eMac named Worst Desktop PC

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Original poster
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/general/2004/12/20/generalmacobserver_2004_12_20_eng-macobserver_eng-macobserver_121548_107023336812008987.html?partner=yahoo&referrer=

The end of the year inevitably brings with it scores of "Best of" lists from a variety of sources. Such lists from this year frequently have Apple's iPod at or near the top, but Apple also made another kind of list this year: PC Magazine's "Worst Products of the Year" list, where the eMac was named worst Desktop PC.

"For Apple, the entry-level eMac really does represent Think Different," wrote Jim Louderbeck. "That's because for a company that prides itself on quality, this computer is different. As in bad."

Noting that it is stylish, he called it slow, underpowered, and pathetic. He specifically criticized the 40 Gigabyte hard drive the entry-level unit comes with, and said it was impossible to download data from the unit because it does not have a DVD burner. To that end he did not also note that it comes with FireWire, USB, Ethernet, and a CD burner, all of which can be used, and are used by Mac users, to transfer data.

The last technical issue he listed as a problem is the ATI Radeon 9200 graphics card, which he said "won't even run this fall's hot Mac games."

Mr. Louderbeck concludes: "If you're considering a home Apple, think different. Buy a Dell. Or be prepared to spend a lot more for an acceptable Apple computer."


more at link....
 

jeremy.king

macrumors 603
Jul 23, 2002
5,478
1
Fuquay Varina, NC
For a second there, I thought it was named worst desktop PC, because it didn't hold up to the standard of all other PCs which include security exploits, spyware, and viruses.

While I agree with some of the points there, but I would defend with the fact that the eMac is an educational product turned consumer because of demand for CRT all-in-ones. Was never really designed for the public.
 

QCassidy352

macrumors G4
Mar 20, 2003
10,572
2,670
Bay Area
I think he's missing the point of what and who the emac is for. And the "transfering data" thing is just an ignorant statement.
 

miloblithe

macrumors 68020
Nov 14, 2003
2,076
28
Washington, DC
Until the most recent G5 iMacs, the emac was pretty comparable to the iMac, just with a CRT instead of flat screen. In fact, at certain points it has been more powerful than the iMac, and it's so much cheaper. If rumors prove to be true and a G5 eMac is due in the next few months, I will once again argue that the eMac is a much better computer for the money than an iMac (depending on how price/specs shake out).

However, the current eMac is pretty weak, but even a boost to a 1.5Ghz G4 (or more) would make it OK again.
 

superfunkomatic

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2003
229
0
calgary, ab canada
the only thing he could have added to make himself sound like a complete **** was "this thing doesn't have a floppy drive".

doesn't surprise me, given the source of the article.

it's a great computer for business, small business, or home use. and for crying out loud - does every computer have to be a super gaming machine?
 

combatcolin

macrumors 68020
Oct 24, 2004
2,284
0
Northants, UK
Apparantly you need a DVD burner to copy information that other people need on there computers.

Hmmm.

Reviewer didn't metion that an emac will still be soldiering on in years to come when most PC's motherboards will have died...

Hmmm.

Oh well, silly articles like this won't affect the buying public.
 

yippy

macrumors 68020
Mar 14, 2004
2,087
3
Chicago, IL
Umm... for the low end eMac. And am I behind the times or don't most people use CDs to get info off of their computer still?
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Original poster
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
combatcolin said:
Apparantly you need a DVD burner to copy information that other people need on there computers.

Hmmm.

Reviewer didn't metion that an emac will still be soldiering on in years to come when most PC's motherboards will have died...

Hmmm.

Oh well, silly articles like this won't affect the buying public.
You must be kidding. Articles such as these are the bane of Apple. The original article was in PC Magazine.
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,056
6
Yahooville S.C.
Hey rdowns, the author makes a lot of hit and miss statements. Heck the iMac doesnt have a gaming card in it let alone a 9200 in a emac. Still as long as you only like those oldergaming or arcade titles the emac is a very nice entry machine and can do almost everything else. But it is true its a old G4 and a old 9200 mated to a what is now dirt cheap crt. it needs bumping, you know what i mean. :D
 

Eric_Z

macrumors regular
Jan 15, 2003
118
4
rdowns said:
The end of the year inevitably brings with it scores of "Best of" lists from a variety of sources. Such lists from this year frequently have Apple's iPod at or near the top, but Apple also made another kind of list this year: PC Magazine's "Worst Products of the Year" list, where the eMac was named worst Desktop PC.
Meh... there are far "worse" desktops out there, just take a look at the SUN Blade 150 for example. Yeah I know that they claim that it's a "workstation", but come on... [and I actually like SUNs] For $1,395.00 you get:

UltraSPARC-IIi Processor: ____1 @ 550 MHz
On-Chip L2 Cache: __________512 KB
Graphics Accelerator:_______Sun PGX64
Memory: _________________256 MB (1 @ 256-MB DIMM)
7200 RPM EIDE Disk Drive:___ 1 @ 80 GB
Ethernet Port: _____ _______ 1 @ 10/100BASE-T
USB Port: _________________4
IEEE 1394 Port: ____________2
Parallel Port: _____________ 1
Serial Port: _______________1
32-Bit PCI Slot:_____________3 @ 33 MHz
Floppy Drive: ______________1
16X DVD-ROM Drive :________1
Smart Card Reader: _________1
Office Productivity Suite:_____StarOffice 6.0 Pre-Installed
Operating System:___________Solaris 8 & 9 Pre-Installed
 

noel4r

macrumors 6502a
Jul 17, 2002
661
0
Los Angeles
I have an eMac and I love that machine. This guy's insane. I have a superdrive and I've never used it. I use a flash drive to get data off my machine or use a cd. A cd is less expensive than a dvd-r. It isn't underpowered at all. I constantly have iTunes, iPhoto, Mail, Safari running at the same time and it runs smoothly and I never turn that machine off. How can the eMac be worse than a low-end Compaq? I repeat, this guy's insane!
 

mrgreen4242

macrumors 601
Feb 10, 2004
4,352
1
A review of Dell's entry level PC:

This comes with a 40gb HD, quite inadiquate.
It lacks a DVD burner AND A CD BURNER. It doesn't even have a DVD READER!?
The integrated Intel GPU won't play even last years hottest PC games.
It completely lacks in firewire support, limited to jusr USB for transfering data off the computer.
If it wasn't for the holiday sale, you would get a 17" CRT standard with it, same as the eMac.
The CPU is definately faster than the eMacs, at a P4 2.8 ghz, but it is massive crippled by the inclusion of Windows XP Home. <ack>

Ya, that was a pretty lame article, especially the end when he suggests buying a Dell... like thier computers are that much better than an eMac.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Original poster
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
Dont Hurt Me said:
Hey rdowns, the author makes a lot of hit and miss statements. Heck the iMac doesnt have a gaming card in it let alone a 9200 in a emac. Still as long as you only like those oldergaming or arcade titles the emac is a very nice entry machine and can do almost everything else. But it is true its a old G4 and a old 9200 mated to a what is now dirt cheap crt. it needs bumping, you know what i mean. :D
It doesn't rally matter if his statements are hit or miss. The general buying public is not as knowledgable as the furum posters here. They will read the article and not dig down deeper.

Perhaps we should all write letters to PC Magazine with polite, intelligent rebuttals.
 

BornAgainMac

macrumors 603
Feb 4, 2004
6,354
3,217
Florida Resident
eMacs are the worst Macs but not the worst desktops.

eMacs are very durable machines. They are best used in an office or school rather than a primary home machine. They also are good for people that have a high-end PC but want to try a Mac without spending a fortune. iBook is probaby a better choice compared to a eMac in that situation.

Celerons (even at 2.8 Ghz) should be considered worst desktops. Those run so slow even compared to old Pentium 3 machines.
 

maya

macrumors 68040
Oct 7, 2004
3,225
0
somewhere between here and there.
noel4r said:
I have an eMac and I love that machine. This guy's insane. I have a superdrive and I've never used it. I use a flash drive to get data off my machine or use a cd. A cd is less expensive than a dvd-r. It isn't underpowered at all. I constantly have iTunes, iPhoto, Mail, Safari running at the same time and it runs smoothly and I never turn that machine off. How can the eMac be worse than a low-end Compaq? I repeat, this guy's insane!
Dell must have paid him off ;). besides its in PC mag, not Mac mag what do you expect the guy to say buy an eMac. He might get the boot the following day and have a truck load of angry PC users, maybe no Christmas bonus either. People are always paid in the media to take sides if you get my drift. :)
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
And how well do the $499 PCs compare to his goal of the perfect computer, or the $199 PCs without Windows.

The $625 eMac is there as a complete education solution/alternative to the $499 Dell in the education market, not as a hugely efficient and most up-to-date desktop around.

Plus with the eMacs sealed construction, there are less apt to be opened by students and gutted/downgraded -- which eats into a schools budget.

With decent memory, the machine was one of the best bargains in the line-up -- now that the G5s are out the little eMac is still a great little machine.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,889
25
Northern Virginia
nosen said:
Yeah, I'll go buy a Dell instead...



I think that guy really misses the point of the eMac.
It also sounds like this guy has never tried to call Dell for help either. My recent 2001FP purchase is most likely the last one from Dell, if my before and after sale support issues are any indication.
 

spaceballl

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2003
2,856
240
San Francisco, CA
I think his article was harsh, but he made some pretty good points. At close to $1k, a comparable PC is a much better deal. This one lacks a DVD burner, lacks memory, lacks a new graphics card, lacks a big hard drive, etc etc. In fact, this thing doesn't really offer too much at all. I do appreciate that he goes out of his way to say that they reccommend other macs (iMac, iBook, etc) in their product guide, showing that its not that he hates macs, but for the price, the eMac is trash.
 

Timelessblur

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,086
0
it sounds bad until you start thinking about it. when you figure in how much you payed for the emac then compared it to what you get out it pretty crappy. Dell 500 buck computer has a much better ratio in for the amont of money you put in to what you get out. that is what he is hitting on. it the fact of how poor the promeces to dollar ratio plays out and it is well pretty poor.
 

cmvsm

macrumors 6502a
Nov 12, 2004
784
0
This guy also has no mention of the space savings the eMacs are known for in terms of elementary school use, a primary target market. The eMac is just about indestructable to my wife's first graders who use it for reading skills an computer introduction. It has no tower, no crazy wires all over the place, and is very simply set up so that anyone can use it.

The article is typical of the PC world where every computer must be to gaming standards. God forbid if you tier your computer offering to a wide range of customer base.
 

sigamy

macrumors 65816
Mar 7, 2003
1,300
2
NJ USA
I think Jim Louderbeck used to be on TechTV, back when it was ZDTV. Didn't like him then...still don't.

As much as I want more people to buy Macs...anyone who reads this and doesn't know any better deserves a Dell and WinXP and spyware and viruses and popups and spam and crashes and headaches.

The eMac is a fine value for its intended audience. That being said, I believe it should stay G4 and that Apple should keep one config at low specs (1ghz/256/40/combo/ethernet) and offer it at $549-$599. Never gonna happen, but I'll dream.