New eMacs

[Hattig]

The FX 5200 and the 9200 are approximately in the same class. If you consider the 5200 good enough, then the eMac wins out again since it already comes with an equivalent card. No need to upgrade!

You can't upgrade the Dell anyway, the low end ones use the 82845GV chipset which doesn't support external AGP. You'd have to use a PCI graphics card, and the selection of these is rather limited, and you can't get many that perform better than a Radeon 9200 anyway.

 

[billyboy]

I just bought a last generation eMac to use as a web kiosk. As long as you upgrade the ram to 256 (128 isn't enough), it's plenty fast enough for web browsing and email. Surprisingly, with Panther installed the OS seems on par with the XP machines we use in the office. Not as sluggish as I expected.

iTunes rips and ecodes CDs at a respectable rate... about half the speed of my dual G5. And while I'm not a computer gamer (I've always felt consoles are for games and computers are for work), I did test some of the included games, and they all seemed to work fine. But really, no one should be buying an eMac just to play games... you'd be better off buying an xbox or PS2.

Haven't tested iMovie, but Garageband works okay (it's sluggish... but it's sluggish on my G5!).

Overall, I am impressed by the performance... it exceeded my expectations. And now that Apple has updated the eMac's speed (25% faster processor, larger cache, and faster ram should net a real world increase of 30% or more), I won't hesitate recommending eMacs to my family and friends. In fact, I intend to buy 6 more for my company this week.

Thankyou for a voice of reason. Sounds like an eMac could keep a non power user with a Playstation very happy

 

[form]

The FX 5200 and the 9200 are approximately in the same class. If you consider the 5200 good enough, then the eMac wins out again since it already comes with an equivalent card. No need to upgrade!

Besides, even if kids' games are requiring more resources, they still can't match Unreal Tournament's requirements. A 9200 will be good enough for any k-12 computer for a long time. It might not make sense for a college, but if the college doesn't provide at least one lab that's at least close to the industry standard, then that school is too cheap.

The upgrade would cost $50-$80, which is less than the $300 price difference for an eMac. Plus, you're getting 64 or even 128mb of graphics ram. Second, the performance of similar cards on PC have been noted as faster than equivalents on Mac, so what you think wouldn't be able to handle so-and-so because it wouldn't on a Mac, might do fine on a PC. Check requirements for games.

UT 2004:

Mac Minimum System Requirements: Macintosh 933MHz/G4-G5 or faster processor, Mac OS X v10.2.8 or higher, 256MB RAM, 32MB AGP Video Card, DVD Drive, 6GB hard disk space.

PC Minimum System Requirements
Windows 98/Me/2000/XP; Pentium III or AMD Athlon 1.0 GHz processor or faster; 128 MB RAM minimum; 3.5 GB free HD space; Any Windows-compatible video card.

Note that 2.4Ghz+ processors are the very lowest they go in those $499 (even one for $339) comps at dell. You can buy 2 of those and upgrade both of their graphics, for the price of one emac.

Upon reading about the non AGP supporting chipsets from another post, I located the confirmation for this; I then checked the next in line, a dell for $499, with a 865G chipset, which supports 8xAGP. Still much cheaper than the eMac. Also, a custom built pc is a better value, as well.

 

[kirk26]

Thankyou for a voice of reason. Sounds like an eMac could keep a non power user with a Playstation very happy

Well, considering it's basically on par with the PowerBooks now and $1,000 cheaper!

 

[kirk26]

The upgrade would cost $50-$80, which is less than the $300 price difference for an eMac. Plus, you're getting 64 or even 128mb of graphics ram. Second, the performance of similar cards on PC have been noted as faster than equivalents on Mac, so what you think wouldn't be able to handle so-and-so because it wouldn't on a Mac, might do fine on a PC. Check requirements for games.

UT 2004:

Mac Minimum System Requirements: Macintosh 933MHz/G4-G5 or faster processor, Mac OS X v10.2.8 or higher, 256MB RAM, 32MB AGP Video Card, DVD Drive, 6GB hard disk space.

PC Minimum System Requirements
Windows 98/Me/2000/XP; Pentium III or AMD Athlon 1.0 GHz processor or faster; 128 MB RAM minimum; 3.5 GB free HD space; Any Windows-compatible video card.

Note that 2.4Ghz+ processors are the very lowest they go in those $499 (even one for $339) comps at dell. You can buy 2 of those and upgrade both of their graphics, for the price of one emac.

Where'd you get your UT 2004 requirements for PC from? Not from the USA version I see.

 

[Mike Teezie]

What a great deal!

$1000 bucks for an Apple built machine that runs OS X and burns DVDs? (faster than anyother mac might I add)

If I could afford it I would buy one for my mom and dad right now. This is a very good move by Apple methinks. I'm not one to speculate what every single upgrade means for the rest of the line.

I just want the new Powermacs to come out so people will be dumping their old Dual 1.8s. Then I can score one on Ebay for a good price, buy some Applecare, and be a happy camper on OS X again.

 

[El Duderino]

PC Minimum System Requirements
Windows 98/Me/2000/XP; Pentium III or AMD Athlon 1.0 GHz processor or faster; 128 MB RAM minimum; 3.5 GB free HD space; Any Windows-compatible video card.

although you forgot the caption that reads after it "(1.2 or higher recomended) (256 mb ram recomended) and (64mb video card recomended)

for me, this translates into...sure you can use your baseline video card for a "hiccupy" game with all sorts of skips and slow load times and thats with the game settings at lowest quality but if you want a good game you better buy a PM G5 or a pc with upgradable options

 

[Hattig]

Note that 2.4Ghz+ processors are the very lowest they go in those $499 (even one for $339) comps at dell. You can buy 2 of those and upgrade both of their graphics, for the price of one emac.

Upon reading about the non AGP supporting chipsets from another post, I located the confirmation for this; I then checked the next in line, a dell for $499, with a 865G chipset, which supports 8xAGP. Still much cheaper than the eMac. Also, a custom built pc is a better value, as well.

The Dimension 2400 is the cheapest desktop I can see on Dell's US website, at $449 default. The 2.4GHz Celeron will perform like the 1.25GHz G4 I'd guess (if a 2.8GHz performs like a 1.6GHz Duron). Configure it with XP Pro (to match Mac OS X), add the Plus! Media pack (to match iLife), double the memory to 256MB, upgrade the drive to a CDRW/DVD combo drive (note not DVDR!), minimal support options (i.e., the cheapest), Optical mouse, Firewire.... I got a price of $754. Sadly non-upgradable graphics, you're stuck with the integrated graphics. That includes a 10% off discount that end today. So it will cost more than an eMac tomorrow.

The next system up starts at $674 before you make it usable.

Where are you finding those prices you quote?

Yeah, a build-it yourself AMD system will come out at a fraction of the cost of the eMac, and will perform a lot better.

edit: ah, you are looking in the business section. The lowest configuration doesn't include audio, doesn't include a monitor, basic CD drive ... terrible. Making it usable in a fair manner took the cost up to $1111.

 

[Escher]

Still want a pizza box version.

Yup. I want my pizza box (or any other shape) eMac, without the darn CRT. I already have a nice LCD on my desk. Don't need the stinky CRT. I would even be happy to pay exactly the same price as for the CRT version. Apple: Give me my headless eMac already!

Escher

 

[jade]

The Dimension 2400 is the cheapest desktop I can see on Dell's US website, at $449 default. The 2.4GHz Celeron will perform like the 1.25GHz G4 I'd guess (if a 2.8GHz performs like a 1.6GHz Duron). Configure it with XP Pro (to match Mac OS X), add the Plus! Media pack (to match iLife), double the memory to 256MB, upgrade the drive to a CDRW/DVD combo drive (note not DVDR!), minimal support options (i.e., the cheapest), Optical mouse, Firewire.... I got a price of $754. Sadly non-upgradable graphics, you're stuck with the integrated graphics. That includes a 10% off discount that end today. So it will cost more than an eMac tomorrow.

The next system up starts at $674 before you make it usable.

Where are you finding those prices you quote?

Yeah, a build-it yourself AMD system will come out at a fraction of the cost of the eMac, and will perform a lot better.

edit: ah, you are looking in the business section. The lowest configuration doesn't include audio, doesn't include a monitor, basic CD drive ... terrible. Making it usable in a fair manner took the cost up to $1111.

My cheapest Dell had a p4...I can't find any Celerons.

AMD chips are always faster..the top clock speed they have now is 2.16 or something like that. So clock speed and comparing AMD Intel doesn't hold a 1:1 ratio.

Actualy the price of the emac is fairly decent...it is just potential future performance is better on the Dell....and that is the main point of the arguement.

 

[jtalborough]

Upgrading a G4 from a eMac

Lately I’ve been thinking about upgrading my Powermac (G4 450 Sawtooth AGP Graphics) The only thing is those upgrade cards from sonnet, Other World Computing, ect are expensive and with the upgrade to the eMacs I can get a whole new computer for only a couple hundered more (screen, drive, RAM, DVD-R ect). My question is if I purchase a new eMac can I swap out the G4 processor into my Powermac (I need the PCI slots for protools) and then hopefully swap my G4 450 into the new eMac? Is this possible and does anyone have experience doing it? Thanks

 

[Dave the Great]

Yup. I want my pizza box (or any other shape) eMac, without the darn CRT. I already have a nice LCD on my desk. Don't need the stinky CRT. I would even be happy to pay exactly the same price as for the CRT version. Apple: Give me my headless eMac already!

Escher

Hey, you can get a headless eMac right here http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APP...JmiB0JTAbO5r5w/0.0.7.1.0.5.21.1.8.1.0.0.0.1.0

It will cost you about $500 more though. Hey, but at least you don't get the display.

Have they just forgotten to update the price on the g4 systems? Now with the eMac starting at $799 with about the same specs, I would think you could pick these old G4 systems for ~599 - 650.

Also, is the HardDrive 5400 or 7200? I could not find it listed. It just says ATA100.

And I thought there were some new G4 chips that were up to 1.5. Are these them? If so, how come they didn't put 1.5 chips in them right away? I would think after a year, they wouldn't take baby steps with the upgrade.

Don't get me wrong. I think its a great update plus $100 price drop on the top model. But, if the 1.5 chips are available, why not use them? Also, why is there no option for 64MB graphics? That seems a little bizarre?

 

[kgarner]

Lately I’ve been thinking about upgrading my Powermac (G4 450 Sawtooth AGP Graphics) The only thing is those upgrade cards from sonnet, Other World Computing, ect are expensive and with the upgrade to the eMacs I can get a whole new computer for only a couple hundered more (screen, drive, RAM, DVD-R ect). My question is if I purchase a new eMac can I swap out the G4 processor into my Powermac (I need the PCI slots for protools) and then hopefully swap my G4 450 into the new eMac? Is this possible and does anyone have experience doing it? Thanks

Not anywhere near 100% on this, but I highly doubt it. The processor daughter cards are unlikely to have compatible connections.

 

[Hattig]

Actualy the price of the emac is fairly decent...it is just potential future performance is better on the Dell....and that is the main point of the arguement.

Well after pricing up the expandable option to match the low-end iMac option, you are paying $300 for this privelege (and that was utilising various free upgrades that might stop being offered) - sure, you do get a reasonably good processor (2.8GHz P4) and dual-channel memory though.

This is where Apple need to launch an expandable single-G5 system, in the $1200 price bracket at 1.8GHz say, with AGP 8x, PCI and all the nice things. A lineup something like the following

$799 eMac combodrive 1.25GHz 256MB 40GB
$999 eMac superdrive 1.25GHz 256MB 80GB
$1299 iMac combodrive 1.6GHz G5 256MB 80GB 15" ($1199 if 1.5GHz G4)
$1499 iMac superdrive 1.8GHz G5 512MB 120GB 17"

$1199 ?Mac combodrive 1.8GHz G5 512MB 80GB (monitor extra)
$1399 ?Mac superdrive 2.0GHz G5 512MB 120GB (monitor extra)
$1599 PowerMac superdrive dual 2.0 Ghz G5 512MB 120GB
...

(the prices might be too low for some of these, thinking in dollars isn't natural and they are so worthless these days)

 

[aswitcher]

why are so many people complaining about 32 MB VRAM?

more is better, always, of course, but i don't hear anyone comparing this 32 MB VRAM in the eMac to integrated graphics often found in similarly priced PCs. if you are the type not minding blowing (my opinion) several hundreds of dollars on a video card so you can run the greatest games, then eMac is not meant for you.

I think they might have got some mileage out of a third model in an eMac Super "Deluxe" with a 64MB VRAM card, maybe a faster processor (1.33?, 1.42?), 512 base RAM (single stick), 160 Gig HD...

 

[apalmleis]

Complaining

Wow, 430+ replies and a majority of them are complaints. The emac is not meant to be a gaming computer, it is an educational computer!! They don't need great graphic cards. They are not meant for gaming. Name one educational software that won't run decently on it. And people comparing the new eMacs to other apple computers (iMac, Powerbook, etc), all I have to say is they all will be upgraded, in due time. Comparing apple and dells... 2 different fruits. It would be like comparing living in Texas or California... each person has their perference. The cost is different, and there are pros and cons to each. And those complaining about a g5 not being in the emac... I am not even going to try to reason with them.

When Apple updates something else in the next couple of weeks, which I am confident they will, I wonder if they will get so much critisism. Maybe Apple should work the upgrades from the top to bottom of the line, but they didn't. It just makes me excited about what the new iMac, powerbook and G5 tower will be in the next couple of weeks/months. Hold your britches!!

 

[Lancetx]

<snip>
Note that 2.4Ghz+ processors are the very lowest they go in those $499 (even one for $339) comps at dell. You can buy 2 of those and upgrade both of their graphics, for the price of one emac.

Upon reading about the non AGP supporting chipsets from another post, I located the confirmation for this; I then checked the next in line, a dell for $499, with a 865G chipset, which supports 8xAGP. Still much cheaper than the eMac. Also, a custom built pc is a better value, as well.

Sadly though, nothing Dell sells will run OS X, so I personally wouldn't care if they were selling them for $99, I wouldn't buy one. I'm not sure why these arguments brew here so often because this entire exercise is like comparing apples and oranges anyway (pardon the pun). The fact is, if you much prefer OS X over Windows, it doesn't really matter how much cheaper the Dell or custom built PCs are because they aren't an option anyway if you only want OS X.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

This is the update akin to the iPod/iMac updates at the beginning of last September. The 8x Superdrive is the obvious clue.

Power Mac, PowerBook and iMac updates next week at or simaltaneously with NAB. PowerMac has 8x Superdrive, PB has 4x. PB remains G4. Price drop on PowerBooks (espcially outside US, more in line with exchange rate, like the new eMacs).

Also next week, if we're lucky - iBooks too. iMac possibly G5 and slight redesign, but I'm not getting too hopeful here.

In fact, scrap that - definintely iMac updates of some form. For example, currently: 1.25GHz eMac with combo drive - £549. 1GHz iMac 15" combo drive - £999. The eMac has a higher resolution and is more powerful, CRT granted, but nearly half the price. Meanwhile, for 3 times the price (£1499) you can get a 17" iMac Superdrive with the same 1.25GHz processor ---> iMac updates next week.

 

[aswitcher]

In fact, scrap that - definintely iMac updates of some form. For example, currently: 1.25GHz eMac with combo drive - £549. 1GHz iMac 15" combo drive - £999. The eMac has a higher resolution and is more powerful, CRT granted, but nearly half the price. Meanwhile, for 3 times the price (£1499) you can get a 17" iMac Superdrive with the same 1.25GHz processor ---> iMac updates next week.

A G5 iMac new form factor next week would be pretty timely. A minor G4 bump is going to look a bit lame. They have had design specs for a year+ to redesign the iMac so I think its doable by now. Is this event really big enough for a new form factor Apple machine?

If they do go G5 I wonder if they will push more than a single 1.6 or maybe 1.8, because its going to kill the PM1.6 dead I would think if they go that high. Here's hoping for 4 ram slots...

 

[jettredmont]

I have to take exception to a number of issues raised here.

First 32MB is a minimal configuration for todays software and we are speaking of OS/X here. As you may well know there are programs that demand more. So in effect Apple is marketing a machine that cannot meet the demands of todays user applications nor does it give you much room for future implementations of user software or OS/X features.

While I would agree that much of the game software ported to the Mac is sloppy it is a mistake to label all programs using more than 32 MB of ram as sloppy. There are very real and good uses for that VRAM beyond Quartz Extremes usages. To not have that RAM available is a mistake.

Okay, I'll bite. Please educate me: what are the uses for large amounts of VRAM beyond:

1) Quartz Extreme
2) Games

Please name apps if you can.

Also, remember the "e" in eMac stands for "Education". These aren't for 24-hour Unreal Tournament deathmatches. These are for looking things up online and playing Reader Rabbit.

Third the Radeon 9200 is not a competive processors for installation in a new machine and certianly won't be considered fast when video transitions to new technology in a few months.

eMachines has a GeForce 4 MX standard (far inferior to th Radeon 9200)
Compaq starts with integrated Intel graphics, and baby-steps up through nVidia's current 5xxx lineup.
Dell uses Intel 3D Extreme integrated graphics in their budget line.

Frankly anyone looking at a PC purchase would do well to stay away from this machine, if they expect to get a good payback out of their money spent.

Oddly enough, I think the exact opposite is true. If games aren't your primary obsession (and, I think, as a Mac user we've pretty much pre-selected that obsession out), this is a good, solid machine. It is more durable than just about anything else out there, from any company. It has more than enough horsepower for office/internet/kids' games/etc (even the ole 866MHz models had more than enough horsepower there). While you can get an eMachine cheaper, you won't have the solid hardware or software.

 

[jettredmont]

"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".

Yeah, but Michael Dell says the average consumer designs jet engines on their Dells ... Marketing speak is always a bit out of reach of reality, no matter what company is spouting it ...

 

[aswitcher]

Okay, I'll bite. Please educate me: what are the uses for large amounts of VRAM beyond:

1) Quartz Extreme
2) Games

Please name apps if you can.

What about photo and video work. Does that tap into the graphics card much. Or in other words does iPhoto and iMovie work better with larger and faster graphics cards?

 

[dontmatter]

On the vram debate.... I don't know anything about it, but if this is relevant-

I'm pissed that I have apple's flagship portable (17 in. PB) but running apple's flagship application (itunes) it can't keep up on the smoothing on lots of the graphics effects. Sure, the visualizer looks insanely cool, and doesn't even take being stoned, but some of the effects just look crappy. And, I don't know if it's software or hardware, but what's with the lines you see on lots of the effects, one horizontal across the middle of the screen, one verticle? I assume it's making it's work easier by only calculating stuff for part of the screen, and then just copying the mirror image, but why can't they do that smoothly?

 

[jettredmont]

Nope didn't mis that little 'e' at all. In fact considering the market that these machines are targetted at, makes them all the more appalling.

Consider that your tax dollars are being spent on a machine like this. Do you really want your tax dollars being spent on a machine that has technology that will be more than three years old by the time it is first used in an institution? Do you really want your tax dollars being spent on hardware that barely meets the requirements of modern software and has little ability to expand to support future software? Remember in an educational environment these machines will be around for a long time.


It is really a question of value and long term usefullness. If a local district where to suggest the purchase of such hardware I would have to object. It would be a bit like going to a store to buy a ham and finding when you took the wrapper off that there was little meat on the bone. In essence Apple is selling a container that is a little thin on meat relative to the demands of the modern world.

thanks
Dave

I deal with schools every day. People are generally more upset when someone bullies through an order for PC's with a mid-to-high-end video card and more RAM and HD than necessary, because it is frankly 75% wasted on the software the computers will be used for.

What would a school use a high-end video card for? Please do tell. Would it make Internet studies more effective? Would it make self-learning programs run better? Would it make teachers' gradebooks easier to use? Would it make Word more efficiently handle footnotes?

You sound exactly like the people who end up overspending school IT budgets because they feel for some reason that if they don't max out the memory and hard drive Safari and Reader Rabbit just won't run!

The eMac is targetted for people with a known need, and their egos firmly enough in check that they don't need to buy up to the Maseratti to make up for other deficiencies. The 'e' people generally don't have budgets to fritter away on "but maybe someday" hypotheticals which only tangentially might possibly affect how they teach their students.

 

[thatwendigo]

This is where Apple need to launch an expandable single-G5 system, in the $1200 price bracket at 1.8GHz say, with AGP 8x, PCI and all the nice things. A lineup something like the following

Let me adjust that for you slightly:


$799 eMac combodrive 1.25GHz 256MB 40GB
$999 eMac superdrive 1.25GHz 256MB 80GB
$1499 iMac superdrive 1.6GHz G5 256MB 80GB Radeon 9600 15"
$1899 iMac superdrive 1.8GHz G5 512MB 120GB Radeon 9600 17"
$2099 iMac superdrive 2.0GHz G5 512MB 160GB Radeon 9600 20"
$1399 cMac superdrive single 2.0GHz G5 512MB 80GB 9600XT (monitor extra)
$1599 cMac superdrive single 2.5GHz G5 512MB 120GB 9600XT (monitor extra)
$1999 cMac superdrive single 3.0GHz G5 512MB 120GB 9600XT (monitor extra)
$1999 PowerMac superdrive dual 2.0GHz G5 512MB 120GB 9800 Pro
$2499 PowerMac superdrive dual 2.5GHz G5 512MB 160GB 9800 Pro
$2999 PowerMac superdrive dual 3.0GHz G5 1GB 250GB 9800XT

cMac for consumer macintosh, perhaps?

Note that this is my ideal lineup, and would probably only happen if there were some kind of special deals cut with nVidia and ATI, along with a few other companies. IBM would need to sell the 970 kind of cheaply, but it would be a gamble on lower prices versus return on inventory that Big Blue is far more prepared to soak up than Apple is (And help with the damn motherboarrd designs! Who else is buying these things, IBM?). I don't forsee this actually happening, but it's what would make the mac even more competitive than it is, and it would get some of the whiners to shut the hell up!

(the prices might be too low for some of these, thinking in dollars isn't natural and they are so worthless these days)

Tell me about it.