New eMacs

[benpatient]

steve jobs said that they do good to break even on every iTMS song they sell after they pay the RIAA off, but they keep selling and pushing it, don't they? why? because it sells more iPods, which are over 50% pure profit for apple.

in apple-land, percieved value is much more important than actual value, whereas in the rest of the world, competition creates a much better balance of "paying for what you get."

the eMac/iMac/PBook price-to-performance discrepancies clearly illustrate this. Apple makes the most money on the products that are clearly the least "bang for the buck"

PC's aren't insanely cheaper because they are (in general) made with cheaper things or less "know-how." No, they are cheaper because they have to compete with other companies building the same things with the same materials. Apple uses the same RAM, hard drives, monitors, interface ports (mostly), graphics cards, power supplies, fans, etc., that you'll find in the average PC. They put a pretty face on it and run OS X, and expect us, their loyal customers, to pay a premium for the honor of using their stuff.

you know how much OS X is worth? 129 dollars.

Most companies exist because of their customers, and good companies appreciate the relationship, and the importance of the customer. to be honest, apple's sales/service/marketing approaches over the last couple of years have been MUCH more oriented towards profit than they have been towards customer satisfaction. They are taking advantage of our dependence on their OS and the lack of a solid, appealing alternative for the everyday creative professional.

i've started to feel a bit used of late. yes, apple needs to be competitive and yes, they need to be profitable, but just realize that steve jobs' financial security is not in question, and that apple is bringing in a lot more money than they NEED to be bringing in. If all that cash pool were being used towards development of new products, that would be one thing...but it's just sitting in the bank. The technology world needs to be constantly pushed forward, actively. In the last 6 months we've gotten, outside the software realm, very little from apple. the mini iPod, the greatest rip-off in company history, the long-overdue G5 Xserve, and now a speed-bumped eMac. Wow.

I guess i am just worried that apple is going to kill themselves and i'll be stuck without a machine to run their OS on in the future...

make no mistake, the iPod and iTMS will become a liability in the near future. the copy protection and the cost of business combined will turn the iPod's popularity into a "2000's fad" that people look back on and shake their heads about. 128k songs for a dollar a piece? bah.

 

[daddy-mojo]

You must know some intelligent "very young children", because I thought I was making sound arguments based on fact, not acting like a child.

Oh, and simply because I choose to use profanity doesnt make me a child, so beyond that I can't imagine what would lead you to that comparison.

your actions.

 

[ibook_g4_user]

So, the eMac has a faster SuperDrive than the top-of-the-line G5 tower? This sound strange ...

and emac is the cheapest computer.. this must mean that iMac, Powerbook and Powermac will soon see an upgrade with an 8x superdrive..and I think that there will be an g5 in them.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

IMO the iBook line up will look like this:

12" 1 GHz
14" 1 GHz
14" 1.25 GHz

Yes! That's EXACTLY what I want to see in an iBook update (even though I don't need an iBook). I think it would do Apple a world of good to get all the chips Apple uses in their Macs at 1 GHz or greater.

 

[Wuddel]

The eMac sucks IMHO. 32 MB-video card is way to slow for "home use gaming". The HD is to small as well.

 

[Zaty]

Well, since they shoe horned a 2.0 Ghz G5 into the xServe, I don't think it's out of line to expect PowerBook G5s to start at 1.6 Ghz G5s. I think that it's the chip shortage on the 750fx's that is the reason we don't have PowerBooks today as well. *shudder* remembers Motorola's G4 problems *shudder* Apple simply wants to wait until they can keep up with demand, as I'm sure many people are waiting for the G5 PowerBooks!

But you forget that the xServe's case is much bigger than the even the 17" PB not to mention the 12". Even an underclocked 970FX would be too hot.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

steve jobs said that they do good to break even on every iTMS song they sell after they pay the RIAA off, but they keep selling and pushing it, don't they? why? because it sells more iPods, which are over 50% pure profit for apple.

in apple-land, percieved value is much more important than actual value, whereas in the rest of the world, competition creates a much better balance of "paying for what you get."

the eMac/iMac/PBook price-to-performance discrepancies clearly illustrate this. Apple makes the most money on the products that are clearly the least "bang for the buck"

PC's aren't insanely cheaper because they are (in general) made with cheaper things or less "know-how." No, they are cheaper because they have to compete with other companies building the same things with the same materials. Apple uses the same RAM, hard drives, monitors, interface ports (mostly), graphics cards, power supplies, fans, etc., that you'll find in the average PC. They put a pretty face on it and run OS X, and expect us, their loyal customers, to pay a premium for the honor of using their stuff.

you know how much OS X is worth? 129 dollars.

Most companies exist because of their customers, and good companies appreciate the relationship, and the importance of the customer. to be honest, apple's sales/service/marketing approaches over the last couple of years have been MUCH more oriented towards profit than they have been towards customer satisfaction. They are taking advantage of our dependence on their OS and the lack of a solid, appealing alternative for the everyday creative professional.

i've started to feel a bit used of late. yes, apple needs to be competitive and yes, they need to be profitable, but just realize that steve jobs' financial security is not in question, and that apple is bringing in a lot more money than they NEED to be bringing in. If all that cash pool were being used towards development of new products, that would be one thing...but it's just sitting in the bank. The technology world needs to be constantly pushed forward, actively. In the last 6 months we've gotten, outside the software realm, very little from apple. the mini iPod, the greatest rip-off in company history, the long-overdue G5 Xserve, and now a speed-bumped eMac. Wow.

I guess i am just worried that apple is going to kill themselves and i'll be stuck without a machine to run their OS on in the future...

make no mistake, the iPod and iTMS will become a liability in the near future. the copy protection and the cost of business combined will turn the iPod's popularity into a "2000's fad" that people look back on and shake their heads about. 128k songs for a dollar a piece? bah.

Apple knows what they're doing as a business; I don't doubt that - the problem is that Apple gives us very little information about its future plans. (But then again, without this secrecy MacRumors wouldn't exist!) Also, a 128kbps bitrate is all that's needed to equal the quality of 160kbps MP3, and the music labels probably want it that way.

 

[stoid]

The eMac sucks IMHO. 32 MB-video card is way to slow for "home use gaming". The HD is to small as well.

Yes, with new video cards now reaching to 256MB on the Windows side, 32 is rather lame. It would be great to be able to get a BTO for at least a 64MB card.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

The eMac sucks IMHO. 32 MB-video card is way to slow for "home use gaming". The HD is to small as well.

The eMac isn't meant for that kind of gaming anyway - that's why Apple made the iMac. As Apple sees it, only educational customers or Mac buyers on a budget will be getting eMacs, not home-use gamers.

 

[sw1tcher]

Yeah, thats just the thing, the cheapest, lowest line should not be first!!!!!!!!!! And as someone who bought a powerbook a week ago, i DO take personal offense, because its insulting that the update is imminent, but held off so their profit margins are greater.

Exactly. Steve should have sent you a personal letter telling you to hold off on your purchase because of imminent updates. He should've even told you when each of the updates will be released, that way you'll know exactly when to make your purchase. The nerve of Apple updating their products whenever it's feasible and while at the same time trying to make a profit so they can stay in business. Shame on them!

Emacs can only go up, and thats why their being updated. PB's, on the other hand, are doing well, cause people want apple and portable, and dont care about the price/details. So Steve screws people like me and anyone who has recently put their PB's in 6th overall, and highest among comps.

So you shut it, i am right.

Emacs and PowerBooks. Two completely different lines of computers designed for two completely different types of users. Besides the fact that desktops are typically updated first and then when the technology is ready, trickles down to laptops. That's how things usually go. It's always more difficult and expensive to create parts for portables because of heat, power, performance, etc.. issues. That's one reason why your PB is more expensive than the emac, among many others. If you felt the PB was too expensive, then you should've bought an emac or an imac. If you needed something portable, there are other options: ibook, dell, ibm, sony, toshiba, etc. You *didn't have to* get a PB you know?

And as an Apple user, you should already be fully aware that you will always pay a premium for their products.

 

[Zaty]

Yes! That's EXACTLY what I want to see in an iBook update (even though I don't need an iBook). I think it would do Apple a world of good to get all the chips Apple uses in their Macs at 1 GHz or greater.

Some people think that the 12" might only a get a 933 MHz CPU but with the 12" PB moving to 1.25 GHz there is no reason why Apple should keep one sub-1 GHz configuration. After all, 1 GHz looks so much better than 933 MHz.

 

[jnasato]

Finally an update! This is great. With such an update to the eMac, Apple's other hardware updates will hopefully be as nice.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

Just got in and fired up. Tired. Sorry, haven't read rest of thread.

Good call! £100 off the cheapest Mac, plus it's 25% faster, has twice the base RAM (not 128MB) and all the other goodies (Airport Extreme, USB 2, Bluetooth, etc), and £150 off the Superdrive version!!! Now £699 gets you a Superdrive - good pricing by Apple for UK! Normally, a $999 machine retails for £799 in the UK, not the £550 that the exchange rate should dictate!

A Mac can now be got for £525 that is easily comaprable with a similarly specced Dell, ish. Good work Apple. And with I can really see this being the taster before new PowerBooks and PowerMacs next week at or to coincide with NAB. I'll be off to the US that week, so I'll check them out in person in the Apple Stores!

 

[cubist]

So how come Apple's website front page still shows the G5 graphic they've had up for like 3 weeks now?! This is a big improvement to the eMac line, you'd think they'd be bragging about it.

 

[512ke]

(Over) simplification

The "big" news:

Apple has an $800 computer.

Most people that I know care only about that number.

"I want an Apple but they're too expensive."

The more people buy, the larger Apple's market share becomes.

If it were $500 instead of $800...that would be "huge" news.

That's just my uninformed unsolicited two cents.

And "cents" are more important than specs for most consumers I know.

 

[Diatribe]

Right you are! I wouldn't be disappointed if you were right

Hehe, the reason why I said this the way I did is the following:
If they don't upgrade the Powermac until June they cannot update the imac to G5s either, which would make them obsolete compared to the new emacs. If they get faster, meaning 1,5/1,6GHz G4s, processors then this would mean another HUGE delay for the iMacs getting G5s which would mean that they would basically continue to be a no buy for a while.
So all I said I said for a reason.
At least this is what would make sense from an economical and marketing perspective.
As I said time will tell, though if you're right.... then I think Apple would miss out on catching up with the x86 world once again... as they always did.

 

[ipirate]

I don't understand why everyone is so down on the eMac. Yeah, its not a gaming machine, but can you really call any mac a "gaming machine"? With the upgrade its possbile to use Final Cut Express 2 to edit your video and burn it to a DVD, you can also do most of the audio cration apps and so forth. I would get an eMac to complement my iBook, I think I would love to have it. I consider myself a "power user" and I think the eMac would work fine for me, just like my iBook. No, you can't do ALL of the things that a dual G5 PowerMac system could do, but its not like I'm animating for Pixar out of my home here. I do much more than the average user, but alot of the advanced things are done via my server, like most power users. The eMac can be a very valuable tool! (check this article about it on the Mac Blog @ Wired, he agrees with me)

Plus, its cheap compared to other Macs...I wouldn't mind at all to add an eMac as my primary machine.

 

[Zaty]

So how come Apple's website front page still shows the G5 graphic they've had up for like 3 weeks now?! This is a big improvement to the eMac line, you'd think they'd be bragging about it.

The G5 banner will be replaced next week with the ad for the new superfast (G4) PowerBooks

 

[Bendit]

So how come Apple's website front page still shows the G5 graphic they've had up for like 3 weeks now?! This is a big improvement to the eMac line, you'd think they'd be bragging about it.

Apple doesn't want this to be big news. They were relunctant to sell this model to the general public but had to due to overwhelming demand. They don't want to put it center stage and take away sales from the iMac which everyone knows to be a dead product except for Apple
(except for movie set decorators of course!). Very stubborn.

And they are probably going to announce something more interesting than an upgrade to the low end education computer that will take the center spot in a few days.

 

[wPod]

I am I the only one to think that apple could find a lot of switchers if instead of an integrated system this spec of machine was available as a stand alone tower or desktop unit.

switchers, what about current users? man take 100-200 off for the integrated monitor and your left with 600-700 for a small elegant and powerful box. id buy one in a second. . . and one for my parents and one for my little bro! and think of all of the people especially large organizations (like a university) that normally re-uses monitors theyd love it, especially with the power of a 1.25ghz G4.

but man that looks like a great deal for anyone who wants an e-mac!

 

[Parikh1234]

i'd still go to a gym. need the cardio exercise, not just strength training...

Maybe i should start running with the emac strapped to my backpack....see how anti-skip it is

 

[Wash!!]

If you don't like then....

steve jobs said that they do good to break even on every iTMS song they sell after they pay the RIAA off, but they keep selling and pushing it, don't they? why? because it sells more iPods, which are over 50% pure profit for apple.

in apple-land, percieved value is much more important than actual value, whereas in the rest of the world, competition creates a much better balance of "paying for what you get."

the eMac/iMac/PBook price-to-performance discrepancies clearly illustrate this. Apple makes the most money on the products that are clearly the least "bang for the buck"

PC's aren't insanely cheaper because they are (in general) made with cheaper things or less "know-how." No, they are cheaper because they have to compete with other companies building the same things with the same materials. Apple uses the same RAM, hard drives, monitors, interface ports (mostly), graphics cards, power supplies, fans, etc., that you'll find in the average PC. They put a pretty face on it and run OS X, and expect us, their loyal customers, to pay a premium for the honor of using their stuff.

you know how much OS X is worth? 129 dollars.

Most companies exist because of their customers, and good companies appreciate the relationship, and the importance of the customer. to be honest, apple's sales/service/marketing approaches over the last couple of years have been MUCH more oriented towards profit than they have been towards customer satisfaction. They are taking advantage of our dependence on their OS and the lack of a solid, appealing alternative for the everyday creative professional.

i've started to feel a bit used of late. yes, apple needs to be competitive and yes, they need to be profitable, but just realize that steve jobs' financial security is not in question, and that apple is bringing in a lot more money than they NEED to be bringing in. If all that cash pool were being used towards development of new products, that would be one thing...but it's just sitting in the bank. The technology world needs to be constantly pushed forward, actively. In the last 6 months we've gotten, outside the software realm, very little from apple. the mini iPod, the greatest rip-off in company history, the long-overdue G5 Xserve, and now a speed-bumped eMac. Wow.

I guess i am just worried that apple is going to kill themselves and i'll be stuck without a machine to run their OS on in the future...

make no mistake, the iPod and iTMS will become a liability in the near future. the copy protection and the cost of business combined will turn the iPod's popularity into a "2000's fad" that people look back on and shake their heads about. 128k songs for a dollar a piece? bah.

Move on to use windblows, linux, solaris, or make your own and become the next "Apple computer".
I make my living using Macs, and I tried the oh so great "95%" and unless they do a complete 180º on the way it works I wouldn' t use.. heck I said it before I'll use chalk, and abacus and piece of paper before getting one of the "better, faster, boxes" people are so spoiled faster, faster, bigger, bigger, and now, now where is my 1000000000000MHz machine how come I don't have one in my desk I need it a week a go

 

[macridah]

New iMac G5's next week at NAB!!

i won't get my hopes up too high...

if they release a 20" iMac G5, i'll buy on the sameday, which means i'll get it 6 weeks later.

 

[Zaty]

Hehe, the reason why I said this the way I did is the following:
If they don't upgrade the Powermac until June they cannot update the imac to G5s either, which would make them obsolete compared to the new emacs. If they get faster, meaning 1,5/1,6GHz G4s, processors then this would mean another HUGE delay for the iMacs getting G5s which would mean that they would basically continue to be a no buy for a while.
So all I said I said for a reason.
At least this is what would make sense from an economical and marketing perspective.
As I said time will tell, though if you're right.... then I think Apple would miss out on catching up with the x86 world once again... as they always did.

Well, they can put faster CPUs and GPUs into iMacs and drop prices. This would help improve iMac sells, which are not great at the moment. With the PM delay whose reason still remains a mystery, I'm not sure if the G5 wouldn't run too hot in the iMac. They would certainly use the PPC 970 (to spare the 970FXs for PMs and Xserves). So you see, I also have reason to be skeptical.

 

[Penman]

G5 PB is coming

and emac is the cheapest computer.. this must mean that iMac, Powerbook and Powermac will soon see an upgrade with an 8x superdrive..and I think that there will be an g5 in them.

The more I think about this the clearer it gets. The G4 has nowhere to go really. If they move the iMac to 1.5GHz and the PB's get the same processor Apple will have broken their upgrade structure (with PB's a generation behind desktops and equal to their entry-level offering).

I don't know about speeds but I think that the iMac's going 1.5 GHz (soon) and the WWDC will reveal G5 PB's (running what exact processor I don't know) and Desktop upgrades. Even more likely will be G5 iMacs as I don't think Apple want to commit to a 'new' 1.5 G4 (they've had a long time to bump the G4's to 1.42 and haven't - the difference is minor).

As for drives - I don't see why they'd hold back from the fastes +/- drives available.