“The holiday shopping season is upon us – the National Retail Federation says $23 billion was spent at stores nationwide last weekend – and the choice of a gift computer might be in your sights. Two recommendations of computers to buy, with one machine earning my annual ‘Computer of the Year’ designation, and another being an impressive runner-up, though a different kind of product,” Mark Kellner writes for The Washington Times.
“And the winner is … Apple’s iMac G5. It will cost close to $2,100 to get the supersized 20-inch model with extra RAM and a wireless keyboard and mouse. That’s a relatively high price in this age of far-less-expensive Windows-based machines. But Apple Computers iMac G5 is a very impressive machine. It earns top honors from this column, and might well earn a top spot on your holiday shopping list,” Kellner writes.
“Beyond its Space Age looks – stark white plastic frame, suspended on a metal easel, with a supersharp LCD display — is some Space Age technology. The PowerPC G5 chip is a supercomputer-in-waiting with 64-bit processing power that cuts through applications like a hot knife through butter,” Kellner writes.
Full article here.
Wow. The word “gushing” almost comes to mind. If that article doesn’t sway some PCers to switch, nothing will.
The only bummer is that right after he recommends an emachine for 599 as a “strong runner up”. Given the two side by side, a lot of people will again opt out for the cheapo unit and suffer the consequences.
It would have also been cool if he would have mentioned the no viruses, great compatibility, and extra-ordinary ease of use of OS X. This is all kind of looking a gift horse in the mouth though. Great review overall!
e-Machines was the runner-up in case you were wondering.
oops, too late
lol.. gotta be quick arouind here Bobby. At least your post was meaningful, not “first post!!11!!”
Second place should have been given to the iBook. It would be better value and more reliable than an e-Machines PC which would likely need upgrades soon after the purchase.
“It’s at the other end of the price spectrum and it runs Windows XP Home Edition, not the Mac OS. But the EMachines is an ideal home computer for a Windows user.”
Clearly puts Mac on the pedestal and Windows as OK if you can’t afford Mac or are happy with ‘an’ alternative.
Hope others pick-up on this spot-on analysis…
EMachines as a runner up? It’s $600 for the box and then you have to buy a monitor which can add another $200. An eMac at $800 is a better choice and you do get Mac OS X with it.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
“It will cost close to $2,100 to get the supersized 20-inch model with extra RAM and a wireless keyboard and mouse.”
Why does he have to overinflate the price by adding the wireless keyboard and mouse in there? Does the average reader need a wireless keyboard and mouse? I’d agree with maybe the extra RAM, but come on, it’s like he’s trying to make it look more expensive. In the full article, he does mention that you can get the entry level 17″ model for $1299, but IMHO, he should have lead with the low price and then finished off with a recommendation as to why upgrading to the $2100 configuration is worth the money. Many people might not even get past that sentence saying to themselves “Whoa, $2100! Macs are still too expensive!” and skip the rest of the review.
Porsche or Ferrari could be named car of the year, but few could afford it and settle for a Ford or Chevy instead…
same holds true for computers.
Overreact much, Andy C.?
The thing most people don’t seem to understand about those cheap PCs is that they usually come with a Celeron, not a Pentium. The Celeron isn’t worth the silicon it’s made from. You might as well have a box powered by a hamster in a wheel. And the Dell ads use a Celeron badge as though it’s something to be proud of! The G3 is still a far superior processor to the Celeron and it’s been dropped for some time now.
One thought on the car analogy that always gets used – Apple often gets compared to BMW or Mercedes. In Consumer Reports’ 2005 New Car Buying Guide, BMW and Mercedes (as well as most other European luxury cars) get dismal reviews, especially on reliability. It looks like we’ll have to start comparing Apple to Lexus and Acura now!
Andy C.. that was not an overreaction.. this is a backhanded compliment..
perpetuating the myth that macs are too expensive.. and overpriced.. and slow, etc..
at least he didn’t say “the mac sucks for games but it has office on it…” to get the trifecta of mac myths
Can we be a little bit less overreacting? The article is full of praise of the iMac G5. He did mention the least pricey iMac and its specs. Could it be possible that he chose the top of the line with all nice extras because he likes having its full user experience and performance?
If you start to jump at any writer, pretty soon you’ll not get any coverage of the Mac in the media.
ndelc
“The thing most people don’t seem to understand about those cheap PCs is that they usually come with a Celeron, not a Pentium. The Celeron isn’t worth the silicon it’s made from. . .”
Too true. The milk and cookies were coming out my nose the first time I saw the ‘Dells use Celeron’ ad. Try doing two things at once on one of those POS processors.
Effword: I don’t feel I’m overreacting. I, like Mike, think that this article may help perpetuate the myth that “Macs are more expensive” more than it helps sell iMacs. If the main point a reader takes away from the article is “iMac..$2100..relatively high price in this age of far-less-expensive Windows-based machines” then the article may do more harm than good. The way it reads, the 17″ model is not worthy of “Computer of the Year”. He makes it sound like you have to spend all this extra money to get it there.
I’ve seen both the 17″ and 20″ models, and I almost think the 17″ model is nicer because it is so much smaller. One drawback of having the computer mounted to the back of the screen is that the computer’s size is relative to the screen’s. Same problem with notebooks. Sure it is nice ot have a 17″ screen on a PowerBook, but the overall computer size grows along with it…
My 2�…
I agree with Andy C. Great praise, then damned right up front with the inflated price of the top model WITH options. At the same time the eMachine is priced without a monitor and well after the reader has stopped reading does he mention the astounding bargain that is the 17 inch iMac. Methinks there was method to his madness – the message is everybody would like the Cadillac but regular folks would be better served by the affordable Windows horse and buggy.
PC users inevitably end up spending more on their “cheap” computers for hardware upgrades and software updates than anyone buying a Mac that comes with all the software they need. Of course there are not as many software to steal with P2P software on the Mac so one of the most common justifications for buying PCs is to be “more compatible”. In the end, you get what you pay for.