Apple today announced a faster, more affordable line of eMac desktop computers for home and schools, including faster PowerPC G4 processors running at up to 1.25 GHz, 333 MHz DDR memory, faster ATI Radeon graphics and USB 2.0 connectivity to peripherals. Offering even more power and performance, Apple
59 Comments
Reader Feedback
Apple Original Film ‘Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie’ among Peabody Award nominees
The Apple Original Film ‘Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie’ is honored among the first batch of Peabody Award nominees…
Apple reportedly designing its own custom artificial intelligence server processor
Apple is reportedly developing its own artificial intelligence server processor using TSMC’s 3nm process, with mass production to begin by…
Apple cuts Vision Pro production orders amid weak demand
Apple has cut its 2024 Vision Pro shipments as demand in the U.S. market has fallen sharply beyond expectations…
Apple preps biggest update to iPad Air lineup ever
Apple is widely expected to introduce a new 12.9-inch iPad Air model at its just-announced “Let Loose” special event on May 7th. That…
Apple to hold ‘Let Loose’ special event on May 7th
Apple has announced it will be holding a special event on Tuesday, May 7th at 7am PDT / 10am EDT. Apple is widely expected to announce…
The morons at cnet have done it again.
“The new model, a revamp of Apple’s top-end eMac, is the first of the line to offer the company’s SuperDrive DVD recorder/CD burner…” cnet
I don’t believe it, a computer upgrade announcement. The price point on the 1GHz eMacs looks real nice.
Nobody, you are too funny.
I get $850 for the cheapest similar dell noPC, but regardless, it must be noted that with 2.5 times the processing power and faster fsb, the dell will multitask when the emac won’t, for instance when using that fancy superdrive.
Try hyping the mac experience instead of price points, it is easier.
This must mean that up dates to imac and powerbooks are just around the corner, since now the emac has a faster processor then models of each.
Joe-“2.5 times the processing power”
How do you figure that? Are you the first to figure out the cross-platform processing power equation?
And what are the spec on the machine?
Here’s a thought experiment:
think of a company whose products you don’t like. Now think of why you don’t like that company. Now imagine spending your day on websites that promote that product, trying to convince the users of that product that it is no good. Now ask yourself: why would i spend my time in this way? I defy you to come up with a rational answer to that question. [By rational i mean an answer which other reasonable people could take up.]
I’m not trying to pick on you Joe, but your fascination with all things Apple is a little bizarre.
2.66 ghz P4, 533 fsb, 512 ram (need more because it is shared video), 80 gig hd, dvd and cd burner, os, b.
$863 before $100 mail in rebate.
I assume that mhz and fsb matter, b, or apple would not have produced the g5. It is as easy to assume that g4’s suffer in cross platform comparisons to intel and amd than the reverse.
Joe, you again?
Please note “256MB Shared DDR SDRAM at 333MHz (Performs at 266MHz for 400FSB systems)” and “IEEE 1394 Adapter” and “ntegrated Intel� 3D Extreme Graphics” and what is with 2 drives? wasting processing cycles of what should be handled by the gpu just shows how much crap these people are handing their customers who dont understand that they are getting screwed. If people really went to the “computer boot camp” in Dell’s commercials, they would call Apple, lol
Joe, NoPCZone & b,
Add in how much for iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD & Garage Band? Oh yeah, that is FREE on the eMac and they don’t make anything close for a decent price on the PC. The software bundles between the 2 leave something to be desired. Word Perfect and MS Money??? Who uses those – yuck!
Oh yeah, and the OS. I forgot about the OS. Let’s see, add about a billion dollars to convince me to use XP over OS X.
it’s been said before but worth repeating: PC’s are only cheaper if you don’t value your time or quality of life. I’m constantly amazed at how much human cost people are content to suffer in order to save a few dollars.
The eMac really is sensational value. Good job Apple!
Joe, of course they matter, but you we’re able to put a number on it!!
If, as you say, “It is as easy to assume that g4’s suffer in cross platform comparisons to intel and amd than the reverse,” then why use the processor in cross-platform comparisons?
I like to argue, Mike. I also always root for the underdog so I enjoy my niche here as well as enjoy watching apple survive. I never said I hated the company nor do I. I enjoy contradicting some of the popular assumptions around this site, like endless viruses and bsod. I really try to be truthful about what I know and think.
Finally Mike, you might value rationality more than I.
b, huh? The factor is actually 2.12, sorry. 2.5 was a blurred approximation. My point about multitasking stands, however.
All of you are right about garageband etc, quality of life etc, os etc, all individual preferences with no price comparison possible. My ORIGINAL post was to debunk (bunk?) noPC’s faulty accounting and ignoring of processor power.
“Word Perfect and MS Money??? Who uses those – yuck!”
Oh yeah, like so many more people use AppleWorks?
Though MS Money, yeah, that’s Dell climbing into Microsoft’s bung-hole.
Guilty as charged, Joe. (i never said you hated Apple, how could you, or anyone else for that matter?).
I do appreciate your lack of vitriol and rudeness, though. See you do value rationality after all. Keep up the good work. Your cause is just.
Dell killer.
All this for less than $1000
The decent video and Superdrive and flat 17″ screen are great at this price point.
Celerons are very slow.
P4s that are not overclocked are slow too. Athlon is better clock for clock. G4 would be too if it wasn’t 500MHz behind.
My last two rigs were P4s. Both gave execellent OC’s and were way faster than what I paid for. At stock speeds, both were 20% slower than comparable Athlons. I suspect the G4 – if it existed at 2 GHz would be much faster than a 2-2.4 Celeron and about the same as a P4 at these speeds.
Problem is, a P4 at these speeds will easily OC to 2.8 – 3.2 and at those speeds it is no contest.
I think the G5 needs more MHz to really shine – like the P4.
Clarification: Those speeds = 2-2.5 GHz
I know much faster chips are available.
I was right, the new Moto G4 chips were going into eMacs, look for a iBook announcement ditto. Then look for the Powerbook G5 announcement.
wait, perhaps a Powerbook G5 announcement first so most people would look to that to buy, then a new iBook G4 announcement.
What’s the real catcher if there is going to be a G5 iMac in three flavors
Joe, not to belabor this too much, but . . . but I can’t shut up yet. I agree that noPCZone could/should have mentioned this difference of processor, and you rightly called him on it (and I’m not about to say that hyperbole doesn’t have its place on MDN), but still the 2.12 is based on the gigahertz comparison which I know you don’t believe in (based on your admiration of AMD). Also the multitasking ability is derived from the operating system and processor architecture as well as the speed of the chip. For your example of using the dvd-burner and doing something else, I’d be interested and seeing results of this. Perhaps, and I’m just guessing, the mac might slow down more in the dvd burning, but the other task might be more pleasant.
I think that is where I left it, b, no one knows exactly, but there is bound to be a difference. I have used a friends cheapo 2.4 dell while helping him back up stuff and we could burn, surf, and wp simultaneously, with a slight 1-3 second hiccup at the beginning of each disk, about the same as my xp2100. It would be nice to hear a user report on the emac.
You could get the superdrive model with 8x superdrive(wow) for $899 with the educational discount. That’s great. You know what the means. Next revision of G5’s will have 8x superdrive. Also other macs. Can’t wait for new macs. No new form factor?
A headless machine would be great, but this gives people a LOT of OS X machine and a very nice CRT for a great price.
Education: $749 CD-RW/DVD, or $899 SuperDrive/80HD.
I see no reason that the eMac wouldn’t multitask while burning a DVD. OS-X is supremely capable in terms of multitasking. One would hope that DVD burning is prioritised such that it takes as much as it needs and doesn’t create coasters if the user is doing something else.
On my 400MHz G4 I always multi-tasked while burning CDs and never got a coaster. I never tried anything heavy while burning, just Mail/Surf/WP as you suggest.
There’s little doubt that the Dell wins on raw processor performance. The shared graphics is going to be a problem though. Maybe the hard drive too. We know that Apple use good components, but Dell use cheap components. What make is the hard drive, for instance ? It may be that the one in the Dell is fine, but it’s going to be pot-luck.
What’s really important is the OS and useable apps. For two years I had the option of an Athlon 1.2GHz running Win 98 or a 0.4GHz G4 (1/3rd the speed on paper) running OSX. I went for the G4 every time.
For the market the eMac is aimed at, I believe the eMac is a better choice, despite its one disadvantage in terms of raw power. In fact, raw power is relatively meaningless these days. For everyday tasks, almost any machine you can buy is fast enough with plenty of spare processor capacity left over.
But Joe is right to point out these numbers because that’s what people see. That CPU speed rules. But they see 2.6Ghz Celeron versus 2.2 P4 and probably pick the cheaper celeron (maybe with a 5400rpm drive) thinking they got a faster machine.
Dell has quality components. That’s what they’re know for. Quality components and cheap prices. They use western digital. Hywel.