Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
eMac G5 put on hold. G4 model back in production
- Thread starter quagmire
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You have made some great, valid points. For once, I agree with everything you posted. I have to admit that the iMac G5 has a nice cooling system - surely Apple can adapt it to the eMac, since it has a larger form factor - and make the thing even more quiet than it is now (right now it isn't all that noisy anyway).AidenShaw said:Like the iBook logic board?(Every company has some duds!)
Actually, you had a good point going until you said "All components" - when in fact we both know that Apple buys their disk drives, graphics cards/chips, optical drives, memory DIMMs, power supplies, wireless chips and other components from the same companies and OEMs that the PC manufacturers use.
Cooling is a good point, though - extra care in designing the cooling system can definitely add to the system life. Selecting good quality components, and designing the system to "care" for them adds life and value.
Be careful, once again, to look at the price points of the systems that you compare. The $348 (w/ monitor) Dell system is a completely different beast from the Dell Xeon workstations. The Dell's 15K Ultra320 SCSI drives are well cooled, as well as the CPUs with their dual 120mm fans that are also case extractors. (Dell uses large, quiet variable speed case extraction fans that are ducted so that all the air is pulled through the CPU heat sinks on the way out of the system - not little noisy fans on the CPUs that just spin the warm air in circles.)
Wouldn't you *expect* your £2500 PowerMac to last longer than your £250 Tiny PC ???
AidenShaw said:Like the iBook logic board?
Actually, you had a good point going until you said "All components" - when in fact we both know that Apple buys their disk drives, graphics cards/chips, optical drives, memory DIMMs, power supplies, wireless chips and other components from the same companies and OEMs that the PC manufacturers use.
Cooling is a good point, though - extra care in designing the cooling system can definitely add to the system life. Selecting good quality components, and designing the system to "care" for them adds life and value.
Be careful, once again, to look at the price points of the systems that you compare. The $348 (w/ monitor) Dell system is a completely different beast from the Dell Xeon workstations. The Dell's 15K Ultra320 SCSI drives are well cooled, as well as the CPUs with their dual 120mm fans that are also case extractors. (Dell uses large, quiet variable speed case extraction fans that are ducted so that all the air is pulled through the CPU heat sinks on the way out of the system - not little noisy fans on the CPUs that just spin the warm air in circles.)
Wouldn't you *expect* your £2500 PowerMac to last longer than your £250 Tiny PC ???
Well if you are comparing that Dell, Sony, HP, etc... are putting OEM components from this and that company to make they systems then Yes even Apple does so. However that is besides you are comparing a company as Dell not HP, Sony, Toshiba to Apple. Why have to picked the bottom of the barrel company such as Dell to Apple. You would not compare Walmart to a Designer store would you.
Sure both stores sell clothes and they are both made out of fabric however one store looks at cutting cost and putting no care and no eye for quality into they clothing line sometime even making promises to the low and at times middle targeted designers to carry they line for name recognition and sell in bulk. Designers are the opposite thus the price difference.Though Apple uses the same HDD, WiFi components, ram, etc... they do not buy from no name brands and they place it in they machines to last longer than a year to 2 years given. And they do not sell in bulk like Dell and to some point HP, they do not have the capabilities to pull this off at current that is why they prices are higher when compared. This will change when the numbers increase and this takes time.
And yes they do cripple they machines and I don't have any problem saying cripple, since they do it for a reason they have to set apart they lines which in recent has grown from what it started when Steve J started to make changes. And we both agree on this.
Point being Dell has some advantages however they should be compared to HP, Sony, Toshiba, etc...other x86 computer makers not Apple who others have mentioned do not have any other competition. Same goes with other companies charging an arm and a leg for electricity or broadband since no other company or competition is there to rival them.
And Apple knows this and they did it so it does play as such, in some cases they seem like M$ however in a hardware stance. They have locked themselves in the hardware and software segment, and leaving a crack in the door open for Java, *nix, web application developers. Its has to do with control, like M$ plain and simple.
Remember the grass is always greener on the other side.
So go ahead buy a Dell with gigabit or wireless G 108, or this and that, there is a concern of security and I do not plan to risk that. I already find that my 4.5-5 year old Macintosh system runs effective for my use and it will even run Tiger so I am not bothered and since 10.5 will be slowed down after the release of Tiger this system will last a good 6+ year try pulling that off with an x86. My investment though seems a lot of $$$ at first however its lasted long and when compared it was well worth it.
MacSA said:OK OK ...we get the point, youe love Dell.
its not really even liking Dell or liking Apple, it is the point of the bottom end company such as Dell comparing to Apple who has no other competition in the PPC desktop market.
If he is going to compare Dell then he has to compare it to other x86 companies such as Sony, HP, Toshiba, etc...
It is rather absurd since I feel that Apple (design sense) is balanced with Sony (design sense) on the PPC - x86 league.
Offtopic:m a y a said:Well if you are comparing that Dell, Sony, HP, etc... are putting OEM components from this and that company to make they systems then Yes even Apple does so. However that is besides you are comparing a company as Dell not HP, Sony, Toshiba to Apple. Why have to picked the bottom of the barrel company such as Dell to Apple. You would not compare Walmart to a Designer store would you.
Though Apple uses the same HDD, WiFi components, ram, etc... they do not buy from no name brands and they place it in they machines to last longer than a year to 2 years given. And they do not sell in bulk like Dell and to some point HP, they do not have the capabilities to pull this off at current that is why they prices are higher when compared. This will change when the numbers increase and this takes time.
And yes they do cripple they machines and I don't have any problem saying cripple, since they do it for a reason they have to set apart they lines which in recent has grown from what it started when Steve J started to make changes. And we both agree on this.
Point being Dell has some advantages however they should be compared to HP, Sony, Toshiba, etc...other x86 computer makers not Apple who others have mentioned do not have any other competition. Same goes with other companies charging an arm and a leg for electricity or broadband since no other company or competition is there to rival them.
And Apple knows this and they did it so it does play as such, in some cases they seem like M$ however in a hardware stance. They have locked themselves in the hardware and software segment, and leaving a crack in the door open for Java, *nix, web application developers. Its has to do with control, like M$ plain and simple.
Remember the grass is always greener on the other side.
So go ahead buy a Dell with gigabit or wireless G 108, or this and that, there is a concern of security and I do not plan to risk that. I already find that my 4.5-5 year old Macintosh system runs effective for my use and it will even run Tiger so I am not bothered and since 10.5 will be slowed down after the release of Tiger this system will last a good 6+ year try pulling that off with an x86. My investment though seems a lot of $$$ at first however its lasted long and when compared it was well worth it.
I could get my x86-based machine to last 6 years by simply not upgrading stuff. For example, I plan on staying with Windows XP and not getting Longhorn; I use outdated versions of several programs (WavePad being the one that gets the most use); and my PC has only one purpose right now - converting music files to Apple Lossless. Once I get that done, I'll keep the thing turned off unless I need it again for something else.
wrldwzrd89 said:
Actually the iMac G5 case is THICKER than it has to be for the sole purpose that the weight of the computer has to anchor its self to the stand for stability.
If you own or have seen an iMac G5 in person, you would know what I am talking about.
iMac G5 frame is not snug fitting to the lcd frame, has acetate that is quite thick. Has a back plate that is thick for the base to mount. All this adds to weight and thickness and even size. Remove the PSU from the case it adds heat and weight. And the speakers are just horrid
iMac G5 has not innovate design idea behind it, however that said it should use some lighter materials for the casing for weight and keeping the insides cool. I do believe that John Ive, has missed some details in the iMac G5. Then again that is my opinion.
The point that Adian Shaw is making is that why no Gigabit ethernet, that is because it will loose sales for the PowerBook and PowerMac. Apple does not want they middle lined desktop machine to be on almost PAR to the desktop. I believe for a few thousand less people are willing to loose a faster bus, ram, ports and in the process gain an LCD screen. You can find 3rd party FW linked devices for importing Analog and Optical signals for Music and Video at a fraction of the cost so no biggy. Its an issues of envy and how many consumers or even prosumers need more than 1Gig or ram.
wrldwzrd89 said:
However I am referring to using the PC for daily use and also upgrading the OS.
I surf, WiFi, email, encode, edit and create images, 3D, video, and even burn on this 4.5-5 year old mac along with upgrading the OS to the latest. Sure things are not as snappy as with a dual 2.5GHz G5 with 8 gigs of ram however it gets the job done while also being secure.
Again I still see no point for me yet to upgrade.
Then again that is just me since I don't play any games. AidenShaw said:Like the iBook logic board?
Actually, you had a good point going until you said "All components" - when in fact we both know that Apple buys their disk drives, graphics cards/chips, optical drives, memory DIMMs, power supplies, wireless chips and other components from the same companies and OEMs that the PC manufacturers use.
Be careful, once again, to look at the price points of the systems that you compare. The $348 (w/ monitor) Dell system is a completely different beast from the Dell Xeon workstations. The Dell's 15K Ultra320 SCSI drives are well cooled, as well as the CPUs with their dual 120mm fans that are also case extractors. (Dell uses large, quiet variable speed case extraction fans that are ducted so that all the air is pulled through the CPU heat sinks on the way out of the system - not little noisy fans on the CPUs that just spin the warm air in circles.)
Wouldn't you *expect* your £2500 PowerMac to last longer than your £250 Tiny PC ???
Ofcourse every company has a dud or two, its inevitable. But Dell, Tiny etc have a hell of alot more duds than expected.
What are you on about? the parts that Apple and PC both buy from the same companies are all quality components. These arent normally the components that PC companies skimp on. Please read my post properly. The components i was talking about were not the ones "shared" by both companies. The components shared are mostly good quality. The components which are **** in a PC is as i stated the motherboard and sound card, which as i recall, are NOT used by Apple too.
I wasnt saying ALL Dell Pcs are bad, but alot of the cheaper workstations ARE. their Xeon workstations are generally ok, which is why they cost more. Did i say All Dells are bad? no.
Yes, i would *EXPECT* my £2500 PowerMac to last longer than your £250 Tiny PC. Thats entirely my point. Have you not read what my post was about??? I was saying that with Apple you pay more, but you pay for quality and longevity. And to compare a £250 Tiny PC and a £2500 powermac as a similar spec, is as we both know exaggerating things. Dont try and exaggerate to prove a point please, this is meant to be informed discussion, not one-upmanship.
m a y a said:
Perhaps if you owned a few Dell systems you wouldn't have this ignorant view. ("ignorant" in the dictionary definition "caused by a lack of understanding or experience")
Compare a Dell Precision Workstation 470 or 670 to a PowerMac, or a PowerEdge 1850 64-bit Xeon server to the Xserve. And by "compare", I mean actually hold and look at them. Put them in the rack to see how sturdy and easy to use the rackmount and sliders are. Connect the redundant power supplies (oops, Xserve doesn't have that quality feature) and fill them with ECC memory (well, Xserve finally has that).
I recently scrapped about 30 Dell servers - not because they were "bottom of the barrell", but because we tossed everything that was less than 1 GHz and replaced them with dual 64-bit Xeon systems.
The 4 and 5 year old Dells were still running without any trouble, but the 500 MHz Pentium IIIs were no longer worth the space they were occupying.
On the other hand, I never saw problems like these with the Dells:
And again, since Apple's entry level Xserve is *more than three times the price* of the entry level Dell or about 3 time the price of an HPaq entry 1U server, one should take care to not judge the entire product line by the lowest end items.
My point about quality and longevity is to note that "good, better, best" in Apple-land is about option levels - the same system but different memory, CPU speed, disk size, etc.
In the PC market, "better" and "best" may have fundamentally higher quality design and components than "good". For three times the price (for entry 1U servers), you'd expect higher quality and longer life.
AidenShaw said:
Actually I say this because I HAVE USED DELL desktops and laptops in the past that were owned by my friends.
So if you are calling on that I have an ignorant view on Dell systems then you are very wrong about that. However I shall take that you did you get that bit of information from my post so all is good. You began by compare low end Dell machines with Gigabit and WiFi to Apples iMac G5 and then you started to move into the higher end systems and then Servers.
Call me crazy, however I never said that any computer was perfect, Apples customers have not asked for the iMac G5 to have Gigabit, etc, etc. Heck I am surprised that the PowerBook line doesn't have HD resolution. Does that mean if if PC manufacturers start putting microwaves that Apple also has to do so, nope. Some things in the PC world are just candy and have no real benefit like mobile entertainment media centre's. Give me a break do I really need a "remote control", 5.1 and 6.1 surround sound built into a laptop along with a TV tuner, yada yada yada. , those things are not needed they sound like Sony notebooks to be, what real benefit do they have being mobile, you must be joking.Can the PowerBook 17inch have a BTO or standard HD resolution sure it would be nice then again that is me, people will poor sight might find higher resolution on a small screen too much to strain they eyes. Does the PowerBook really need 6.1 surround sound built-in, nope there is no need for all that. Those sound like features that Car companies are doing now, hey lets put a microwave, TV, DVD player, Satellite TV, a hot tub, heated feet warmers, head warmer, butt warmer in the seat. Please enough is enough where is the Form and Function bit do we really need all that.
On note of the XServer, remember that other companies have been in the server field much much longer than Apple, I believe you need to cut them a break on that. They will put those advance features in future updates, considering they do not update the XServer line often mainly once a year.
You need to re-evaluate your opinions Adian Shaw, just because you want to get from point A to point B, you can buy any car with four wheels or even bicycle it, however you have to consider the overall attention to everything not just safety and design. Again I am not taking Apples side however I also do not consider you taking Dell's side in this matter.
Yes, something on the Apple side suck and well many things on the x86 side suck as well, you win some you loose some as long as the overall experience is positive.
By the way I love how you compare the life of a server compared to a desktop, since I also know many IBM servers used in banks that are 10-20 years old and still running today. Servers are a bad choice to compare considering an IT specialist looks after them, and they are never mobile or suffer from home incidents, all in a closed environment. Bad comparison.
Since server runs 24/7/365 However there is no way anyone here can say for positive the life and wear and tear on hardware pieces, since it all differs. Since you company where you work at could have a smaller customer base online and accessing maybe at a lesser rate than other companies. Again there is no way for sure of telling.
V.A.Toss said:
Actually V.A.Toss, I have always felt that Apple seems to rip off they out of America customers in every regard and not giving the exchange rate any importance.
And I reside in Canada. I feel bad for all those EUropeans, and UK customers that are paying way more than they have too. I there anything that the Apple customers of Europe and UK do for Apple to obey the exchange rate. Why do you guys stand up for all this nonsense as far as exchange rate goes. At least in Canada its not as bad however still bad when over dollar does well.
AidenShaw: The PowerEdge server that you linked to had in it's default configuration: no redundant power supply, no rails, single 2.8GHz Xeon, no OS and 256MB RAM.
Still it was $429 more expensive than the entry level Xserve which has an (arguable) faster processor, Mac OS X Server Unlimited client and 512MB RAM. Granted the PowerEdge has SCSI.
Still your post gives a very strange picture when you first talk about this server that would be $1755 more expensive than the Xserve if you add the features you mentioned and raise the RAM, add a 5 client OS version and up the CPU to 3.0GHz.
Then you mention that Dell offers servers that start at a third of the price of an Xserve.
Last post you accused me of twisting your meaning. Maybe you should look at your posts a second time and try to see what impressions a first time reader of that post would think instead of assuming that your thoughts are somehow magically carried with the words.
But then again, I almost think you do this on purpose ... and I keep feeding the troll ... silly me.
Still it was $429 more expensive than the entry level Xserve which has an (arguable) faster processor, Mac OS X Server Unlimited client and 512MB RAM. Granted the PowerEdge has SCSI.
Still your post gives a very strange picture when you first talk about this server that would be $1755 more expensive than the Xserve if you add the features you mentioned and raise the RAM, add a 5 client OS version and up the CPU to 3.0GHz.
Then you mention that Dell offers servers that start at a third of the price of an Xserve.
Last post you accused me of twisting your meaning. Maybe you should look at your posts a second time and try to see what impressions a first time reader of that post would think instead of assuming that your thoughts are somehow magically carried with the words.
But then again, I almost think you do this on purpose ... and I keep feeding the troll ... silly me.
Because we don't have a choice. Most big vendors are international and U.S based and they all seize the oportunity when the dollar is weak to profit a little extra. Actually, here in Norway, Microsoft raised the prices because the Euro was relatively stronger than the NOK and that made pan-european companies migrate their licensing to Norway. Still the dollar was relatively weaker than both the currencies, so the right thing to would have been to reduce the Euro price, but nooo ...m a y a said:
So, you see, Apple isn't the worst, but they're by far not the most fair company either when it comes to "cheating" on the exchange rates..
m a y a said:Actually I say this because I HAVE USED DELL desktops and laptops in the past that were owned by my friends.
And your friends were buying high-end PowerEdge servers, Precision Workstations and Latitudes, not low end Dimensions and Inspirons?
If your friends bought low end, I have no problem believing that the quality didn't measure up to Apple's. As long as the price doesn't match Apple's, that's a choice that your friends made...
"Ignorance" refers to covering the range, not a few sample points.
m a y a said:Though Apple uses the same HDD, WiFi components, ram, etc... they do not buy from no name brands and they place it in they machines to last longer than a year to 2 years given. And they do not sell in bulk like Dell and to some point HP, they do not have the capabilities to pull this off at current that is why they prices are higher when compared. This will change when the numbers increase and this takes time.
And yes they do cripple they machines and I don't have any problem saying cripple, since they do it for a reason they have to set apart they lines which in recent has grown from what it started when Steve J started to make changes. And we both agree on this.
Last time I checked, Apple uses the same manufacturing buddies as PC makers do. Compal for example. A lot of their stuff is produced right next to another PC making lane. And also, their founding basis is capital growth, i hardly see any difference between Apple and any other corporation in that respect other than what is seen superficially.
Crippling machines for a reason ? That makes it okay ? Everything around us happen for a reason, just because some don't understand it, doesn't mean it happens randomly. What's important is how valid their reason is. In this case, their reason is completely bogus. Crippling a machine so it won't outshine another is like having a younger brother with half a brain removed at birth so the older ones can have a better chance in his life time. Apple is perfectly capable of providing us with machines in every range that uses the maximal capabilities of the hardware, if they can't do it, then maybe they can learn a thing or two from other personal computer makers and stop being ignorant and arrogant toward the x86 community.
m a y a said:
I agree with you, and i live in the UK. North london. the pound is simply too strong right now.
But its not just Apple, its like whats been said, there are better and worse. But its so expensive to live here that u barely notice the misery it does to your bank balance. Overall, Apple is as bad as all other PC vendors.
tsk, tsk
The PowerEdge default also has 3 year warranty with a 4 hour service guarantee.
If you back the warranty off to 3 year, next day, the PowerEdge is $2100 cheaper than the Xserve with 3 year AppleCare. It's hard to do an exact comparison - you can't match Apple's one year warranty, every Dell 1850 comes with at least three years....
You really should research the details before posting....
gekko513 said:
The PowerEdge default also has 3 year warranty with a 4 hour service guarantee.
If you back the warranty off to 3 year, next day, the PowerEdge is $2100 cheaper than the Xserve with 3 year AppleCare. It's hard to do an exact comparison - you can't match Apple's one year warranty, every Dell 1850 comes with at least three years....
You really should research the details before posting....
Sure we all want a PowerBook G5.SiliconAddict said:Maybe for you but for those of us who have been sitting on the fence for over a year now waiting to switch from a PC laptop to a PowerBook that actually has a pair of balls we are getting more then a tad impatient. To be blunt I don't know about others but I'm god damn pissed at this point. The PowerBook is a stunted pile of ****.
But my PB AI 15 is doing just fine. It is a good machine and by no means a slouch. Rather it is a good all around solution.
Sushi
tsk, tsk yourself
OK, we've got lots of people throwing around numbers and claims without backing them up with configs that describe the entire server. For instance, it's easy to add $3,295 to the price of that Dell with Server 2003 Enterprise with 25 client access licenses (which sucks compared to Apple's unlimited option built into the server price).
Everybody, please do so and we'll raise the level of discourse here somewhat. We might also try getting back on topic and taking this to a new thread...
AidenShaw said:
OK, we've got lots of people throwing around numbers and claims without backing them up with configs that describe the entire server. For instance, it's easy to add $3,295 to the price of that Dell with Server 2003 Enterprise with 25 client access licenses (which sucks compared to Apple's unlimited option built into the server price).
Everybody, please do so and we'll raise the level of discourse here somewhat. We might also try getting back on topic and taking this to a new thread...
~shard~ you crack me up!~Shard~ said:I think if Apple can do it, they should - if they can put a G5 into an eMac before a PowerBook (which makes sense from a engineering point of view) than they should. Why should Apple pointless wait and hold back a machine just because another machine can't have what the other machine has?
If Apple waits until a G5 is in the PowerBook before releasing a G5 eMac then we won't be seeing a G5 eMac for a looong time...
Plus, the eMac and PowerBook are two completely different products, aimed at completely different market segments. Even the eMac and the iBook would be a closer comparison, and that's pushing it. All I'm saying is, how will the eMac getting a G5 affect PowerBook users? They are completely different market segments for all intents and purposes.
Just because you can throw a G5 into an eMac does not mean you can throw a G5 into a PowerBook - and for people who don't grasp this concept my suggestion is that they should take up a little technical design reading and educate themselves on why this is the case.
What a slam dunk. Your points are right on.
Personally, I have no problem seeing the eMac go G5 before the PowerBook line. As you indicate, there are some engineering issues. Why should one line hold up the other.
...also, while nothing against the high end using folks, the more Macs are sold the bigger and more valuable the Mac market is for developers. PM G5's are not going to carry Apple. They need volume. And that will come from eMac, iMacs and iBooks. The pro line is for those who need the performance, but not the masses.
As we all know, the eMac was originally for the education market. But due to demand for a low cost Mac, and the popularity of the eMac, it is now a separate product line. A good one at that.
Sushi
I know we were told to stop throwing numbers, but since you are so proud of your details I have to ask why you back down the Dell support to next day support when you at the same time include AppleCare with 4 hour support?AidenShaw said:
I have also decided that I am so sure now that you're a troll, that I'll stop responding after this
off topic?
You're assuming that we'll run Windows - sorry, but our servers run RHEL 3.0 u2....
And if we did want to run Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition, the price wouldn't change. Our corporate Windows CAL agreement makes the per-client access free - whether we have 5 users or 5000 users it is the same price. So, throwing up nonsense numbers from either side is still nonsense.
________________
Anyway, the "on topic" part of this tangent is that Dell (&HP/IBM/SuperMicro/...) makes low-end systems that aren't comparable to their high-end systems in quality and durability. One shouldn't base an opinion on the company based on these cheap entry-level systems (as "m a y a" was trying to do earlier) when Apple doesn't have the cheap option.
You can't imply that Apple is always better quality without acknowledging whether you're comparing the cheapest from each company (where Apple will usually win, since they'll be much more expensive) or whether you're comparing items from a similar price range (where there's much less difference).
Rower_CPU said:OK, we've got lots of people throwing around numbers and claims without backing them up with configs that describe the entire server. For instance, it's easy to add $3,295 to the price of that Dell with Server 2003 Enterprise with 25 client access licenses (which sucks compared to Apple's unlimited option built into the server price).
Everybody, please do so and we'll raise the level of discourse here somewhat. We might also try getting back on topic and taking this to a new thread...
You're assuming that we'll run Windows - sorry, but our servers run RHEL 3.0 u2....
And if we did want to run Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition, the price wouldn't change. Our corporate Windows CAL agreement makes the per-client access free - whether we have 5 users or 5000 users it is the same price. So, throwing up nonsense numbers from either side is still nonsense.
________________
Anyway, the "on topic" part of this tangent is that Dell (&HP/IBM/SuperMicro/...) makes low-end systems that aren't comparable to their high-end systems in quality and durability. One shouldn't base an opinion on the company based on these cheap entry-level systems (as "m a y a" was trying to do earlier) when Apple doesn't have the cheap option.
You can't imply that Apple is always better quality without acknowledging whether you're comparing the cheapest from each company (where Apple will usually win, since they'll be much more expensive) or whether you're comparing items from a similar price range (where there's much less difference).
gekko513 said:
The main reason is that Dell has the "4 hour" in the top level menu at the store, and Apple buried it a link or two away.
With three years of 4 hour support, the Dell is only $500 cheaper, my bad.
gekko513 said:
That's good, bury your head in the sand. Don't listen to anything that doesn't tout the wonderland of Cupertino.... The Emperor's new clothes are wonderful, thank you Mr. Jobs!
I thought that trolls usually did one-shot inflammatory posts, and didn't participate in prolonged dialogues that calmly discussed points and counter-points. My bad again....
sushi said:~shard~ you crack me up!
What a slam dunk. Your points are right on.
Personally, I have no problem seeing the eMac go G5 before the PowerBook line. As you indicate, there are some engineering issues. Why should one line hold up the other.
...also, while nothing against the high end using folks, the more Macs are sold the bigger and more valuable the Mac market is for developers. PM G5's are not going to carry Apple. They need volume. And that will come from eMac, iMacs and iBooks. The pro line is for those who need the performance, but not the masses.
As we all know, the eMac was originally for the education market. But due to demand for a low cost Mac, and the popularity of the eMac, it is now a separate product line. A good one at that.
Sushi
Thanks Sushi, I try.
I agree with your point as well that volume is a key to Apple's long-term success, and releasing a G5 eMac as soon as possible will definitely benefit Apple in this respect. Along these lines, it will be interesting to see how the new G5 iMac's sales numbers come out this first go-around.