replaceable, it has a much longer lifetime as those parts can be upgraded as newer and better ones become available.”
Objectively, Macs are expensive machines. If you want to convince someone to buy a Mac, you’ll have to convince them the intangibles of the package make up for the obvious technical inferiority and price difference. Don’t try and do it solely on price, because PCs are cheaper – much cheaper.
Additionally, if you *are* evangelising the Mac platform, don’t lie because it just makes the people more pissed off when they find out. Don’t try and tell them a 1.25Ghz G4 is faster (or even as fast) as P4s and Athlons in comparably priced intel machines, because it isn’t. Don’t try and tell them OS X will be as snappy and responsive to use as Windows, because it won’t be. Don’t try and tell them 256Mb is enough to run OS X, because it isn’t. Don’t try and tell them the mahcine will be fine for running games, because it won’t.
Instead, tell them a Mac will probably be easier to use, most likely have fewer hassles over the lifetime of the machine, hold its value much better for resale and, overall, feel like a much more “polished” and “integrated” product.
So, you can’t just wave your hand and say the bunded apps with that Compaq are equivalent to the bunded apps with the Mac because they really are not.
Well, likewise, you can’t wave your hands around and assert the near 50% price differential (using Australian prices – in the US it’s probably more) is made up for by those apps…
Do you remember the cubes? Did you ever use one? The G5 is not by any means the ideal solution there. The cube was so small and quiet because there was not fan. The metal bottom cooled the chip. It would cost more than $1000 to make a G5 cube, even with a mass production.
If we went back to clones, Apple losses hardware control, and you get the same problems Windows has, plus the apps don’t work nearly as well.
The thing you guys aren’t getting here is that Apple isn’t makeing computers to meet what the customers ask for. They never have. Not with anything they have ever made under Jobs control. They make computers that people want to use, whether they can afford it or not. They aren’t trying to meet the needs of what people want to do with computers, they are trying to change what they want to do. And they have done so many times. The problem is they aren’t getting the word out on what they want people to do with computers. They don’t need to make a headless cheap ass Mac, they need to advertise the crap out of OS X, it’s their greatest asset and biggest selling point.
If they wanted a larger marketshare at any cost, they would make a headless cheap Mac and sell it for almost nothing to offices in huge numbers. Of course it would sell. They don’t want to change for the market, they want the market to change for them, it’s the whole hippy revolutionary thing. You can judge it as working or not working on whatever basis you want, but no matter how you look at it, they are a profitable company who makes the best software around, owns almost all the media markets as well as about 10-15% of the home market, and makes designer hardware to pay the bills.
Why does apple attract so many flamewars?
Because Apple zealots make ridiculously overblown assertions that rarely stand up to even a small amount of objective examination. Which is not to say that other types of zealots don’t, but IME Mac zealots are the worst (closely followed by Linux zealots), mainly driven by Apple’s own rarely-criticised, deceptive and overblown assertions.
The GHz thing is a silly point. Two identical PCs, one with a 1.5GHz, the other with a 2.5GHz Pentium chip, will be as fast as eachother.
Uh, no, they won’t. Maybe for web browsing, word processing and email they will be similarly responsive (although with a speed differential that great, the 2.5Ghz machine will probably feel noticably quicker), but as soon as something even remotely CPU intensive – ripping MP3s, playing games, etc – is being done, the 2.5Ghz system will leave the slower machines in the dust.
A faster system bus, more and faster RAM and a faster Hard Drive will make a bigger performance boost than getting a processor with 0.5 more GHz.
That’s entirely dependent on what the person is doing.
Not to mention that, compared to G4s, P4s and Athlons *do* have much faster busses and RAM.
The PowerPC and x86 chips are completely different processors anyway, so simply saying that a P4 2.5GHz is faster than a 1.25GHz G4 just because the P4 has more clock cycles per second is silly.
Indeed it is, however, so is saying the G4 is faster because of a few cooked Apple benchmarks and some outrageous marketing claims.
The fact remains that a 2.5Ghz P4 *is* a faster CPU than a 1.25Ghz G4 in nearly all cases.
I just stop troubleshooting my friends PC’s(give ’em a *shrug*), and turn back to my sexy 17″ powerbook with a smirk.
It isn’t as active and annoying of an evangelism, but its sure fun!
Your speed claims leave out the single most important point. Software. Optimized software makes more of a difference than anything. I can rip a CD twice as fast on a slower Mac than a faster PC because the software works much better. Just the same for your GUI responsiveness. Grab a Mac and speed up the mouse and turn off UI latency and you get the same effect Windows and Linux use. Nothing special there.
If the Apple clone market were still alive, the Mac market would be vibrant will all sorts of better value machines.
If Apple hadn’t killed the cloners, they probably wouldn’t be alive themselves. People seem to forget with the Apple cloners, that not only were Apple paying for the software development, they were also paying for 90% of the general paltform hardware development *and* trying to make their own machines. The clone machines were gutting Apple’s market because they had, comparitively, practically no overheads.
“but then everyone would think im gay. Only stupid mac users would choose form over function. MY PC COULD SMOKE YOUR MACS ANY DAY, SUCKERS!!! HAHAHA
MACS = expensive paper weights”
Really? I use a dual 2 GHz G5 with 8 gigs of RAM for editing at work. What exactly are you going to smoke me with? MS Word? Premiere?
“you can’t wave your hands around and assert the near 50% price differential (using Australian prices – in the US it’s probably more) is made up for by those apps…”
Drsmithy, check your math. The compaq example given above was comparing an eMac for $1000 vs. a Compaq for $740. That’s a $260 difference, which is a 26% difference, not the 50% you say.
Furthermore, another poster above estimated iMovie would cost about $100 and GarageBand about $200. That sounds about right to me. That right there is $300, which more than makes up the difference. If you have never used those apps for an extended amount of time then you are not qualified to comment on that. Plus, that doesn’t even count all the other intangibles that other poster mentioned like stability, security, ease of use, integration etc.
The iApps and all the intangibles more than make up for the 26% price difference.
With respect to iLife applications being for kids and grammies: I was talking to a second hand software dealer a few years back and he said that he was tired of people walking in and asking to pirate the latest version of Photoshop he owned. He went on to say that they could walk into any store and pick up something which would suit their needs for under $100, or find some older software in his store for a lot less. A lot of people don’t need the professional tools, they only think they do. When they see how much the professional tools cost, they use it to legitimise piracy — which hurts everyone.
Anyone who complains about the price of the Macintosh doesn’t have any right to say that the iLife applications are worthless when they can use Photoshop on a cheaper PC.
Compaqs in my experiance are complete garbage machines. I would not buy a compaq machine for half the price of the cpu in and ram in the box. I have never run into a more error prone, breakdown worthy, peice of garbage manufacturer than compaq.
Athlon64 workstation, iBook laptop. Best of both worlds. I use the iBook more because it is better from a non-gaming/rendering point of view.
Use the best tool for the job, for many people I know the eMac is the best tool. No “complicated” cabling, no confusing cords, no arcade bootup sequence. No email viruses, no internet explorer exploits, no awfully designed and implimented software that most people want to use (iChat beats the hell out of the normal aim clients people download). I can go on.
If you don’t feel a product is being marketed to you, dont buy it. You will still be hard pressed to find a dual athlon64 system that compares price wise with the G5. But yes, for 1000 bucks I put together a 2ghz athlon64, 1gb ddr400, and a sweet motherboard and video card. But I still prefer my 1 year old mac.
I thought Apple was a digital music company now.
OK, turn your flamethrowers off. I am writing this on a PowerBook G4, and I’m a confirmed Mac addict. I was just kidding. Nice to see Apple announcing some new hardware that isn’t an iPod, but the G5 towers and PowerBook lines are also aching for a refresh.
I’ve toyed in the past with switching to Linux – cheaper, faster hardware. But I stay with OS X because the value to me cant be quantified in dollars and sense. OS X is the nicest operating system to use. To me, its worth the Apple premium. The posters who are comparing dollar for dollar cant factor that in to their analysis.
Do you remember the cubes? Did you ever use one?
Yes.
The G5 is not by any means the ideal solution there. The cube was so small and quiet because there was not fan. The metal bottom cooled the chip.
THERE IS NO HEAT PROBLEM WITH THE G5.
I wish people would get this through their heads. The G5 today produces no more appreciable heat than the G4s only a few years ago did – like the one in the Cube – and certainly less than things like the dual CPU upgrades some people have done to their cubes.
From a heat perspective, a 2Ghz G5 Cube (using 90nm 970s) is more than possible, technically speaking (so is a G5 Powerbook in the current form factor, for that matter).
It would cost more than $1000 to make a G5 cube, even with a mass production.
Rubbish. The G4 Cube was stupidly overpriced relative manufacturing costs. They were pandering to people with too much money who wanted a desk ornament first and a computer second.
Take out the meaningless fluff like the clear covering, expand the size only slightly so things like standard AGP cards could be used and Apple should _easily_ be able to make and market a small, marginally expandable (AGP slot, standard 3.5″ cage, standard 5.25″ cage, CPU daughtercard) machines for less than the current bottom end Power Mac. Such machines would sell like hotcakes – they’d be like the original iMac was – and Apple would *still* be able to pick up a nice markup on each one. Heck, all they’d have to do is shrink the existing PowerMac case and sell it as a PowerMac Mini ™.
If we went back to clones, Apple losses hardware control, and you get the same problems Windows has, plus the apps don’t work nearly as well.
No. The problem with the clones wasn’t that Apple didn’t have control over the hardware, it was that they *retained too much* control. The cloners were killing Apple because Apple was paying for all the general hardware R & D, *and* the R & D for their own specific machines *and* OS development. Meanwhile, all the cloners had to do was take Apple designed motherboards and slap them into generic cases with off the shelf PC components.
The thing you guys aren’t getting here is that Apple isn’t makeing computers to meet what the customers ask for. They never have. Not with anything they have ever made under Jobs control. They make computers that people want to use, whether they can afford it or not. They aren’t trying to meet the needs of what people want to do with computers, they are trying to change what they want to do. And they have done so many times. The problem is they aren’t getting the word out on what they want people to do with computers. They don’t need to make a headless cheap ass Mac, they need to advertise the crap out of OS X, it’s their greatest asset and biggest selling point.
That works up to a point, but the unfortunate fact is the barrier to Mac ownership is too expensive.
If they wanted a larger marketshare at any cost, they would make a headless cheap Mac and sell it for almost nothing to offices in huge numbers. Of course it would sell. They don’t want to change for the market, they want the market to change for them, it’s the whole hippy revolutionary thing.
The problem is that no matter much they try, the market isn’t suddenly going to have an across-the-board wage increase.
I have seen the battle about the price tags of Mac and PC a couple of times in this site. I think we should think over a little for the Mac zealots.
First, the Mac is a combination of the hardware (PPC box) and the software (OSX) right now. Besides the two, we must give some credit to the designation of the mac box. Though I have left the mac population, I have to say Apple gave the end-users a better design of the computer.
Second, as the mac and its OS is dying, the production volumn has been shrunk. In order to survive, the Apple has to increase a little to get the profit from the hardware, software and designation. Everyone in the anti-apple population would not see the mac zealots without updated mac.
I can remember: at least when I was a mac fan, I really didn’t think a mac was overpriced, though it was EXPENSIVE. So far, I haven’t changed my mind.
“No wonder. You must you be a drug dealer or a terrorist
SO thats how mac users afford macs.
MAC USERS = Criminals Spread the word. THE WORLD MUST KNOW.
You make me sick”
How in the world do you get drug dealer or terrorist out of anything I said?
“THERE IS NO HEAT PROBLEM WITH THE G5.
I wish people would get this through their heads. The G5 today produces no more appreciable heat than the G4s only a few years ago did – like the one in the Cube – and certainly less than things like the dual CPU upgrades some people have done to their cubes.
From a heat perspective, a 2Ghz G5 Cube (using 90nm 970s) is more than possible, technically speaking (so is a G5 Powerbook in the current form factor, for that matter).”
I never said there was a heat problem with the G5, only that it’s hot. It puts off a lot more heat than the G4s did a few years ago. But no, no more than it should be putting off. The G5 PowerBook thing is having problems for the same reason they are having problems putting the 90nm ones in towers…the sit differently on the motherboard and so the cooling zones and fans must be redone.
“Rubbish. The G4 Cube was stupidly overpriced relative manufacturing costs. They were pandering to people with too much money who wanted a desk ornament first and a computer second. ”
The G4 cube was overpriced, but a G5 cube would cost more than what the G4 cube should’ve been.
“Take out the meaningless fluff like the clear covering, expand the size only slightly so things like standard AGP cards could be used and Apple should _easily_ be able to make and market a small, marginally expandable (AGP slot, standard 3.5″ cage, standard 5.25″ cage, CPU daughtercard) machines for less than the current bottom end Power Mac. Such machines would sell like hotcakes – they’d be like the original iMac was – and Apple would *still* be able to pick up a nice markup on each one. Heck, all they’d have to do is shrink the existing PowerMac case and sell it as a PowerMac Mini ™.”
I’ve though for a long time they should make a lower end tower for home use, but a cube is not the way to go. The cube was brilliantly designed, but the G5’s don’t fit into that design. A smaller tower, yes, a cube, no.
“No. The problem with the clones wasn’t that Apple didn’t have control over the hardware, it was that they *retained too much* control. The cloners were killing Apple because Apple was paying for all the general hardware R & D, *and* the R & D for their own specific machines *and* OS development. Meanwhile, all the cloners had to do was take Apple designed motherboards and slap them into generic cases with off the shelf PC components.”
The problems I was refering to wasn’t the clones killing Apple thing, it’s the lowering the quality thing. Financially I think it would be an awful move, but I was talking about the effect it would have on the OS, not the company.
“That works up to a point, but the unfortunate fact is the barrier to Mac ownership is too expensive…The problem is that no matter much they try, the market isn’t suddenly going to have an across-the-board wage increase.”
Good comeback. That was my first thought too. But that was the point. They cost money, yes, and no you can’t get them for $400. Apple isn’t trying to sell that though, they are trying to make computers that make people want to spend more money on them. It’s not about how much it costs, it’s about how much you are willing to spend, and they are trying to make something that you will be willing to spend more on.
All zealots make ridiculously overblown assertions that rarely stand up to even a small amount of objective examination, this is what makes them zealots.
While the 2.5GHz P4 may be faster than the 1.25GHz G4, it doesn’t mean that the G4 is unusably slow. I realise that the vast majority of the people here attacking the Macs are trolling, it still needs to be said that they are wrong.
I’m using a 933MHz G4 in my iBook and it feels fast enough. A couple of people in college have P4 laptops and their systems seem to pause and stutter way more than mine. I realise, of course, that there is no solid scientific research to back up my comments but I know from using my laptop and also from using other PCs, some with XP, some with Win200, some with Redhat and some with Debian that my iBook feels much more responsive than the PCs.
yes but apple was collecting royalties on every mac clone sold much as m$ is on xp.
perhaps some powerusers would like an overclocked G4/G5 in a industry standard ATX midtower case, ATX PSU, with Nvidia or Radeon on an AGP bus and 6 PCI slots.
“Second, as the mac and its OS is dying, the production volumn has been shrunk.”
Actually, it’s gone up. Overall marketshare has gone down. Certain markets have gone up, but the office share has gone down, and it’s the one with the largest sales numbers, by volume, not revenue.
They have over 25 million customers, marketshare percentages is so inaccurate, only journalists and trolls bullshit themselves with those numbers these days.
Get a life.
That last get a life comment was for the troll calling me a terrorist and drug dealer, not anyone else…just to clarify (I noticed someone else posted inbetween).
Getting a Linux PC may be cheaper than buying a Mac but a Mac is so different to a Linux PC. As I said before, Apple work hard at getting all their software work with their OS and their OS to work with the hardware. With a Mac there’s no need to “RTFM”. Don’t get me wrong, I love Linux, I’ve got my PC beside me now purring away with Debian on it but using a Mac is so much better, Apple do all the kernel compiling, driver installing for me so I can get on with posting crap on osnews
Tell you what, Lagne. I’ll say whatever you want me to say when you can back up one single thing you’ve said so far, you preteen troll. And if you can’t, then you go away and never post in any thread that I am in.
Drsmithy, check your math. The compaq example given above was comparing an eMac for $1000 vs. a Compaq for $740. That’s a $260 difference, which is a 26% difference, not the 50% you say.
I was using Australian prices, where an eMac is $1300 and a Dell Dimension 2400 is a shade under $900.
These are the get-into-computers prices that people after their first basic machine are looking at. A more capable and expandable Dimension 4600 is still cheaper, at $1200.
I am working under the assumption that US prices will be lower, but proportionately roughly the same, and that the Compaq price offered was just a quick & dirty, not the best on the market.
Furthermore, another poster above estimated iMovie would cost about $100 and GarageBand about $200. That sounds about right to me.
This is the hand waving part.
That right there is $300, which more than makes up the difference. If you have never used those apps for an extended amount of time then you are not qualified to comment on that.
Indeed I haven’t and hence, I’m not. However, their mere presence does not automatically add US$300 of value to the machine just because a random OSNews poster says they do. The person buying the machine may never even use them.
I’m sure I can wave my hands around and come up with some dollar figures for the bundles thrown in with the Dell machines, as well, but I haven’t because I don’t think it’s valid to do so.
Plus, that doesn’t even count all the other intangibles that other poster mentioned like stability, security, ease of use, integration etc.
That’s right, it doesn’t and, again, this is something that can’t just have a dollar figure attached because they will have different values to difference people. Even that’s assuming the person has the capability to meet the extra costs *at all* – if they’ve only got AU$1000 to spend, they simply can’t afford a new Mac.
The iApps and all the intangibles more than make up for the 26% price difference.
In your opinion. And, where I come from, it’s a 50% price difference (or near as damnit to that). I wouldn’t be suprised if in some countries like New Zealand the difference is even bigger.
As a general rule of thumb, I recommend Macs to newbie users. However, Macs are not always within the person’s budget and do not always do what they want to do (eg: play games).
The simple fact is, that from an *objective* standpoint, Macs are significantly more expensive. For some people, it’s possible for that extra cost to be “worth it”. For others, it is not.
“I’m sure I can wave my hands around and come up with some dollar figures for the bundles thrown in with the Dell machines, as well, but I haven’t because I don’t think it’s valid to do so.”
The latter part of this statement illustrates the problem that others have already commented on. Far too often, PC users simply use numbers, or hardware comparisons, to make the case that x86’s are better than Macs. And while you say it is not “valid” to make the comparisons on the intangibles, I say it most certainly is valid.
I switched from PC’s to Macs several years ago because of those intangibles. I can shoot a DV movie of my young son and quickly edit it in iMovie and then either burn it to DVD with iDVD or email it out to my family and friends. Or, I can take advantage of the hompage capabilities with my .Mac account and upload the movie to my .Mac homepage so people can go view it. It’s so easy, and so seamlessly integrated, that the intangible benefits of that do make up the price differential. Remember, it wasn’t the Mac people who came in to this thread and started the comparison of prices — it was a PC user making the case that the eMac is overpriced. And I firmly believe that when making that determination you cannot just look at hardware. As another poster mentioned, on hardware alone, sure the Macs will be a little more expensive. But I believe that the intangible benefits of using a Mac, the intangible benefits that you don’t think are worthy of discussion, are, in and of themselves, the difference-maker and do indeed make up for the price difference.
The latter part of this statement illustrates the problem that others have already commented on. Far too often, PC users simply use numbers, or hardware comparisons, to make the case that x86’s are better than Macs. And while you say it is not “valid” to make the comparisons on the intangibles, I say it most certainly is valid.
The point you seem to be missing is that it’s not “valid” because the relative value of these things are *subjective*. Hence, they can’t be used as a blanket assertion because their value is dependant on the persion, not the machine.
For example, I place a very high value on a good UI, mainly its responsiveness, particularly under load. It was because of this that I ditched my PB 667 – it was simply frustratingly unresponsive to use.
However, since I’m a unix admin, I also place a high value on being able to do my job, so the integration of a mostly unixy OS with a decent UI was why I bothered buying the thing to try OS X in the first place.
So, eventually I went back to XP+Cygwin. Similar levels of functionality, much more responsive to use, *much* cheaper.
So, when I say the intangibles are not valid to compare, I speak in terms of blanket assertions and attaching arbitrary dollar figures to certain features – which Mac zealots *often* – based on personal opinions.
Eg: Garageband to me is worthless, because I have no interest in the things it does (and not a shred of latent talent for it to enhance). So someone saying it’s worth $200, to me, is laughable. Similarly, if a Dell machine comes with a free printer or year’s worth of internet access, the dollar figure those things might be distilled down to is irrelevant to someone who already owns a printer and has a ‘net connection.
I can shoot a DV movie of my young son and quickly edit it in iMovie and then either burn it to DVD with iDVD or email it out to my family and friends.
When was the last time you tried this on a PC and with what software ?
Or, I can take advantage of the hompage capabilities with my .Mac account and upload the movie to my .Mac homepage so people can go view it. It’s so easy, and so seamlessly integrated, that the intangible benefits of that do make up the price differential.
Yes, but the point is that for other people *they might not*, so a blanket assertion along the lines of “the eMac is really good value because you get all this other stuff [that I think is] worth $500” is not valid.
Remember, it wasn’t the Mac people who came in to this thread and started the comparison of prices — it was a PC user making the case that the eMac is overpriced.
Given this is a thread about new Apple hardware, which inherently involves the cost, and that this is a website catering to multiple platforms, I personally would consider that on topic and relevant.
And I firmly believe that when making that determination you cannot just look at hardware.
I agree. However, if you *are* comparing hardware – as this person was doing – trying to attach the costs of “intangibles” is not valid.
If you want to discuss “intangibles” – ie: the whole package – go for it. However, please don’t try and assert that just because you attach a certain value to some aspect of the system (eg: iApps) that everyone else must as well.
As another poster mentioned, on hardware alone, sure the Macs will be a little more expensive.
The trouble is it’s not a little, it’s a lot. A 17″ iMac here in Australia is $3200. $3200 can buy me a hell of a lot of PC. Alternatively I can buy a Dimension 4600 with a faster CPU, better video card and more memory for about $1000 less. $1000 is a fair chunk of change – indeed, I could use it to buy *another* PC for the girlfriend to use.
But I believe that the intangible benefits of using a Mac, the intangible benefits that you don’t think are worthy of discussion, are, in and of themselves, the difference-maker and do indeed make up for the price difference.
I agree they’re worthy of discussion, I just don’t think they should be having arbitrary dollar values attached and sweeping assertions made based on personal opinions.
They have over 25 million customers, marketshare percentages is so inaccurate, only journalists and trolls bullshit themselves with those numbers these days.
Could it then be logically thought that the “25 million customers” is also a BS number?
The reason I ask, is that I see Apple computer sales in the 700 – 900k per quarter range when Apple files their results.
That would give a sales figure of around 2.8 – 3.6million computers a year.
If the sales are such, that would mean that at the high end, Apple is counting all the computers that have sold over that last seven years, AND assuming that no one has bought more than one computer. (Or thrown any out due to damage, etc.)
At the low end, it would mean that Apple is counting all the computers sold over the last 8.9 years, again all one computer owners, and none retired, destroyed, etc.
I know this isn’t a marketshare number, but actual sales numbers which have increased over time, so the total sales would have been lower in earlier years? This would mean that Apple may be counting computers sold more than 10 years ago , and saying that everyone has only bought one each.
I just don’t see where they get this number…
BTW The eMac is a big improvement, but still an all-in-one which kills it for most buyers.
“When was the last time you tried this on a PC and with what software ?”
Don’t even start on that. I do that stuff professionally, and let me tell you, PC’s barely pass the good-enough-to-get-by mark.
“I agree. However, if you *are* comparing hardware – as this person was doing – trying to attach the costs of “intangibles” is not valid.
If you want to discuss “intangibles” – ie: the whole package – go for it. However, please don’t try and assert that just because you attach a certain value to some aspect of the system (eg: iApps) that everyone else must as well.”
Like you said, we are in a thread about an Apple product. That includes more than the hardware. The value being attached to iLife is usually a big selling point in a Mac purchase, so it does count for a lot.
“I agree they’re worthy of discussion, I just don’t think they should be having arbitrary dollar values attached and sweeping assertions made based on personal opinions.”
You’re in a Mac thread, and those dollar value aren’t based on personal opinions, they are common opinions of Mac users. Fact is, most Mac users like those iApps a lot, and use them daily. Macs are known for that sort of thing, so when you talk about a Mac, it’s going to come up, just as there is going to be a PC user lurking around to complain about how Apple’s pricing doesn’t suit him.
BTW The eMac is a big improvement, but still an all-in-one which kills it for most buyers.
How do you figure that ? I’ve always seen the all-in-one form factor as ideal for first time and/or “typical” users. It’s not like most of them are adding more hard disks, new video card or swapping CPUs…
“Could it then be logically thought that the “25 million customers” is also a BS number? ”
Actually, it’s a very old number.
“The reason I ask, is that I see Apple computer sales in the 700 – 900k per quarter range when Apple files their results.”
That’s not what they file in their results. The G5’s alone are more than twice that. It looks like you were just reading the results of a single model.
Look, when people say that Macs are too expensive, they don’t mean to say (usually, anyway) that Macs are bad machines. They don’t mean to say that they might not be the best purchase for particular types of people. What they do mean to say is that for the same $X, you can get a PC that is Y% faster or has Z megs more RAM or a graphics card that is W% faster. Its a really simple, black-and-white numbers game. No need for “intangible” (dishonest language for “unprovable”) comparisons here.
As for those ascribing ridiculous valuations to the Mac software — I have absolutely zero use for Garage Band or iMovie. Where can I get a $300 discount on my Mac purchase? Face it: Apple is in the premium market. They offer a tightly-integrated hardware/software combo at a premium price. If you consider just the silicon and plastic that you get with the Mac, its ridiculously overpriced. And the “BMW vs Taurus” comparison makes no sense — a BMW’s metal and leather is much better than a Taurus’s metal and vinyl. There is a “tangible” difference between the two.
The monitor…
Especially now, as the market is moving away from CRT to LCD…
For many one of the most important things about the computer is what you are looking at, and if you can’t upgrade it in a couple of years, it makes for some disgruntled customers.
This is often the first advice given to a new computer buyer in the PC world. Buy the best monitor you can because it will be still very functional when your PC is out of date in 4 years…
That’s not what they file in their results. The G5’s alone are more than twice that. It looks like you were just reading the results of a single model.
From Maccentral, Dated jan 15 2004:
“Apple on Wednesday announced a profit of US$63 million on $2.006 billion in revenue, moving 829,000 CPUs and 733,000
iPods in the process.”
“Look, when people say that Macs are too expensive, they don’t mean to say (usually, anyway) that Macs are bad machines. They don’t mean to say that they might not be the best purchase for particular types of people. What they do mean to say is that for the same $X, you can get a PC that is Y% faster or has Z megs more RAM or a graphics card that is W% faster. Its a really simple, black-and-white numbers game. No need for “intangible” (dishonest language for “unprovable”) comparisons here.
As for those ascribing ridiculous valuations to the Mac software — I have absolutely zero use for Garage Band or iMovie. Where can I get a $300 discount on my Mac purchase? Face it: Apple is in the premium market. They offer a tightly-integrated hardware/software combo at a premium price. If you consider just the silicon and plastic that you get with the Mac, its ridiculously overpriced. And the “BMW vs Taurus” comparison makes no sense — a BMW’s metal and leather is much better than a Taurus’s metal and vinyl. There is a “tangible” difference between the two.”
Those intangible things are not important to you, but if they were you’d probably have a Mac. And if they weren’t and you had a Mac anyway, you would try them out and find that they become important when you see how easy it is to do amazing things.
And do you really think the difference between leather and vinyl justifies the cost difference between a Taurus and a BMW? Or that that’s why people buy BMWs? Of course it isn’t. It’s the experience a BMW provides. It’s about what king of experience you want in a car. Macs are about what experience you want in a computer. If you value being able to easily get good results in digital media without a hassle, then a Mac is a lot more valueable to you.