Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

eMac and iMac EOL'd?

maybe garbage is a strong word, lets just say its last in class. its at the bottom. nvidea has 5200,5700,5900,5950. it holds the bottom slot and if you check any benches as soon as you start cranking up resolution from 640 x 480 it starts dropping frames. 5200 was designed for manufactors to have a inexpensive video system so it was cheap for them to buy and it was easy for nvidea to sell. they both were happy. see toms hardware for more info on video systems. or inside mac gaming.
 
Dont Hurt Me said:
maybe garbage is a strong word, lets just say its last in class. its at the bottom. nvidea has 5200,5700,5900,5950. it holds the bottom slot and if you check any benches as soon as you start cranking up resolution from 640 x 480 it starts dropping frames. 5200 was designed for manufactors to have a inexpensive video system so it was cheap for them to buy and it was easy for nvidea to sell. they both were happy. see toms hardware for more info on video systems. or inside mac gaming.
Click to expand...

And that's fair enough. I by no means am trying to play UT2004, etc. with all features turned on, and with high resolutions on my 5200! But it's quite a step above my GF2, and again, for my limited gaming and usage, it's a perfectly fine card. Lowest in its class, yes, but it still does the trick.
 
Soemthing completely off the walll . .

In the previous post I mentioned the eMac morphing into something similar to the TAM format. There's been lots of comments as to why this wouldn't happen (mostly little kiddies poking at the LCD) but I figured I'd take a Photoshop stab at what it might look like. I couldn't find a TAM image with a good foot, so its "floating" right now . . . picture a slot CD on the oposite side.
PS: this image is not based on ANY reliable information. Its just my mind wandering. . .
 

Attachments

  • emac2 copy.jpg
    emac2 copy.jpg
    29.2 KB · Views: 171
The problem with the two concepts above (at least for me) is that if it can be made that compact, why not just have a laptop? Both concepts look sort of Like a Tablet iBook...

I have the same issue with the current iMacs... If Ihad £1000 to spend and the choice between an iMac and a iBook, I'd opt for the iBook. There just isn't enough bang for your buck with current iMacs. A redesign of the outside would need to keep the role of the machine the same, and on the inside there needs to be more for my money to tempt me....
 
Danrose1977 said:
The problem with the two concepts above (at least for me) is that if it can be made that compact, why not just have a laptop? Both concepts look sort of Like a Tablet iBook...

Because the iBooks only have 1024x768 screens.
Click to expand...
 
de_construct said:
I am thinking Apple may ditch the G4 entirely, as it did with the G3s ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/35749.html ) This has a precedent, as Apple unexpectedly went G4 with the iBook line, even though IBM had the PPC 750GX ready to go past 1GHz, and despite having both multiprocessing capabilities and AltiVec added, it went with hand-me-down PPC 7455 instead.
Click to expand...

Well, where did you get that GX info? IBM hasn't got anything on it, so either the GX is still a myth, or you're just dreaming up facts. Anyway, it still isn't availabe, and the iBook was updated half a year ago... does that ring any bells?
 
dieselg4 said:
In the previous post I mentioned the eMac morphing into something similar to the TAM format. There's been lots of comments as to why this wouldn't happen (mostly little kiddies poking at the LCD) but I figured I'd take a Photoshop stab at what it might look like. I couldn't find a TAM image with a good foot, so its "floating" right now . . . picture a slot CD on the oposite side.
PS: this image is not based on ANY reliable information. Its just my mind wandering. . .
Click to expand...

Poor design - all those cables are bound to cause trouble at that side. Do a redesign that the cables wont interfere with user actions.
 
adamjay said:
how many Reai's is the monthly payment in Brazil for an eMac, iCeb0x ?
Electronics in generaly (even mac's) are very inexpensive in the US compared to the rest of the world. I would jump to say because of the consumerist nature of our culture. Everyone wants the latest, and every company pushes to make the latest, its an endless cycle.

i remember being in Sao Paulo in October, shopping on Avenido Paulista and seeing the prices for even cheap non-brand PC Laptops were outrageous!

would you be surprised if i said you could get a brand new eMac here in the US with the specs you listed above for 2,184 Reai's ??
Click to expand...

The problem with Macs pricing in Brazil is that our government charges huge taxes for imported stuff. There's no Apple plant in Brazil (and there will never be -- HK is cheaper) so we have to pay taxes well in excess of 100%. Add that to the fact that US$1.00 is worth R$2.90 and there we go! A US$900 machine will cost over R$5,220.00 because the shops gotta earn something, right? =)

Well... Check this: http://www.apple.com/br/promo/back2school/

R$4,990.00 or 20 x R$289.04 (there's is an interest rate of between 2% and 3% - a grand total of R$5,780.90)

You see, it's cheaper than it was before -- something like R$5,900, even with the g--damned interest rate! There's something really fishy in that. Apple only does that because it can't/shouldn't hold those machines anymore. Gotta sell it fast because of logistics (extra costs for longer than intended storage at a third party warehouse) or because there is new stuff coming.

I would bet that it's both in this case...

There are other problems with electronics pricing in Brazil, but that's much more complicated and the problem has to do with social problems. Let's put it simple: you americans got more bang for the buck than us brazilians have. Even if you could buy that eMac for R$1,800 (a modest price for a no-brand PC with a 17" monitor here), not much people would do it...

Edit: You said about paying R$2,184 for a Mac: that's why most people smuggle Macs instead of buying them through the correct channels over here.
 
dieselg4 said:
Danrose1977 said:
The problem with the two concepts above (at least for me) is that if it can be made that compact, why not just have a laptop? Both concepts look sort of Like a Tablet iBook...

Because the iBooks only have 1024x768 screens.
Click to expand...

Good point, but one thats not personally a problem, I'd still take the iBook... in fact I did!
Click to expand...
 
the iMac is the most important product!!!!

The base iMac should outperform ANY pc, not just the PM G5.

This is Apple's bread and butter computer. They need to get it right. I have been cycling through Apples lately trying to find the right price/performance. I am just about through waiting. Maybe I will go back to intel - I can buy a single machine that I can carry, burn DVDs and play the LATEST games on in native LCD resolution. Nah. I will just wait for Stevie Wonder to get a clue.
 
Dont Hurt Me said:
man you are clueless, G4 thats way overpriced is killing Imac sales. and by the way they count Imac & Emac sales as Imac sales(Apple spinning the truth) and those numbers still are the same as powermac G5. Dismal. why? old stale technology that apple charges twice what its worth thats why 1.7% of all new computers were macs. Only mac faithful would be dumb enough to buy old hardware at new hardware prices. new buyers flock to the PC world where they can get fast new machines at 1/2 what apple charges for old slow G4s. I also love the logic of cant make a decent Imac because Powerbook doesnt have G5 in it. Brilliant! way to go! Just keep making old crap. with that thinking Apple is sure to hit 1% marketshare or less this qtr. they must have someone like you running Apple.
Click to expand...

True. I had a 1.25 iMac for a day. Took it back and got the PM G4. Kept that for four months. Sold it. Too slow. Took my PB G4 apart and sold it in pieces. Now I am patiently waiting for a G5 PB. Apple has one seriously borked up lineup. I can honestly say that not one of their computers is desirable.
 
Dont Hurt Me said:
maybe garbage is a strong word, lets just say its last in class. its at the bottom. nvidea has 5200,5700,5900,5950. it holds the bottom slot and if you check any benches as soon as you start cranking up resolution from 640 x 480 it starts dropping frames. 5200 was designed for manufactors to have a inexpensive video system so it was cheap for them to buy and it was easy for nvidea to sell. they both were happy. see toms hardware for more info on video systems. or inside mac gaming.
Click to expand...

No, it's garbage. Your words were well chosen. One step above integrated. What you will find in $500-999 PCs.
 
~Shard~ said:
And that's fair enough. I by no means am trying to play UT2004, etc. with all features turned on, and with high resolutions on my 5200! But it's quite a step above my GF2, and again, for my limited gaming and usage, it's a perfectly fine card. Lowest in its class, yes, but it still does the trick.
Click to expand...

Faster than a 4 year old video chip? It _MUST_ be good then.

Hey, we are just advocating for better value from Apple. Stop defending them. Is Steve Jobs your child or something.
 
dieselg4 said:
In the previous post I mentioned the eMac morphing into something similar to the TAM format. There's been lots of comments as to why this wouldn't happen (mostly little kiddies poking at the LCD) but I figured I'd take a Photoshop stab at what it might look like. I couldn't find a TAM image with a good foot, so its "floating" right now . . . picture a slot CD on the oposite side.
PS: this image is not based on ANY reliable information. Its just my mind wandering. . .
Click to expand...

Neither of the above will even be close! Apple said when they redesign the iMac to its looks that they looked at that kind of design and there are some problems that go along with that type of design. For one thing is that you have to slow the optical drives way down and possibly the hard drive too. Also it doesn't quite look right. You would have to make it a little thinker to accommodate a Hard Drive, Optical Drive, and still allow for cooling. I just don't see this happening, or anything even close to it. It is great to use your imagination though! Its a nice thought!
 
wrldwzrd89 said:
I'm not in the market either (I bought my iMac in late January of this year); I think this upcoming iMac (G5) revision is coming right when I expected it to, which was sometime around the time of the PowerMac update. I haven't followed the eMac line, so I don't have any guesses as to what will be in it. This is good news for iMac and eMac buyers, though.[/QU
I'll pray for a G5 Imac. I'm selling my Dell to my roommate & need an all in one solution!
Click to expand...
 
In less than 12 hours we may receive some clue

if the Powermacs are updated tommarrow ( I doubt it ) , the PM G5 configurations may point to where Apple will take the IMAC . A top of the line DP 2.5 GHZ 970FX Powermac selling for $3000 or less as well as a DP 2.2 GHZ 970FX Powermac selling for $ 2500 or less followed by a bargain priced DP 1.8 GHZ 970FX Powermac selling for $1700 or less might really help elevate sales of the G5 Powermacs as well as raise the bar for the IMACs .
 
lewdvig said:
Faster than a 4 year old video chip? It _MUST_ be good then.

Hey, we are just advocating for better value from Apple. Stop defending them. Is Steve Jobs your child or something.
Click to expand...

Wow, someone's getting all defensive for no good reason here!

Your reply to my post makes no sense whatsoever - did you even read my post? There is no way you could have. Is my 5200 faster than my GeForce 2? Yes. Of course it is. That's what I said. What's your point? "It _MUST_ be good then" - yes, actually it is good - as I have previously said, (which I will repeat for you since you obviously didn't read it the first time), the card does everything I need it to and I have not had any issues or complaints with it. Therefore, it is not garbage. Garbage to me means it does NOT do what it's supposed to, or perhaps it malfunctions, or acts like, well, a piece of garbage. Playing games and displaying my screen - it passes with flying colors! (And I am not saying it would if I tried playing UT20004 maxed, did intense PhotoShop work, or used FCP, 3D modelling, etc. - of course it wouldn't.)

"Stop defending Apple"? Where did I even make 1 comment regarding Apple in this whole thing? I was simply talking about a video card. How do you know I even have a Mac? Maybe I have a PC which I upgraded from a GF2 to a 5200. Your illogic boggles my mind, yet curiously amuses me - thanks for the laugh.

And is Jobs my son? Wow, impressive - THAT one made me laugh. Can you get anymore over the top? If so, please let me know! Talk aboout hitting a nerve...

Anyway, thanks for the chuckles, and relax buddy - there's no need to get your pink panties in a knot. :cool:
 
~Shard~ said:
Wow, someone's getting all defensive for no good reason here!

Your reply to my post makes no sense wh....

"Stop defending Apple"? Where did I even make 1 comment regarding Apple in this whole thing? I was simply talking about a video card. How do you know I even have a Mac? Maybe I have a PC which I upgraded from a GF2 to a 5200. Your illogic boggles my mind, yet curiously amuses me - thanks for the laugh.

And is Jobs my son? Wow, impressive - THAT one made me laugh. Can you get anymore over the top? If so, please let me know! Talk aboout hitting a nerve...

Anyway, thanks for the chuckles, and relax buddy - there's no need to get your pink panties in a knot. :cool:
Click to expand...

Just ignore the stupid ones.
:D
 
~Shard~ said:
Yah, I'll try and follow your advice in the future, CmdrLaForge - but it's just so damn hard to bite my tongue sometimes! ;) :cool:
Click to expand...

I think you guys are the ones getting worked up and not reading very well.

Drink more punch knucklehead!

My point, and it is a valid one, is that the parts in your machine are not worth the premium you paid. Just because you are ingorant of this does not make it OK. When this obvious fact is pointed out, you claim it's OK because it is faster than the obsolete card it replaces.

It is not OK. The moment you try to play Tony Hawk 4, or some other 2003/2004 game you will find your card insufficient. Even if you never, ever, play a game you were still ripped off. You paid for more than you received.

Regarding gaming: No one other than Mac users is playing these games at 6*4 with low detail. Why? Simply because they blindly follow the bad decisions made by Apple. Apple even has the nerve to publicize how good Mac are for playing games!

For all the years I have been a Mac user, there have always been people like you: the dwindling niche that Apple relies on that accepts everything Apple says and voraciously consumes all the tainted punch it can get.

I for am not spending another dime on an Apple until they make some thing that doesn't cost twice as much as an eMachine and perform half as well (I am talking laptops here).

And don't bother telling me about Apple quality either. I have disected more than my share of these things. Yes they are well made, but I don't just want to look at it.

There is no question Apple is holding back technology. They could made a G5 notebook last year. There are P4 Prescott laptops and they put out 100 watts of heat - way more than a G5.
 
The point applies to all Apple products really.

Apple needs a lineup where desktops are not available slower than 1.6GHz. If people are really going to enjoy their macs with all the great software Apple makes - they need this power. Also, put in graphics parts that are cutting edge. This way, one year from now people will still be able to play highly hyped-up games. Even for people who don't play games, they have paid a premium for an Apple, they deserve something good.

Don't kid yourself, Apple could do this tomorrow if they wanted. I think the margin is there too. I will need to see a comparitive bill of parts between a current spec eMac and a G5 one with a RADEON 9600 before I believe otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back