Apple is on the verge of announcing a trio of speed-bumped eMacs, sources confirmed to Think Secret. ‘Highly reliable’ sources said that Apple’s consumer eMac lineup will be expanded to three models at 800MHz and 1GHz, and with larger hard drives. But other changes are also in store.
Apple to Boost eMacs to 1GHz, Add Third Model
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Anyone own one of these? I’ve been thinking about buying a mac and I really can’t afford a TiBook or to drop $1600+ on a PowerMac…
But…if they work, and work well…I might consider spending $1000 on one of these.
I have to say that it is a “joke” from Apple to ship
the eMac with 128MB RAM booting in X only.
Also I have to say that the screen refreshrate of the build-in
crt is really bad. I hat a chance to test an eMac some weeks
ago and it is only possible to display the hightest resolution (1280×960) at 75Hz. That’s too less – the screen flickers noticeable. Another issue is, that the eMac has a large radial-fan in the back of it’s case which is way to noisy.
If you think of a class-room equipped with 20 eMacs, you get a really noisy room.
Apple shoud fix this – than the eMac might be a success.
* quiet down the fan
* make 256MB Ram the default
* pump up the refresh rate to 100Hz at 1280×960
Ralf.
I would try to get a second-hand flat panel iMac instead of an eMac.
Ralf.
> eMac with 128MB RAM booting in X only.
The small iBook also ships with 128 MBs. I believe that the minimum should be 256 MB indeed these days.
> Also I have to say that the screen refresh rate of the build-in CRT is really bad. I had a chance to test an eMac some weeks ago and it is only possible to display the hightest resolution (1280×960) at 75Hz. That’s too less – the screen flickers noticeable.
I think that the highest res/refresh is actually 1280×1024@72 Hz on the eMac. And I agree that it is indeed too low. However, instead of bumping up the CRT specs to 80-85 Hz for that resolution which would also bump up the price considerably ($30-$40 more) I would just recommend to run that monitor to the factory defaults which are not 1280×1024, but 1152×864@80 Hz. Yes, the resolution is not as much, but the eye strain is smaller. And if for some reason you need 1280, you can always bump the res up temporarily (e.g. a game, or a test). But Apple should have been shipping these monitors at 1152×864 IMHO.
I used an eMac at 1280 for half an hour some months ago and it was painful at 72 Hz.
Can I get a 1 Ghz iLamp for under a grand?
Where??
Fortunately, I don’t have to work with it. I have to post here because the refresh-thinggy is really getting me started. My girl-friend is sitting in front of a dual 800 MHz G4 at work with a 22″ CRT attached. It will not go beyond 75 Hz. I have checked this with the ATi site specs. You say: Mac is not for gaming + all the other shortcomings — fine with me. *BUT* if you do want to sell me this piece of crap as a niche product for graphics PROs, then I MUST MUST MUST DEMAND that some minimum standards are met, especially at the usual Apple price tags. If it is my job to sit in front of a screen all day long, then at least it should NOT blind me. However, she comes home with sore eyes every day. I can only laugh at people still defending this retarded product in the third millenium.
I was curious whether you would be better off with a recent card, so I checked for the specs of a Radeon 970 Pro, it does:
1280 x 960 with 75
1280 x 1024 with 85
The build in 7500 will not go beyond 75 at any resolution. I really should say that I pitty all Mac users, but frankly: I don’t. You always get what you deserve, so live with it.
The PC-version of the 9700 pro does 120 MHz !!
I got news for you, Mac-heads: A pro System does NOT start with a pretty case, it starts with decent hardware.
Even for this single reason I would NEVER get myself a Mac.
PS: And no, she does not need to consult with the doc, she can sit in front of the screen the entire weekend at home without getting sore eyes.
..that pros are working with eMacs ? Because the other ones are supposed to be used with TFT’s, which don’t have the refresh-rate problem 😉
No article has been posted on this site about Apple’s potential/probable music service, and possible buy-out of Universal Music.
Were they just rumours? Maybe, and if so, fine. I can understand that you don’t want to post every rumour that’s floats across the web about apple or M$ or Linux or whatever.
But now this. Using Thinksecret as a source?? Yes there are often fairly reliable, but they are a rumour site nevertheless. The Apple-Universal deal was first brought to the public by the LA Times….surely they are no less reputable or reliable than thinksecret!?!?
Inconsistent, imho.
L.
These machines would be overpriced at half the price.
The following should be the <minimum> specification.
512 meg RAM
GeForce4 MX
1.4GHz G4 (~athlon 1.8 GHz)
Combo drive
they are specs for a low end PC which sells for around US$600.
The 800MHz eMacs are really only US$300 machines.
To who do you talking to?
The thread here goes about the (rumored) eMac upgrade – not more not less. In you post you confuse a lot of things.
eMac/PowerMac specs, vertical refresh rate and frequency bandwith for example.
I can ensure you the (Mac) Radeon 9700 PRO can get a higher vertical refresh than 75Hz. Check your screen-settings!
Even the old 16MB ATI Rage Pro in my 450MHz PowerMac can go up to 85Hz at 1280×1024. I bet the 9700 can go over 100Hz – just choose the correct monitor setting.
Ralf.
Well you got to read what I write. I am not talking abou eMac in context with pros – I clearly talk about Dual G4.
@ Ralf: I did check as I stated as well. Obviously, you did not. Here we go:
http://mirror.ati.com/products/mac/radeon9700prome/specs.html
Can the “PC-heads” do anything but bitch about Macs?
Clearly not. It’s not like anyone is making them use macs. I cannot understand the psycology of a group which is on top to put down the underdog. Where is the sense in that? What’s the point? It’s not like you have anything to proove.
this must be apple’s rumoured time machine, still stuck on April 1. Talking Apple is fun. They are not the underdog. They are increasingly stupid tho, and expect their market to remain 3x as clueless.
I was thinking the exact same thing. The potential buyout of universal music as reported by the LA times seems like much bigger news.
Personally, i hope it does not happen. The music industry sucks and it is going to be further debilitated by an army of MP3 swappers, web based independents, lack of choice, and the horrible horrible music that they put out. The mainstream record companies have not put out anything decent since independent went mainstream back in the early 90’s since then its been downhill culiminating in fake punk, brittany and boy bands. ugh. No wonder elvis had one of the best selling albums in 2002.
Apple is better off trying to work to disrupt the music scene using modern technology and working with innovators instead of the fawn-like music execs.
simple as that
if they are better, they aren’t “overpriced”
I thought people used XEmacs these days.
What’s the point though? I haven’t heard a mac user say that macs are better than PC’s for ages, not since they actually were! Now all I hear are Mac users dispelling some of the fake rumors about Macs (such as 800Mhz G4 = 800Mhz x86 with now Altivec taken into account). Also, I don’t think all macs are overpriced too bad. Remember that a lot of cheap PC’s from Dell, etc have integrated video, sound, network, etc which never completely work properly.
I agree that mac users argue that the mac is best for them , but never that they are better than PC’s period.
Might be time to buy an eMac for running Yellowdog Linux
The most humorous part is that Mac, Linux, BSD and what ever can get along like a house on fire, yet, we have these PC fanboys with their supa-dupa-ultra-el-cheapo-crash-all-the-bloody-time-over-clocked-compu ter going on about how they’re better than everyone else and since 90% of the computers users have PC obviously they’re right. Wasn’t Socretes (Greek Philosopher) who stated that jjust because something is popular doesn’t necessarily make it correct? maybe it is about time people stopped using stastics and started using cold hard technical arguments to why their chosen poisen is better than another.
The Universal buyout is just a rumor at this point – I mean totally a rumor.
The problem with the eMac, which was referenced but not fully explained. For a long time, Apple didn’t know proecisely what it was. So, to fix it, they would replace the whole video module. And, it was not unusual to have to do this on one Mac more than once. They finally isolated the problem to a single VID cable. In the article, they don’t actually say the problem has been fized. It sounds as if it *may* have been fixed when they got through that last bad batch, but it is sort of murky about that.
The Emac, assuming the raster shift problem has been solves, is Apple’s best deal. Well, also if they add more RAM. Get an iSub with it and the sound system isn’t bad at all.
Apple needs to lower the prices on these and advertise them. It is much more likely to be the Mac that new users and switchers try out, assuming all problems are fixed and there is more RAM. I’, anxious to see what the specs will be, including price specs.
Ok, I am not trolling or trying to start a flame here.
What I don’t understand is this: I always here about how Apple hardware is lacking when compared to PC – performance wise at least. I also hear all the time in response to OS X on x86 that “Apple is a hardware company not a software, that’s how they make money.” When I hear Apple-heads fighting with the PC-heads – it always comes down to the OS being more superior, elegant, stabel, etc, thena anything on the x86 platform.
So… is ti safe to say that right now, Apple’s strongest asset is it’s OS – not hardware. And if that is the case, why not explore better hardware platforms?
Not trying to start another OS X on x86 thread, I just really don’t see Apple’s motivation to remain a hardware company, that pumps out weaker hardware.
Most people I know have Athlon 1400->2000. I have not met anyone with a 3Ghz P4.
So all you people saying ‘PC’s are faster’ are right, but I bet MY mac is faster than YOUR PC!
If you really love cheap fast hardware, and the ability to build-your-own, and you are good with computers and knowledgeable, it’s hard to appreciate the mac, or how it’s better (in ways that make it superior for most consumers and creative pros and yes education). Basically, what makes the mac great is the software and the way it works with the hardware. More attention is paid to ease of use and removing the need to have all kind of technical know-how to get tasks done. When you buy an emac, you’re buying more than mhz, ram and hard drive numbers. But for many PC diehards, that’s all they care about, or at least what they care about most. So a mac makes literally no sense to them.
Dingo, it depends on what you’re interested in. If you’re a digital hub person, then the Mac and OS X is for you, with the bundled iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto and iDVD.
If you would like to also run unix programs, OS X is for you. And now Apple has it’s own X86 to use.
Back to digitial hub, Apple is going to start its own music service.
Parts – I think that has become a mixed bag. It’s impossible to say,” Apple had better parts across the board”.
It’s difficult to decide, depending on some of these things. It would be easier if XP wasn’t as good and stable as it is.
So basically it is all about the software, right? So why would it be such a bad idea to port to x86? It’s just I never understood why people would say it is a bad idea because Apple is a hardware company. It seems that in the past it may have been true that APple harware was better, but most of the stuff I have been reading shows the x86 performing better.
Maybe I just won’t get it until I get to work on one. I have only seen one iBook ever – and it was only for a few minutes. There are no stores in my area that sell them.
I really wish I could check them out.
Here’s the problem with OS x on commodity hardware. One reason the mac is so great is that it’s written for a limited amount of hardware. Also, making both the hardware and software allows apple to implement new things more readily and in a more glitch-free way. Like consumer video editing (firewire + iMovie).
Allow OS X on commodity hardware, and soon there is no more Apple hardware because everyone will buy the cheaper commodity hardware. Or at a minimum Apple will no longer have control over the direction of the hardware, too many other companies will be in the stew.
There are downsides to apple’s hardware “monopoly” if you will — higher prices, less choice etc. But there are upsides too (explained above). Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad because they flow from the same basic set of facts.
So all you people saying ‘PC’s are faster’ are right, but I bet MY mac is faster than YOUR PC!
That’s about the greatest and most correct thing I’ve ever heard. LOL, sorry It made me laugh to see someone in here that actually has a grip on reality. Since I use both a Dual G4 and I actually own a 3ghz P4, I’d have to say that I have a better grip on this whole computer debate than most of you. My P4 is blazing fast especially with HT, but it’s only a gaming/Linux box whenever I use it, my Mac is my main desktop.
So tell me I’m an idiot tell me I’m wrong, tell me that my Mac is slow, who cares, when we are talking about GHz differences in computers it’s not like one or the other is really that slow.
Hm.. you know, only because you keep repeating wrong statements this doesn’t add any more validity to them. I really don’t want to start the whole PC/Mac is better/worth-enchilada now, so I’ll limit my comments on what you say to the following: There have been a few things already in this thread that are _objectivly_ bad about current Macs – you (obviously) refrain to challenge them because you can’t, instead you are waffeling about people OC-ing cheapo-systems bla-bla..
Well, as for what you cannot challenge here: It is a matter of fact that it is a moronic decission to sell ANY system running OS X with 128 MB RAM. If one critisize this, it is not flaming, it is pointing out the blatanly obvious. Live with it.
Same goes for the refresh issue – why would a sane brain be stoopid enough to limit a card running beyond 85 Hz in a several thousand USD system? Yes, I know you don’t like to hear such things where you have no good argument against it. Truth hurts.
As for the cheapo-part: You do realize that there are a lot more PC-systems out there that are _vastly_ more expensive than all the Macs out there together..? What does it tell, if there are people who can spend *more* money on a system than the most expensive Mac could ever cost? It should tell you that you are not an 1337 priviliged person that can afford stuff that others don’t, at least… so I don’t really see a point in that.
> 1.4GHz G4 (~athlon 1.8 GHz)
You haven’t been pulling benchmark numbers off of apple’s site again have you???
Just for reference, I’m currently building a system for a friend specced with dual 2400MP’s, 2GB ram, gf4 ti 4200, few other goodies with end price of ~$1800 (no monitor).
At work we’re getting some xterm type boxes with XP1800+, 256MB ram, 40G, with samsung syncmaster 900NF 19″ monitors for ~$650 a pop.
I like the idea of apple offering clones but not necessarily x86 clones. The lack of software apps would kill them.
Now on this powerpc clone business. Yeah do it but not immediately. You need a gradual way to work into that and you need to have other businesses developed to off-set the inevitable losses. You also need to be careful with the licensing model. Limited licensing might be better than the pc madness.
The problem here is not powerpc vs x86. The real problem is lack of volumes and that is addressable without changing to x86.
This is a rumor, not news.
Thinksecret is a joke. It may be true, but it’s not news til it’s on apple’s site.
Appleforever, Macs integration with hardware and software is baseless garbage. If anything Apples hardware and software integration is repelling consumers rather than appealing to them. I for one do not like one company controlling both my hardware and my software, PCs have many other advantages over the Macintosh
he PC heads bitch about the mac b/c they hate people saying they are better
By appleforever (IP: —.res.east.verizon.net) – Posted on 2003-04-15 12:42:04
simple as that
if they are better, they aren’t “overpriced”
Yes I hate people saying that Macs are better because its not true, that is what you call misinformation. There is absolutely nothing better about the Mac, there are no significant advantages. The only thing I have ever liked about the Mac was the design of the original iMac and the eMac. The iShaving mirror looks stupid and for my LCD all in ones I went with the Gateway Profile, I have 2 of them.
The PC has alot more advantages than the Mac and is a better buy. Sure Gateway and Sony aim at the iMac crowd with their all in one designs but they saw it was popular and they listen to their consumers, try putting in a design request with Apple, it will never see the light of day.
I know I shouldn’t get into this, but for God’s sake, do we have to resort to utter nonsense to prove how awful Apple is?
You think putting in a “design request” with a PC company is going to get you something? Gateway and Sony are aiming at the iMac crowd because they’re following Apple’s lead because, as RJ says, “it’s popular.” If they’re doing that because they’re “listening to consumers,” it’s because the consumers are saying they like Apple’s designs.
Look. Either all-in-one computers are a turnoff for consumers, or they aren’t. If they aren’t, then it isn’t a liability for Apple to make consumer-oriented machines with those designs. Maybe you wouldn’t buy an all-in-one Mac, but if your reason for doing that is that you’re comfortable with (or even seeking out) the control that build-it-yourself PCs give you, then you wouldn’t buy an all-in-one PC, either. That’s a perfectly valid viewpoint. But it doesn’t have squat to do with the platform.
And RJ, if you can document a design request you’ve given to Sony that’s shown up in their hardware or software, lay your cards on the table. (Say what you will about Apple, but many of the changes in OS X from 10.0 to 10.2 were, in fact, due to customer screaming. Other than wanting much faster CPUs, there’s hardly a concerted voice asking for hardware changes to the machines.)
You don’t like Apple. Great. I won’t make you buy one. Shut up already.
There are two things absolutely better about the Mac: The software (OS X), its integration with the hardware so it works, and the design of most of the computer. The software is easier to use and update (ie, apps in a folder); the integration means I don’t have to trust that J Random PC hardware company did a good job; and the design is quieter, cooler (heat-wise), and asthetically nicer (subjectively) than any PC.
Please try not to speak in hyperbole, as soon as anyone says “there is nothing better about X than Y” they’re show a great deal of ignorance.
Bahahaha…. Macs.
If you look at the future, say a 5 years timeframe.
We will all have pocket pc or subnotebook. Most of the people won’t need a 6-10 GHz computer. This kind of computer will become workstation again. And I believe this is the future that Apple is looking for.
Desktop Macs are becoming Video Editing Workstations, and Mac laptop are becoming smaller and smaller.
You can see the trend for the next years to come. Workstation will be back, pocket pc and notebook will take over the desktop.
I believe Apple as see the trend, but will they be able to execute properly.
See you in a few years….
Apple generates a few billion in hardware revenue; they generate a few hundred million in software revenue. It is a question of being a hardware that makes better software so they should drop the hardware part. Let’s say: they are computer makers (and computers include hardware, an OS, and software).
Okay, that being said, it seemed as if you were suggesting a change to x86 and the MS OEM model… Okay, well, there are many technological hurdles to be addressed and there’s not much reason to get into them here.
But: who is going to license MacOS? Not Dell, HP, Gateway and the other big guys. They’d lose business from MS and they’d be carving up pieces of 3% of the market when they already fight for and are losing ground on 97% of the market. There are plenty of other reasons to suggest such a move would be poor.
Not to mention the inherent disadvantages which come with it–testing for commodity peripherals and hardware, drivers, etc… The fact is: this would no longer be a Mac. It would be a PC running MacOS. Some computer users ust don’t get this: a Mac is defined as the hardware and software. If you were to run MacOS on a PC, that’s exactly and only what you would be doing.
But… I think Apple is transitioning. Slowly, patiently. And this process is actually pissing people off so it must take place over time. Consider some of these apps: WebObjects (used to cost tens of thousands, now only hundreds, small qunatities but a new revenue stream to Apple); Final Cut Pro — leading the mid-class video market at $1000; Shake — the standard for all classes of video compositing; Logic… Apple is becoming an ISV for critical highend markets which Apple is doing the most to become mainstream skills and capabilities. Then there is .Mac — pisses a lot of people off, but you have to replace billions in hardware revenue somehow. Then there is the new music service. (Universal buy isn’t happening—it was maneuvering to get access to the tunes, but this would have been another source of .5 billion revenue.) And Panther is (finally) goin to tie in the online hooks to purchase content (throughout OS X you may notice links to purchase Apple software, more fonts, more tunes, other software, etc…) Oh, and did I forget the iLife bundle?
These are attempts to create software revenue streams. It is coming. But it isn’t even close to replacing the hardware revenue that Apple currently generates–they need to replace this cash flow FIRST before making a change. Even if they get to the point where they have the software revenue, that still doesn’t mean Apple will quickly swithc to commodity boxes. But I do think they are working on it.
I think people need to have greater appreciation for what it takes to run a niche technology company that has existed for over 25 years, still is worth 5 billion dollars, generates a couple of billion in revenue every year, has 20 million users, and still produces (relatively) “high quality” products without compromising vision and values when the rest of the industry is only concerned about stock valuation or profit margins.
That first bit got all mangled in my head, let’s retry that:
“Apple generates a few billion in hardware revenue; they generate a few hundred million in software revenue. It is not a question of being a hardware company that makes better software so they should drop the hardware portion. Let’s say: they are computer makers (and computers include hardware, an OS, and software).
As for Dohnert’s typical baloney: “If anything Apples hardware and software integration is repelling consumers rather than appealing to them. I for one do not like one company controlling both my hardware and my software, PCs have many other advantages over the Macintosh”
YOU are NOT all CONSUMERS. Appleforever said there are advantages and disadvantages. Get over it–some people DO see computers as a complete package. If you would like to show PROOF that Apple is repelling customers do so, but everything shows me that they are holding market position which means their market grows every year. In the last quarter and this coming year, I expect to see them actually grow share AGAINST the PC market. So where is the “repelling”? And if it exists is it caused by hardware/software integration? I think not.
There are two things absolutely better about the Mac: The software (OS X), its integration with the hardware so it works, and the design of most of the computer. The software is easier to use and update (ie, apps in a folder); the integration means I don’t have to trust that J Random PC hardware company did a good job; and the design is quieter, cooler (heat-wise), and asthetically nicer (subjectively) than any PC.
Please try not to speak in hyperbole, as soon as anyone says “there is nothing better about X than Y” they’re show a great deal of ignorance.
Tell you what big shot, tell me what I can do with a Mac that I cannot do with a PC. And Im not talking about iTunes, iPhoto and iMovie, There is absolutely nothing. PCs work and Macs work and no I do not agree with the hardware software integration. As for cooler running machines, thats not what reports say and I personally think Sonys are asthetically nicer than Macs. When you purchase a PC you are buying what you want, I do not knock you for that. You choose to buy Macs I choose to buy PC’s so get over it. I cannot change your mind you cannot change mine, so get over it and move along. Dont waste your time on perfect ol’ me.
See you guys take my comments and you go over the bend you think just becuase I said this:
If anything Apples hardware and software integration is repelling consumers rather than appealing to them. I for one do not like one company controlling both my hardware and my software, PCs have many other advantages over the Macintosh
That comment is not mac bashing I gave you my opion, just like when you said ” as for Dohnerts typical baloney blah blah blah ” That is your opinion but several non-mac users would very much disagree with you. But I would buy an eMac because they are reasonably priced.and I did say I liked the design.
I sit here every week and i watch this bashing from the two computer camps, the PC users bash the mac heads and the mac heads bash the PC users.
This is fucking boring already, as a mac user AND a PC user i am so tired of this, everytime there is an article with a blue Apple icon it becomes the mac bashing thread. If the mac heads shutup and ignore the PC users the thread will flow nicer and if the PC users please ever get tired of bashing please do so quickly.
Everybody knows the arguments for either side so why waste good bandwidth every week?
While some of you do put up a decent arguement for your side i’d say get a life and surf elsewhere you are wasting your own time fueling an argument that is going nowhere.
Huh?
I wrote: “YOU are NOT all CONSUMERS. Appleforever said there are advantages and disadvantages. Get over it–some people DO see computers as a complete package. If you would like to show PROOF that Apple is repelling customers do so, but everything shows me that they are holding market position which means their market grows every year. In the last quarter and this coming year, I expect to see them actually grow share AGAINST the PC market. So where is the “repelling”? And if it exists is it caused by hardware/software integration? I think not.”
I say acknowledge the advantages AND disadvantages.
I say you do not represent all consumers.
I say there is little evidence for your sweeping statement that Apple is “REPELLING” customers. (Didn’t you jsut say: “Please try not to speak in hyperbole”? I quoted you, you must have.)
Where do I say you are bashing the Mac? Doesn’t “Macs integration with hardware and software is baseless garbage” sound like an out-and-out dismissal of someone’s opinion? Get a grip.
Welcome to the year 2000 eMacs! The rest of the world has had been at a ghz, nice to see they are joining us.
I happen to think that anonymous hit the head of the nail with his post. Apple is changing. They just can’t do that overnight. It takes time. The value of what they are doing today should be apparent. however it will be visible even beyond the gaze of wintel PCs that seem to obstruct the view of so many in this group in time.
Apple is an extremely well run company. In ten years i bet MBAs will be studying case studies of Apple’s success story. Guaranteed. They execute without being obvious. Its really pretty cool to watch.
I just recently “Switched” my self back in December and I love my Mac. If you want a computer that just works get a Mac, but be prepared to adjust to the new look – “it’ NOT windows”. I have the 15” flat panel iMac as for the eMacs I don’t know. I say do it. “Swithch!” “Swithch!” “Swithch!”
We purchased a refurbished eMac at my workplace. The G4 was only a 700 but it was the 128MB of RAM that hurt the speed.
Apple really needs to ship these things with a 512MB stick. MacOSX is a memory hog and needs all it can get.
The CRT was best set to 1024 X 768 @ 85HZ. The flat CRT is nice but the whites on the screen is not a true white, so any kind of production work is out!
A boost to 1GHZ is welcomed news if they can address the quality control problems and ship the systems with a CDRW or combo drive at minimum.
The entry level price of $999 is too high for an entry level Mac and why bother with so many processor speeds? Keep it at 1GHZ, 512MB of RAM and just offer two models, one with a combo and the other with a super drive.
There was also an anonymous coward that said that his girlfriend comes home with sore eyes every day after working on an 800MHZ G4. This model G4 is a QuickSilver 800 with a Radeon 7500. This model is our photographer’s workstation at my workplace and he works on it all day with no problems.
Teach your girlfriend how to change monitor resolutions to an acceptable refresh rate and resolution. That video card can put out video at 1600X1344@85HZ which is an acceptable refresh rate for even a 21″ monitor. Just because you have a 21″ doesn’t mean that you should go to a res that the video card can barely handle. I thought you would figure this out since you are an expert with Macs like you pretend to be.
http://www.ati.com/products/mac/radeon7500me/specs.html
A poor workman blames his tools.
Wow!!! 1 Ghz!!! it’s soooo fast!
Doehnert: “Yes I hate people saying that Macs are better because its not true, that is what you call misinformation. There is absolutely nothing better about the Mac,”
Nothing better? Usually things have upsides and downsides, some advantages and disadvantages. The sign of true, lunatic, off his rocker zealot is someone who says there’s no plus at all to something.
Also, isn’t this just a bit arrogant and condescending? I mean millions of people have decided mac is better for them. They found something about it BETTER than a PC. Yet Doenhnert the all-knowing says he knows much better than all these millions of people, they are just dumb or deluded while he has perfect judgment on this. Right.
Appleforever, You really need to get a life and quit calling people names, You call RJ a Zealot yet you call yourself Appleforever and you always seem to pick RJs comments to retaliate against,yet it seems to me and some others he makes good points? Who are you scared of? Who sounds more of a zealot, someone named ” Appleforever ” or someone who actually uses their real name. Who can expect to have a decent convo with someone who calls himself Appleforever and who already portrays himself by his name to already be biased. Nobody pays attention to you or thinks you have anything productive to add to any topic. Grow up child before I call your mommy and daddy.
Actually seth I agree with you that namecalling and labelling is not what we should be doing. The substance is what matters and that’s what we should debate. The problem is people, many, have labelled and called me a zealot, instead of dealing with the substance. I’m not interested in anything but the substance and 90 percent of my posts make substantive points.
So does Doenert, for that matter. I just think he’s wrong (a lot of the time).
As far as my screen name, I can’t see what difference this makes. It’s actually a misnomer because I don’t know or believe Apple will be around forever.
As I have stated, what I believe is that, at least for the forseable future, where we are headed is movement out of the forced DIY project phase of PCs, where ordinary people are forced to try to make hardware, OS and apps from 10 different companies work together reliably. People don’t want this any more than they want to assemble their cars from engine, transmission, body, stereo, AC system, etc.
Apple is the only one providing a package of hardware, OS and basic apps now (except maybe Lindows in some more limited sense). There will be others. Mark my words.
“As I have stated, what I believe is that, at least for the forseable future, where we are headed is movement out of the forced DIY project phase of PCs, where ordinary people are forced to try to make hardware, OS and apps from 10 different companies work together reliably. People don’t want this any more than they want to assemble their cars from engine, transmission, body, stereo, AC system, etc”
Apple, it’s really not that bad. If the customer wishes to, they simply pick an OEM such as Dell or IBM. The OEM usually installs the OS and some Office software, as well as anything to take advantage of what kind of systme they’ve bought. Such as burning software, dvd player, whatever. Then they ship it out to the customer with everything ready to go. Same goes with most computer stores, where customer can choose what they want installed when buying the computer and have it done.
Also, you say having 10 different companies fighting for each part of the computer is a bad thing. That’s what stimulates competition friend. You think PC processor speeds would have reaches 3 Ghz if AMD hadn’t started threatening Intel’s marketshare, or that ATI wouldn’t have done so much to improve their drivers without Nvidia. You consider having all these options and competition as being bad, but I consider it a strength, because it forces these vendors to make better products for less if they wish to remain in business. Now that Linux is becoming a threat to MS desktop share (because hovering between 3-5% marketshare Apple certainly wasn’t doing the job), MS is finally being forced to improve their OS and make big steps in improving it.
stopidnoobie: “If the customer wishes to, they simply pick an OEM such as Dell or IBM. The OEM usually installs the OS and some Office software, as well as anything to take advantage of what kind of systme they’ve bought. Such as burning software, dvd player, whatever. Then they ship it out to the customer with everything ready to go. Same goes with most computer stores, where customer can choose what they want installed when buying the computer and have it done.”
Yes, but a lot of the stuff installed doesn’t work well together and if there’s a problem, Dell blames MS, MS blames Dell or the app provider and on and on. Also, everything’s installed coming out of the store, but a lot (at least some) of the installed stuff is not very good and the consumer has to find something better, install and troubleshoot it etc.
stopidnoobie: “Also, you say having 10 different companies fighting for each part of the computer is a bad thing. That’s what stimulates competition friend. You think PC processor speeds would have reaches 3 Ghz if AMD hadn’t started threatening Intel’s marketshare, or that ATI wouldn’t have done so much to improve their drivers without Nvidia. You consider having all these options and competition as being bad, but I consider it a strength, because it forces these vendors to make better products for less if they wish to remain in business.”
You still have competition in the world I describe. All the OS’s today can be made to run on any processor. And when one company makes the apps (at least their final form), they can recompile for the different processor. Apple probably will use multiple processors in the future. But it will be invisible to the user. Hopefully, there will be multiple companies doing exactly what apple does – producing an integrated package. But they won’t make all the pieces themselves (code or hardware). They will just assemble, sell and service it.
On the other hand, I do credit the chaotic Wintel world with injecting a lot of competition and that’s a good thing. I’m just saying going forward, we can keep the competition and get rid of the disorder.
Also, there will still be an option to DIY. But most consumers won’t make that choice.
stopidnoobie: “Now that Linux is becoming a threat to MS desktop share (because hovering between 3-5% marketshare Apple certainly wasn’t doing the job), MS is finally being forced to improve their OS and make big steps in improving it.”
Actually, even with it’s small share, Apple forced MS to do things. Such as a little thing called windows. More recent examples abound, such as moviemaker. I do think that Linux presents a much bigger threat and therefore pushes MS much more than Apple ever could.
stopidnoobie: “If the customer wishes to, they simply pick an OEM such as Dell or IBM. The OEM usually installs the OS and some Office software, as well as anything to take advantage of what kind of systme they’ve bought. Such as burning software, dvd player, whatever. Then they ship it out to the customer with everything ready to go. Same goes with most computer stores, where customer can choose what they want installed when buying the computer and have it done.”
Yes, but a lot of the stuff installed doesn’t work well together and if there’s a problem, Dell blames MS, MS blames Dell or the app provider and on and on. Also, everything’s installed coming out of the store, but a lot (at least some) of the installed stuff is not very good and the consumer has to find something better, install and troubleshoot it etc.
stopidnoobie: “Also, you say having 10 different companies fighting for each part of the computer is a bad thing. That’s what stimulates competition friend. You think PC processor speeds would have reaches 3 Ghz if AMD hadn’t started threatening Intel’s marketshare, or that ATI wouldn’t have done so much to improve their drivers without Nvidia. You consider having all these options and competition as being bad, but I consider it a strength, because it forces these vendors to make better products for less if they wish to remain in business.”
You still have competition in the world I describe. All the OS’s today can be made to run on any processor. And when one company makes the apps (at least their final form), they can recompile for the different processor. Apple probably will use multiple processors in the future. But it will be invisible to the user. Hopefully, there will be multiple companies doing exactly what apple does – producing an integrated package. But they won’t make all the pieces themselves (code or hardware). They will just assemble, sell and service it.
On the other hand, I do credit the chaotic Wintel world with injecting a lot of competition and that’s a good thing. I’m just saying going forward, we can keep the competition and get rid of the disorder.
Also, there will still be an option to DIY. But most consumers won’t make that choice.
stopidnoobie: “Now that Linux is becoming a threat to MS desktop share (because hovering between 3-5% marketshare Apple certainly wasn’t doing the job), MS is finally being forced to improve their OS and make big steps in improving it.”
Actually, even with it’s small share, Apple forced MS to do things. Such as a little thing called windows. More recent examples abound, such as moviemaker. I do think that Linux presents a much bigger threat and therefore pushes MS much more than Apple ever could.
“Yes, but a lot of the stuff installed doesn’t work well together and if there’s a problem, Dell blames MS, MS blames Dell or the app provider and on and on. Also, everything’s installed coming out of the store, but a lot (at least some) of the installed stuff is not very good and the consumer has to find something better, install and troubleshoot it etc.”
You’re going to have issues with that regardless. No OEM can ship off perfect products 100% of the time, especially not computers. No OEM is exempt from that. But PC OEMS, if the customer researches who they buy from, can still get amazing service and it gives them a much wider spectrum of products to choose with regards to hardware and software. True, alot of the software installed by default is worthless, but most ship with Nero if they’ve bought a burner, or PowerDVD if they’ve bought a DVD player.
Fact is with PC OEMs are that prices are considerably cheaper. I don’t know if it can just be blamed on the processor or motherboard, but this protected niche Apple has established, while the software coming out of it looks amazing, the hardware is less then impressive.
I’m not trying to belittle Apple or anything. Software wise, what they have done is amazing, especially with OS X, and I do hope that IBM new processor the 970 or whatever, does make Apple a real threat to MS again. Issue is, that Apple platform is a locked in thing. Significantly lowers options are far as hardware and software available. While I agree it means there’s less chance of stabilty issues, in the long run also means there’s less competition and therefor, less reason to improve it’s performance.
alright. I have to cook.. later