Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

bink · Jun 13, 2002, 09:40 AM

I posted this at the end of a long thread and got no replies so will post it here.

I currently have a rev. D iMac after having several powerbooks. The one
thing that made me most happy about the iMac was getting away from the
LCD screen. No dead pixels, easy to clean and several native resolutions
to choose from.

Am in the market for a new machine and was ready to get the 800mhz iMac
(even with the LCD screen) until the emac went public.

Here are my thoughts: no LCD, 100mhz less is not a big deal coming from
a 333mhz G3, will not burn DVD but would use it for data if I had it,
otherwise CDs are fine, same size pretty much as my current iMac,
speakers are said to sound OK, external ports are the same and can max out the RAM a lot cheaper.

So, tell me please, what am I missing? Am sure there are other
considerations I have not looked at and am asking for help in finding
out what they might be.

[email protected]

driven · Jun 13, 2002, 09:47 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bink:
I posted this at the end of a long thread and got no replies so will post it here.

I currently have a rev. D iMac after having several powerbooks. The one
thing that made me most happy about the iMac was getting away from the
LCD screen. No dead pixels, easy to clean and several native resolutions
to choose from.

Am in the market for a new machine and was ready to get the 800mhz iMac
(even with the LCD screen) until the emac went public.

Here are my thoughts: no LCD, 100mhz less is not a big deal coming from
a 333mhz G3, will not burn DVD but would use it for data if I had it,
otherwise CDs are fine, same size pretty much as my current iMac,
speakers are said to sound OK, external ports are the same and can max out the RAM a lot cheaper.

So, tell me please, what am I missing? Am sure there are other
considerations I have not looked at and am asking for help in finding
out what they might be.

[email protected]<hr /></blockquote>Many of us (and our eyeballs) actually like the LCD better.

But beyond that: You'd lose ...
- Small, attractive footprint. (Personal preference)
- No Superdrive option.

If you can go without the Superdrive, and you like the form factor of the eMac, then go for it!

Superchicken · Jun 13, 2002, 12:09 PM

They're cheap... CHEAP!
GO FOR IT!
haha

I'd love to upgrade my Rev D iMac to an eMac... unfortunately... ain't got no cash <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

Commodus · Jun 13, 2002, 02:17 PM

There's a few reasons to go for the iMac... some obvious, some not (I'll skip what's already been mentioned):

lightness! The iMac is 23 pounds versus the eMac's 50 or so. You can actually move the iMac without needing help or causing a lot of strain on the surroundings and yourself.
</li>
the ease of viewing the display. Apart from the weight, we all know that the display is easy enough to move around; on top of that, LCDs are less likely to "burn" your eyes than CRTs - always good for long periods at the computer.

</li>
if you're not in education, DVD playback simply isn't an option for the eMac without an external Firewire drive... this system may last you years, so you may not want to be caught out if software starts moving to DVDs. </li>

Besides... the iMac just LOOKS cooler.

Wait until MWNY and see how the iMac and eMac change, since there may be incentives thrown in that aren't there now.

mikerally · Jun 13, 2002, 02:43 PM

the eMac is far better value for money...

if you need dvd/superdrive, then go for the iMac.

and I can imagine you will want to keep away from any of the original iMacs still for sale (why does Apple still sell the $999 iMac in face of the $1099 eMac?!?)

Rob Judd · Jun 13, 2002, 03:03 PM

I wouldn't buy an eMac because the refresh rate at 17" resolution is only 75 Htz.

driven · Jun 13, 2002, 03:44 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Rob Judd:
I wouldn't buy an eMac because the refresh rate at 17" resolution is only 75 Htz.<hr /></blockquote>You can get something other than " 17" resolution " with an eMac?

D'Espice · Jun 13, 2002, 05:08 PM

And what might 17" resolution be? I've never heard of anything like that before. As far as I know, the 17" CRT makes 85Hz at a resolution of 1024x768 what would be fairly enough.

I'd buy the eMac immediately, if only I had the money.

[ 06-14-2002, 06:54 AM: Message edited by: D'Espice ]

Chimpmaster · Jun 13, 2002, 07:39 PM

The emac is an excellent buy.

Dvd is not a big issue - you can buy an external firewire dvd rom for around $150 US and a superdrive for under $500 US.

When you do the sums, the difference in price between a high end and low end imac would justify the purchase of an external superdrive, and certainly an external dvd rom - and the emac is even cheaper!

Main differences between emac and imac :

- aesthetics. Without doubt the imac looks cooler and it very "high tech", being all digital and very modern.
- lcd screen vs crt. Some prefer lcd, some prefer crt.
- sound system is better on imac, especially with apple pro speakers.
- logic board is different but benchmark tests i have seem would indicate no performance difference between 700mhz imac and emac.
- weight

You can run the emac at the following resolutions:
640 by 480 pixels at 138Hz
800 by 600 pixels at 112Hz
1024 by 768 pixels at 89Hz
1152 by 864 pixels at 80Hz
1280 by 960 pixels at 72Hz

Given that 72hz is a bit flickery, you would tend to stick to 1024x768 or 1152x864. 80hz should be fine. The old imacs were 1024x768@75hz anyway.

What else... umm...

I personally bought an fp imac over the emac. I wanted the better sound, and over here in aus the emacs have been delayed substantially - i was going tohave to wait 4 weeks + for an emac, where as i got the imac within 1 day from the apple store.

Oh, and make sure you get the stand for the emac. I personally think its a must.

iDaver · Jun 14, 2002, 03:02 AM

Has anyone had a chance to compare the eMac vs. the "new" iMac, noise-wise? It's hard to tell how loud a fan is at an Apple store because they usually have loud music playing throughout the store.

I'll be replacing an old iMac rev b pretty soon. I'm leaning toward the eMac since it's cheaper and has a bigger display than the new iMac. If the fan is noisy, this might be a point against it. I have a feeling eMacs might begin to outsell iMacs if Apple doesn't equip the iMac with a 17" display. That would be a big selling point for me, even if it made it a couple hundred more expensive. I love LCDs, but 15" in a desktop computer just doesn't cut it anymore.

vmarks · Jun 14, 2002, 09:55 AM

If you get an eMac, buy AppleCare, or insure it somehow.

Now add the cost of AppleCare or other insurance into the price of the computer.

It isn't that far different from the prices of the iMac without such insurance, for the lesser models of iMac.

Of course, AppleCare on either model isn't a bad thing, but for me, it's a must on an eMac.

KellyHogan · Jun 14, 2002, 05:40 PM

Why not? Because it is underspecced rubbish that won't be able to run even Doom III next year. For the same price you can get a PeeCee with all the bells and whistles, Superdrive, Geforce 4Ti and even TFT screen.

Jet Powers · Jun 14, 2002, 06:26 PM

Get the .edu Combo drive. Best of all worlds. Cheaper than iMac, versatility of drive.

Not a student? It's not like they check. And if they do, you must know a teacher or student somewhere who can say that it is for them.

Jet

SpeedRacer · Jun 14, 2002, 06:30 PM

AppleCare? Why AC on an eMac and not an iMac? If you're technically-inclined i see no real difference in potential problems between either machine.

Having used both machines first-hand the eMac is noticeably louder. Perhaps a better way to put it is that i don't notice much of a difference between the noise of an eMac and the noise of a Tower (or the original series iMacs). So if the noise of a Tower does not bother you, the eMac should be fine. But it clearly sounds like a school lab machine, in contrast to theiMac which is nearly completely silent. This is not some 5 min Apple Store assessment, but from hands-on use of both machines for the past two weeks.

Positives for the eMac vs the iMac are:

Higher, more flexibility in screen resolutions</li>
Larger screen real-estate</li>
$250 cheaper (given that the optional stand is all but mandatory)
</li>

Why not buy an eMac? Well it's certainly nothing to do with competition from the Towers. In most educational environments, at $1200 the eMac makes quite an argument against the comparable $1200 Tower (w/out display).
Frankly, the only significant arguments against the eMac i see are:

The potential of Apple releasing an iBook/G4 with ability to function as a portable eMac via attachment to external 17" CRT (very speculative)</li>
Cheaper, faster, more expandable BTO Windows box (may or may not be an option)</li>
CRT v. LCD (may or may not be a concern</li>
Weight (much, much more awkward to carry/move than original iMac series) - again may or may not be a concern
</li>

Overall, though quite dull style-wise, the eMac appears one of few true machines you could call a "value" coming out of Cupertino in a while now.
Speed

vmarks · Jun 14, 2002, 07:17 PM

Why AppleCare on an eMac and not an iMac?

Analog/Video power supply board in an eMac versus LCD inverter board like those used in laptops.

iDaver · Jun 14, 2002, 10:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by SpeedRacer:

Having used both machines first-hand the eMac is noticeably louder. Perhaps a better way to put it is that i don't notice much of a difference between the noise of an eMac and the noise of a Tower (or the original series iMacs). So if the noise of a Tower does not bother you, the eMac should be fine. But it clearly sounds like a school lab machine, in contrast to theiMac which is nearly completely silent. This is not some 5 min Apple Store assessment, but from hands-on use of both machines for the past two weeks.<hr /></blockquote>Thanks much for the info. The vacuum cleaner-like noise of the tower does indeed bother me. I think it's much louder than a Rev B iMac. So, you may have helped eliminate the eMac from my consideration.

Vanquish · Jun 15, 2002, 06:08 PM

Why is everybody talking about weight ???, who cares about weight ? It's not that you continuously carry your mac around.

BTW: buy the eMac, 15" LCD at 1024x768 is REALLY SMALL, especially with OSX. (for me 1280x1024 is the minimum)

-Vanquish

Big Mac · Jun 17, 2002, 04:31 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by vmarks:
Why AppleCare on an eMac and not an iMac?

Analog/Video power supply board in an eMac versus LCD inverter board like those used in laptops.<hr /></blockquote>I see your point, vmarks. I was thinking about an eMac but that does sort of bother me. Do you happen to know if the eMac's A/V board is the same as the notorious iMac version? Do you dislike the A/V boards just in principle, or is there something particularly troubling about the eMacs?

Oh, and KH, "Please organize your 'valid points' so that they appear in the appropriate threads and don't annoy damn near every user who visits these OS X forums regularly." (Gorgonzola)

vmarks · Jun 17, 2002, 05:16 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Big Mac:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by vmarks:
Why AppleCare on an eMac and not an iMac?

Analog/Video power supply board in an eMac versus LCD inverter board like those used in laptops.<hr /></blockquote>I see your point, vmarks. I was thinking about an eMac but that does sort of bother me. Do you happen to know if the eMac's A/V board is the same as the notorious iMac version? Do you dislike the A/V boards just in principle, or is there something particularly troubling about the eMacs?<hr /></blockquote>I have not personally seen an eMac analog/video board fail.

I do not know with absolute certainty that the eMac analog/video board and it's iMac predecessor analog/video board are of the same design (using the same parts, laid out differently physically.)

I like analog/video boards just fine when they are in a independant monitor that may be replaced without requiring the whole computer to be serviced. I have hesitations about the eMac analog/video board, based on the past experience with iMacs, both tray-loading and slot-loading.

Be mindful, I am not instructing people to avoid the eMac, only that getting AppleCare for it is probably a good course of action.

bartman00 · Jun 17, 2002, 08:31 AM

Rob Judd: Hit the nail on the head!! I finally got to see an emac the other day and it looks nice. The store had the rez set to 1024 at first so I kicked it up to the 1280 rez and right off the bat noticed the picture looked like crap to me. I'm really sensitive to low refresh rates. Then I saw it was set at 75hz and I coulden't change it! Well.. that was it for me. I can get away with 75hz at 1024 but anything higher I have to have 83mhz+.

For a lot of people this is a non issue... At work I'll go to help a user and they'll have the monitor set at 1024x768@60hz, it'll almost melt my eyes out.. and when I ask them about the flickering they don't notice.. I'll bump it up to 83.3hz and they say they can't tell the diff.. ack..!

Bart

Commodus · Jun 17, 2002, 10:08 AM

vanquish:

Considering that the eMac is a 17" CRT with a whole computer beneath it, weight could be a factor in getting it on a desk as well as any time you have to move it. An iMac is less than half the weight of the eMac, and that makes it light enough that you may actually be more inclined to move your computer for whatever reason (rearrangement of room furniture, etc.).

That's admittedly not a major point, but the sheer bulk can be. The eMac isn't exactly small and could cause problems when space really is important. The iMac's footprint is 10.6 inches (as Apple will continually tell you); even if you have the space for an eMac, you'd see a cleaner desk... or just have more space to make a mess.

slider · Jun 17, 2002, 08:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mikerally:
the eMac is far better value for money...

if you need dvd/superdrive, then go for the iMac.

and I can imagine you will want to keep away from any of the original iMacs still for sale (why does Apple still sell the $999 iMac in face of the $1099 eMac?!?)<hr /></blockquote>That is a very good question, maybe with all the new toys they forgot about them. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

spivey · Jun 18, 2002, 12:00 AM

I could see myself using one of these since I mainly do graphics work. The 17" screen is the bare minimum I've sworn to ever work with, plus, this offers a slightly higher res than even the 17" I have now. The only thing I might miss is the capability of running true dual monitors (the eMac has VGA mirroring, but it's not the same thing).

Coming from my Beige G3/266 to one of these might be a nice switch for less than what a tower would run me. I'd never consider the iMac just because (as I've said) a 17" monitor is the bare minimum I can do graphics work on. But since I don't do heavy graphics work at home it might be a decent step-up for me.

I really do like the over-all specs, but the price is the real grabber.

<img border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" title="" src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" /> I'll probably still wind-up getting a tower though.

Mac Zealot · Jun 18, 2002, 03:32 AM

1152x867 or whatever that resolution is does fairly well on a 17" screen. i use it on all of mine just because it isn't too big or small

*shrug* with a stand it's a very nice computer, IMO, but that analog board thing drives me nuts, they are crap there <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />

Eug · Jun 18, 2002, 05:56 PM

It seems you can put a SuperDrive in the eMac.

See <a href="http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=006218" target="_blank">here</a>.

Macintosh · Jun 18, 2002, 07:11 PM

You cant put a superdrive in an eMac easily.

cSurfr · Jun 19, 2002, 09:31 AM

With the falling price of the DVD-R drives, I'd say that the eMac is a great value. I completely disagree with the above post that the eMac won' play Doom III in the next year. If that is the case, then the iMac won't as well (same video card, and only 20% proc. performance increase). Also, If Doom III has requirements that are that steep, there are going to be quite a few mac users left out in the cold. Bang for the buck: eMac is exactly what you need. One thing students (or people with access to apple edu prices) may not have noticed...It's actually CHEAPER to order the eMac from the apple store at retail price. The machine is 1099 from the apple store with the CDRW Drive, or 1249 from the Apple EDU store with the Combo drive. Unless watching DVD's on your machine is a must, save the extra cash and upgrade the ram and such. Also mentioned above is the fact that a superdrive can be added to the machine with ease. It's all about what you want. Sorry that I talked forever, but ultimately the choice is yours. I'd say eMac..Bigger screen, nicer res, and the sound is much niver than the G3 iMacs. Don't forget what VMarks said earlier...get apple care.

cS

gumby5647 · Jun 19, 2002, 02:38 PM

Personally, i would wait. if its possible, i would wait a few months. The iMac is due for an update, which could possible include 1Ghz G4's, 133Mhz system bus, and even possible 4X AGP or L3 Cache.

my advice, Don't even consider the eMac. Wait a few months on the iMac.

deca · Jun 19, 2002, 06:26 PM

I think the original imac is more of a design revolution than the new imac or the emac. I was hesitant, but I will buy a rev. d or graphite imac instead of the emac (tastes better to me

Eug · Jun 19, 2002, 06:55 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cSurfr:
With the falling price of the DVD-R drives, I'd say that the eMac is a great value. I completely disagree with the above post that the eMac won' play Doom III in the next year. If that is the case, then the iMac won't as well (same video card, and only 20% proc. performance increase). Also, If Doom III has requirements that are that steep, there are going to be quite a few mac users left out in the cold. Bang for the buck: eMac is exactly what you need. One thing students (or people with access to apple edu prices) may not have noticed...It's actually CHEAPER to order the eMac from the apple store at retail price. The machine is 1099 from the apple store with the CDRW Drive, or 1249 from the Apple EDU store with the Combo drive. Unless watching DVD's on your machine is a must, save the extra cash and upgrade the ram and such. Also mentioned above is the fact that a superdrive can be added to the machine with ease. It's all about what you want. Sorry that I talked forever, but ultimately the choice is yours. I'd say eMac..Bigger screen, nicer res, and the sound is much niver than the G3 iMacs. Don't forget what VMarks said earlier...get apple care.

cS<hr /></blockquote>Doom III will run, but I'm predicting it will be painful, on any iMac or eMac.

I advise people these days to get a computer with a DVD drive. However, I don't understand why the pricing is so wonky. With that setup it would make more sense to get the eMac non-educational as you say and get an external Firewire DVD-ROM drive if you really need one. Firewire case: $57 plus $10 shipping. DVD-RAM/DVD-RW/DVD-R capable DVD-ROM drive: $48 locally. Total $115.

Indeed, to get an external DVD-R burner would only cost $350 shipped, with Firewire case included and software.

rootonimac · Jun 19, 2002, 10:07 PM

I would definently go with the iMac, saves space, not harsh on the eyes, easy to move, light, all around awesome computer, the eMac is great but it's more something I would rather see in a school then on my desk at home.

macaddled · Jun 20, 2002, 03:15 PM

why not an emac? 'cuz they are sinfully ugly. I just saw one in the flesh for the first time, what an eyesore. get the imac, 's worth it.