The eMac looks better than the “molar” display, but that ain’t saying much.
Agreed, but Apple accepting $12B/year from Google to make it our default search engine isn't helping the cause.Not only do I weep for the children’s future where Google owns every bit of data about them and their parents, but I doubt that Apple could compete seeing that Google practically gives the chromebooks and software away for “free” (probably cost or less than). Google ain’t doing **** out of care for children: they just want the data.
The machine isn't from the 90s and neither was Jobs fired in that decade.I abandoned the Apple garbage in the 1990s when it became pathetically underpowered and the OS was terrible. I hated to switch to WinTel for my personal computer, but since I was using them at work I knew how more they could do compared to the Apple Macs in the 1990s. I do remember there were at least three major lines of Macs in the 1990s, including the educational line. None were good. The only good thing they did in the 1990s was to fire Jobs and license the hardware to 3rd party vendors who immediately started turning out much better Macs than Apple, and at lower prices. I waited until the Intel Macs came around before I returned to buying Macs.
Ouch. Checkmate.Agreed, but Apple accepting $12B/year from Google to make it our default search engine isn't helping the cause.
That was my first Mac, too, bought around the same time! I could play YouTube videos up to 360p, but it was fine. I could even edit videos on it pretty well, using not just iMovie HD 6 but even iMovie '09 thanks to that hack. (Editing was indeed fast, but rendering did take quite a while.) I still have that eMac, and it still boots into Leopard and operates just fine.I had the 1.42Ghz model in 2009, my first Mac. Couldn’t play a YouTube video but I was proud nonetheless.
View attachment 1998335
I still love the MiniDisc concept. Record songs to a 74- or 80-minute disc. If you wanted to move one song to another position, no problem. If you wanted to add a cleaner, newer version of a song, just delete the old one and record the new one.OMG another minidisc user!!!!
Yes! Very little for me to add!I still love the MiniDisc concept. Record songs to a 74- or 80-minute disc. If you wanted to move one song to another position, no problem. If you wanted to add a cleaner, newer version of a song, just delete the old one and record the new one.
Great way to make a collection of my vinyl 12-inch records back before they appeared on CDs (10 years later, at least). I still have 2 MiniDisc portable players and 3 920 full-size decks, for playing and recording (mostly playing), and over 1000 MiniDiscs -- all of which still play. (This is hardware that is 22 years old! I'm still waiting for a Mac to last that long!)
You could do soooo much with a MiniDisc versus a CD-R. Once that CD-R was burned and finalized, that it was. The MiniDisc ... you could keep playing around with it to your heart's content.
The only downside was Sony's DRM and all music, etc., had to be pretty much recorded in Real Time. But
it even had a larger bit rate than MP3s at 320 bits, versus 128 MP3s. Sony's compression rate was actually pretty good, It's just too bad they never wanted to let you easily transfer your collection to your Macintosh or iPod later.
(Yeah, yeah, I know, this is "off-topic," but hey, what can I say? More of a Fan Boy for Sony than Apple back in those days.)
The CRT is fine, I have one and it runs at 1280x960 and looks pretty good. Also, it isn't that noisy and it runs pretty fast. Mine is the 1 GHz model that still runs native Mac OS 9. It does slow down considerably when running 10.4 though.Time flies but god am I happy that this machine is history, together with all the old CRT iMacs. This contraption was loud, not particularly fast, and had a mediocre monitor.
Those early LCDs were not nearly as nice as the ones we have now. Viewing angles dropped off real quick, for one thing. CRTs were also a known quantity, especially the higher-end ones designers were using. I remember visiting a friend who did video in the mid-2000s and they were editing on these specific little Sony monitors. Tech like that doesn't die off immediately, especially since those monitors probably cost a couple grand a piece at the time.I can remember wanting to buy one of these. At the time, a lot of us in the design field still preferred CRTs over LCD monitors, believing they had more accurate colors. Not sure if it was actually true back then, but LCD monitors were really new at the time.