New eMacs

[aswitcher]

I wouldn't mind mid-level Apple machines selling with basic (32MB) vram if they had the capacity to upgrade to better cards.

Yep, me too. Even the eMacs with an option for 64meg would be a really good move for would be gamers. Sure you can't play games on hi end settings but at least you can play them far better than the 32 meg is going to allow.

That and the screen resolution are the only 2 things that I find disappointing in what is a very nice update.

 

[mvc]

DHM where are you?

What I want to know is; where is Don't Hurt Me. He has been complaining about consumer mac's being underpowered for a while now, I would have thought he might have a contribution or two to offer about this update?

 

[Hattig]

I wouldn't mind mid-level Apple machines selling with basic (32MB) vram if they had the capacity to upgrade to better cards. Using Dell machine's integrated graphics as a counterexample is a little deceptive. If you're careful, know what you're doing, and if you build your own machine, you can get a PC for AUS $1000-2000 that has a nice graphics card and can play games in good resolutions and with the textures up.

Building your own PC is different, as mentioned above. You can build the exact specification that you want, and you don't have to provide profits to Dell (or whoever). The problem here is that Apple doesn't allow you to build your own Mac from off the shelf components.

Sadly Apple don't build hardware that appeals to what everybody wants.

Is it that putting an AGP 8x slot in mac machines makes them much more expensive to produce? I genuinely don't know, but I wish Apple machines could be upgraded to 128mb of vram, at a lower level than the "pro" offerings.

There are no integrated graphics chipsets available for PowerPC.

Hence "integrated graphics" on Macs are actually AGP connected chips, but on the motherboard instead of on a card. This is why you cannot expand any further (AGP is point-to-point, not a multi-device bus). The benefit is that the graphics chip will have local high-speed memory and not have to share system memory bandwidth with everything else. I presume that Apple saves more than a few bucks by having the functionality on the motherboard rather than having an AGP slot and a separate card (saving money is a logical choice, if limiting for the consumer).

I would like Apple to have more varied hardware. Not a massive plethora of hardware making everything complicated, but at least a new product between the eMac/iMac and PowerMac - single processor but powerful and expandable, but not too expensive.

The problem isn't the eMac/iMac being limited, but in that Apple doesn't have a mass-market computer, only specialised computers for niches (educational, movie-studio prop, professional with lots of money).

 

[areyouwishing]

I tried to read everything, but got to about page 6 and gave up..

I am appalled at Apple right now, they are ignoring a growing opportunity, the new eMac revs make this even more apparent. Take the eMac, chop the head off and make it 700-750. The only reason Apple/Stevo is not doing this is because its not sexy, if they really cared about market share, they would do this.

Look at the PowerMac G4 that they are still selling... its disgusting to see that Apple is still selling it. Less Video (even no monitor), Same RAM, Same Chip, Less Drive and how much is it selling for? $1299, sad.

I have a RevB 12" 1ghz PB and I am happy with it and I love it regardless of these new updates, I'm watching Bush's Press Conference in my parents living room, if I had an emac, it would be at home, quite the difference, and well worth the price.

 

[aldo]

Have the screens been improved yet? 1280x960 @ 70hz is NOT good for your eyesight. My 17" Mitsubishi CRT can do 1600x1200 at that refresh rate.

Also, is the HDD easy to upgrade? I'm tempted to get a Combo, slam a 250GB hdd in there OR just get a superdrive and buy another HDD for my PC and use it over the network. Choices, choices .

 

[Gyroscope]

Sweet update.They also finally come with 512 kb L2 cache G4's and DDR ram. I'll get one next week.

 

[Hattig]

Have the screens been improved yet? 1280x960 @ 70hz is NOT good for your eyesight. My 17" Mitsubishi CRT can do 1600x1200 at that refresh rate.

Can it do 1152x864 at all (i.e., is that an option in MacOS X*)? I've found this to be the best configuration for a 17" monitor personally - 1600x1200 is just miniscule! That would allow it to get a higher refresh rate surely (probably close to 80Hz)?

* Yeah, still waiting for a decently priced laptop before switching ... I have a feeling that the next iBook revision could be the one

 

[Spades]

As a 15" AlBook owner, I have to say, I don't care at all that the eMac's specs look at lot like my Powerbook's specs. So what? My powerbook is still working great. It didn't suddenly turn off and refuse to start just because the eMacs were updated.

As for people saying the eMac isn't good enough, the question is what is it not good enough for? Games? Yes, a handful and a growing number of them won't look as good without 64 or more. Professional audio and video work? Yes, it comes with too little memory for that, plus is overall not as fast as the professional systems. The average consumer? Nope. It's way more powerful than what the average consumer needs.

Most people will see no benefit from anything over 1 GHz. For most consumers, the real performance benefits come from other things like lower drive seek times, faster bus frequencies, larger caches, and video card (or integrated chips) that don't suck. FYI, a 9200 with 32 MB of RAM doesn't suck. Integrated cirrus logic that shares system memory sucks. A Radeon 9200 does not suck.

If you're not the average consumer, then why does the eMac bother you at all?

iBook+eMac does not equate to portable PB because iBook is not a PB.

True, but wouldn't that make a killer deal for consumers? Apple could offer a discount for buying both at once. Take the iBook on the road with you, then use the "full power" system to make DVDs of your vacation. No more need for a single Powerbook to do that. Combine the power of two consumer models to unleash the full power of iLife. Sounds like plot for some kind of cartoon.

 

[Mencius]

"Blistering 3D effects
To power eMac’s brilliant CRT, we’ve included an ATI Radeon 9200 graphics processor with 32MB of dedicated Double Data Rate (DDR) video memory. The Radeon processor offers dazzling 2D, 3D and video performance, a feature you’ll really appreciate when editing footage in iMovie or while playing Unreal Tournament 2004." - From the Apple store. (emphasis added)

It's the way they market things that rubs the salt in...
I really think you need more than 32MB to appreciate UT2004.
This is what they are showing to the "average consumer".

 

[Some_Big_Spoon]

This has been one of my gripes too.. I'm not a fan of Apple's "take what we've got, or nothing" approach.. I understand that they want delineation, but I'd like the option to do some after market updates (not upgrades even) to the machines.. hey, even charge me more for the option to have a better vid card, just give me the option..

If Apple listened a bit more to the customer, they might be in a better place down the line.

Yep, me too. Even the eMacs with an option for 64meg would be a really good move for would be gamers. Sure you can't play games on hi end settings but at least you can play them far better than the 32 meg is going to allow.

That and the screen resolution are the only 2 things that I find disappointing in what is a very nice update.

 

[Spades]

I do think any casual gamer will be perfectly happy as UT2004 appears on a 9200, but that's a good point. It's hardly misleading since UT2004 will run, but it might be a little disingenuous. Still, a single line in the store's marketing blurb hardly seems like enough to get upset about. Plus, the pages in the hardware section of Apple's site only talk about Unreal Tournament.

It's the way they market things that rubs the salt in...
I really think you need more than 32MB to appreciate UT2004.
This is what they are showing to the "average consumer".

 

[leftbanke7]

One question I have after reading a couple of these posts. If an eMac is a machine geared towards educational institutions and used as such (word processing, web browsing, e-mail), then what exactly is wrong with a G4 1.25G processor and a 32MB video card?

Does everything have to have a G5 and 128 MB of VRAM now to not be considered worthless?

PowerMacs? Legitimate gripe.
eMac? Come on now. Quit being picky.

 

[Rod Rod]

fan noise

i have been using an emac for the last 1.5 years and it is a great machine, i did all my video editing, web design and 3d animation projects on it, it never let me down. i am sure that these new models are great buys, but i am selling my emac right now, and i know that i will never buy one again. the only reason is that emac is the most noisy computer i have ever used. it is impossible to live in the same room with an emac, and when it is working, you can hear it from far far away. leaving it open during the night, which is crucial for the 3d renders i make, is impossible, because you can't sleep.

so, if you are thinking about buying one, please take the fan noise into account. i didn't know about it before i bought it, and i was simply shocked when i first used it in my room.

cheers,
taylan
http://portfolio.orangeslices.net/

I had an eMac before I upgraded to a PM G4 and subsequently a PM G5.

The eMac is especially loud if you're like most people (including me) and you set it up with its backside close to a bare wall. Carpeting or foam should insulate the noise somewhat. The eMac's noise bothered me too.

You could install a variable-speed fan controller. The how-to is linked in one of the posts in these forums, (search for eMac 1.33GHz).

edit:spelling

 

[El Duderino]

It's the way they market things that rubs the salt in...
I really think you need more than 32MB to appreciate UT2004.
This is what they are showing to the "average consumer".

i completely agree, i know that windows isnt as seamless as panther or am i claiming its even close, but i have a 3.0 HT P4 with a 9600 all-in-wonder (128) and when i only had 512ram it ran UT2k4 like absolute garbage, i had to shut every last program i was running just to get a decent game, not to mention it took anywhere from 3-6 minutes to load a single level. ofcourse i went ahead and bought another gig of ram and now its smooth as butter with 5 second load times.

the point im trying to get at is that there is no way i can believe that a 1.25 G4 with a 32VRAM and 256 system can run unreal tournament, premeire, photoshop etc. as seamlessly as a system like mine does now untill i see it first hand...i think i was rambling on there

dont get me wrong, mac power to all, but that it too much to swallow...and i do realize that the Unreal Tournment part was embelished but im putting of doing homework and this is just part of my procrastination

 

[Ensoniq]

Just to quickly clarify one point of my last post...

I was NOT trying to say that all machines only need 32 MB of VRAM, and that anything more than that is unneccessary. I certainly understand the value of additional VRAM for gaming, video, graphic design, etc. I am sorry if I made it seem that more than 32 MB of VRAM was completely "useless".

My point was simply that like it or not, 32 MB of VRAM is more than sufficient for GENERAL computer use...and SHOULD be more than sufficient for any properly designed software to run QUICKLY and look good.

YES...give some games 64 MB or 128 MB if you want them to look even better, run even faster, and be more detailed across the board. But if ANY program performs poorly or sluggishly with 32 MB of VRAM, I still maintain that the program should be optimized better.

But if it can't be, then fine...run it on a Dual G5 with a 128 MB graphic card. Even if you do, that does NOT mean that a Radeon 9200 w/32 MB of VRAM is a bad/slow video system. There will ALWAYS be something faster. The eMac is still a completely well-rounded, well-designed, feature rich system for it's price bracket. I REPEAT, FOR IT'S PRICE BRACKET!

 

[El Duderino]

i built my computer for less than $1200....hehe

 

[macdong]

i have but one thing for you:

you miss the "e" in "eMac".

I'm responding to everyone that seems to take exception to my posts regarding the new machine.

There are a number of reasons why I'm not happy with this new machine, but frankly to claim that I've fallen prey to the MHz myth is a bit of a stretch. The issue is that the eMac has not been updated in a very long time the percentage increase is miniscule considering that.

As far as clock rates go, when your talking about the same class processor, clock rate is very important consideration. Frankly Intel has nothing to do with this discussion. The discussion is about the usfullness of the machine in light of where software technolgies will be taking us in the future. This eMac will not have a long life span, there are simply to many built in limitations.

Besides the clock rate on the CPU you have a huge limitation with respect to the graphics chip. Lets face it it has a minimal RAM installation for OS/X'es Quartz Extreme. Not much future proofing there.

This may very well be the ideal machine to sit in place with one or two aplications that are expected to run for a few years. It is a very poor machine to buy if you expect to be able to continue to upgrade and install new software that will place more demands on the system.

Lets face it Apple delivered this machine now because they know full well that newer machines are coming out that will completely over shadow this machine. If you want to fall for this marketing practice and go out and buy one, then go ahead. Just don't come back to this forum a month or two from now when the rest of the new hardware is out and your eMac is looking pretty sad complaining that you wish you had waited.


Thanks
Dave

 

[CompUSAMacNerd]

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. 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.

Haha.. that is so damn funny. You sound like a spoiled five year old throwing a tantrum because your neighbor got a better toy.

Just because the eMac line got updated, doesn't mean they are not going to do something better for the PowerBook.

Hello McFly, can you take your eMac with you on a plane? No. You pay the money on a PB for the comfortability of portability and the fact its a sleek, professional /laptop/. Not a DESKTOP.

NO one is screwing you because Apple is refreshing their hardware line because you both a laptop a week ago. Thats just called "Life Sucks." For some reason, I don't think HP an Dell buyers cry over the fact some stupid Tower is faster than their laptop. Reality check, have you ever been a real computer consumer and noticed that Towers are /always/ faster than Laptops?

Just because Apple is unique and has a series such as iMac and eMac designed to be undergrads to their PowerTower line, doesn't mean that the Laptops /have to be faster/ than their underated line. Give the manufacturer a break. They are in a competition of themselves, they can't spit out new models every three months like HP, Compaq, an Dell. They enjoy quality over quantity. You may piss and moan about your PB, but you can almost guarantee it won't be 'obsolete' anytime soon.

So, you get over it. I'm right. I work in retail

 

[aswitcher]

"Blistering 3D effects
To power eMac’s brilliant CRT, we’ve included an ATI Radeon 9200 graphics processor with 32MB of dedicated Double Data Rate (DDR) video memory. The Radeon processor offers dazzling 2D, 3D and video performance, a feature you’ll really appreciate when editing footage in iMovie or while playing Unreal Tournament 2004." - From the Apple store. (emphasis added)

It's the way they market things that rubs the salt in...
I really think you need more than 32MB to appreciate UT2004.
This is what they are showing to the "average consumer".

Well someone needs to get a new eMac soon and run the gambit of tests!

 

[macdong]

again, you miss the "e" in "eMac".
trust me, this eMac will run Photoshop just fine.
why? because my PowerBook G3 400MHz still runs Adobe CS on Panther.
it's a bit slow, yes, but it runs.
oh, by the way, who brought up playing UT2004 on eMac?
are you feeling ok?
sure you aren't in a fever?

i completely agree, i know that windows isnt as seamless as panther or am i claiming its even close, but i have a 3.0 HT P4 with a 9600 all-in-wonder (128) and when i only had 512ram it ran UT2k4 like absolute garbage, i had to shut every last program i was running just to get a decent game, not to mention it took anywhere from 3-6 minutes to load a single level. ofcourse i went ahead and bought another gig of ram and now its smooth as butter with 5 second load times.

the point im trying to get at is that there is no way i can believe that a 1.25 G4 with a 32VRAM and 256 system can run unreal tournament, premeire, photoshop etc. as seamlessly as a system like mine does now untill i see it first hand...i think i was rambling on there

dont get me wrong, mac power to all, but that it too much to swallow...and i do realize that the Unreal Tournment part was embelished but im putting of doing homework and this is just part of my procrastination

 

[oingoboingo]

There will ALWAYS be something faster. The eMac is still a completely well-rounded, well-designed, feature rich system for it's price bracket. I REPEAT, FOR IT'S PRICE BRACKET!

Ensoniq, I totally agree with you on that. I wasn't sure where you were originally going with the rest of your previous post though...it seemed a little out of whack The Radeon 9200 is quite a capable entry level GPU, and 32MB should be enough in the context of the eMac for most uses. Many x86 machines at entry level are stuck using slow integrated 'Intel Extreme' graphics with a shared memory architecture (although to be fair, many of them come with an AGP slot for later upgrading).

Still, 64MB of VRAM couldn't hurt in the eMac...but in any case, the Radeon 9200 is a very welcome improvement over the fossilised Radeon 7500 previously used.

 

[sonyrules]

Nice little system for the price, And its got more than enough power to do most of todays apps, I dont know about game, But i am sure photoshop will run nice on it and Final Cut Pro.

And its about time the made 256 Standerd on it... 128 was weak....

 

[Bhennies]

You people are a bunch of whiners, good god get a life already!...so shut up already...you morons...relax already...get a grip on life people.......for now shut it...go back to your whining.

Jesus Christ man, what's your deal?

 

[elgruga]

Now all they have to do is to make it without the CRT tube, and we have a $499 eMac and we can choose our own display.

 

[elgruga]

and its quite a good deal just as it is.