iMac vs. eMac - let's get it on!

there is no g5there is no g5
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
For simplicity's sake, I'm only going to compare the Combo drive models, since there is no Superdrive eMac. Furthermore, I'm going to use edu pricing, since if one can get the eMac for an edu price, one can also get the iMac for edu priceing.



[code]

Component iMac eMac

Processor G4-700 G4-700

Cache 256K full sp. 256K full sp.

FSB Bus 100 MHz 100 MHz

Hard Drive 40 GB 40 GB

Optical Drive Combo Combo

Modem Yes Yes

Ethernet Yes Yes

Monitor 15" LCD 17" CRT

(swivel) (fixed)

Max Res. 1024x768 1280x960

(72 MHz)

Video System GeForce 2MX GeForce 2MX

Speakers Pro Spkrs. Built-in Spkrs.

Price $1549 $1249

</pre><hr></blockquote>



I'd get the eMac in a second, based on this comparison.



TING5



[ 05-02-2002: Message edited by: There is no g5 ]</p>
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    And I would get the iMac.
  • Reply 2 of 28
    macintoshmacintosh Posts: 22member
    I would get the emac!!! That is a lot of money being saved. The only reason to go imac would be the superdrive because the emac doesnt offer that and understadably so.
  • Reply 3 of 28
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    I would go with the iMac. $300 for LCD, ergonomics and style is cheap compared to what you spent on Macs in the first place. But of course I am waiting for iMac 2.2 when the "better/faster" model gets superdrive and the screen will have same DPI as the iBook.



    2-2
  • Reply 4 of 28
    crusadercrusader Posts: 1,129member
    iMac due to superdrive and I already have one. But if I were a student, I would go for the eMac so I wouldn't have to sell a kidney for M$ Office.
  • Reply 5 of 28
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I'd go with the iMac, just because of the LCD. I'm never going to go back to a CRT.
  • Reply 6 of 28
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    iMac, no question. At first I was thinking the eMac would be a good deal, but then I weighed the pros and cons. The iMac has a better looking screen with very close to the eMac's viewable size (about 15" vs. just under 16"), and the eMac doesn't have a great gain in resolution if you don't want your eyes straining at 72 Hz (not MHz, that would be insane!). The iMac's screen is much easier to move into place. The iMac is lighter and easier to move around, for people who change their desk setups often (like me). The iMac's speakers are external so you can use them on other audio devices if you want. And, of course, the iMac looks really cool whereas the eMac looks kinda dumb (at least I think it does).



    But, if I could have ANY Mac, I'd have a Cube but with state of the art specs and no external power supply and audio thing. That thing is SO cool and if it were only available for less money and not so cluttered I'd get one!
  • Reply 7 of 28
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    My take from a design perspective.



    Difficult to say too much about the eMac until I see it in person. The iMac didn't look so hot in pictures but much better in person.



    I may be a bit biased as I have an iMac, but I think it wins in aesthetics and design. It's certainly a more groundbreaking design destined for the Smithsonian (just like the original).



    The eMac while nice, may be a bit clunky in mass but then again, I'd have to see one up close.
  • Reply 8 of 28
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    eMac



    17" brighter sharper higher rez

    standard dimm slots
  • Reply 9 of 28
    dennis the phantom menacedennis the phantom menace Posts: 64member
    eMac

    higher resolution screen.

    1024x768 + OSX = poop.
  • Reply 10 of 28
    mimacmimac Posts: 872member
    iMac without a doubt! Then again, I have one so Im a bit biased towards it

    The eMac looks like the bastard son of the classic iMac and a microwave oven <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

    Specs aren't that bad though but the iMac speeds ahead with available superdrive.
  • Reply 11 of 28
    grombatgrombat Posts: 6member
    I replaced an AIO (godfather of the eMac) with a FP iMac primarily because I have to lug my computer 800 miles several times a year. Weight and bulk. The eMac weighs 50 lbs. If you have to move it, especially without help, that's a pain. OTOH, I suspect that in some environments, it might be a theft deterrent.
  • Reply 12 of 28
    thegeldingthegelding Posts: 3,230member
    i like the eMac and think it is a great option for schools and students (and even for some consumers...very good specs with G4), but that floating flat panel screen on the new iMac rocks...i love that screen and i am constantly touching and moving it around (yes, my wife would be jealous of that computer, but, after 17 years of marriage, she is probably glad that i....well i won't go there <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> ) that screen, plus the superdrive and being less than half the weight of the eMac, make the iMac the better deal in my eyes....of course next year i just may replace the older iMac DV 400 in the kids room with a new eMac...i can see the benefits of a heavy, bulky machine when they go off to college as it will be harder to steal....both are nice machines, but i would buy the iMac over the eMac for myself if i had the option today.....g
  • Reply 13 of 28
    mac's girlmac's girl Posts: 556member
    i'd never pick anything that began with the prefix "e." i live in an iWorld!!
  • Reply 14 of 28
    posterboyposterboy Posts: 147member
    iMac.

    A 17" CRT is attractive, even more so because it is flat, but a flat CRT is nothing unless it has an apperature grille, and the eMac does not.

    I also have bad eyes, and while an LCD is brighter and sharper, it is also easier on the eyes.

    In any event, I prefer laptops. Give me a G4 iBook with a 16MB graphics card, and i will be happy.



    --PB



    [ 05-03-2002: Message edited by: PosterBoy ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 28
    markmark Posts: 143member
    "Microwave-on-Steroids" or ''Stick-in-a-Bun?" Hmm...



    Personally, I'd choose the eMac. Partly for the lower price, but mostly for the clean, almost unbearably cool more-modern-than-modern-itself monoform design. The new iMac may have been composed of 'elemental' forms, but to my eye the combination looks awkward; the shapes don't work together.



    Good thing that the eMac option exists, as I would've upgraded to neither an iMac I don't like nor a G4 Tower I don't need. Mine is the sale Apple wouldn't have received this year without the eMac - let the naysayers chew on that. :cool:





    Cheers,



    Mark.
  • Reply 16 of 28
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    [quote]Originally posted by mac's girl:

    <strong>i'd never pick anything that began with the prefix "e." i live in an iWorld!!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    how sad.



    i guess i'm still in eWorld



    :remembers with fond memories: :sniff:
  • Reply 17 of 28
    mount_my_floppymount_my_floppy Posts: 913member
    I have never been one for all in ones but I think I would take an eMac over the iMac mostly because of the monitor. The LCD in the iMac tends to wash out colors and isnt as sharp as a good ol CRT.
  • Reply 18 of 28
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    heres my vote for the eMac. Better looking than the iMac, speakers built in, nice monitor. This would sell if Jobs would let us buy it.



    But isn't it time Apple upped the bus to 133 mhz and 4xAGP in all its machines?.....................................



    [ 05-04-2002: Message edited by: steve666 ]</p>
  • Reply 19 of 28
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Don't be foolish, the iMac is a better computer. The only reason to buy the eMac is cost. The imac display is better too. A better contrast and flicker free nature of LCD translates to a much more readable display. The 1280x960 res of the CRT is not useable for long periods (72hz refresh is the absolute minimum for flicker free, but in reality many people still see flicker at this hz.) the 1152x864@80hz is acceptable but not ideal. You need a minimum of 85hz to really kill all traces of perceptible flicker. Regular XGA is still your best choice on the eMac's display, that is if you plan on staring at it for long stints.



    Spend a few hours in front of the CRT and then spend a few hours in front of the LCD. You won't feel as tired with iMac.



    Also, the iMac's size and ergonomic flexibility are not trifling things. Your desk will be remarkably open, and the display will sit at the correct height and angle without having to adjust your chair or use other ergonomic props. The eMac's stand doesn't compare in the least.



    eMac is good in a school, or on a budget.



    iMac is just better (in any situation where a kid won't trash it)
  • Reply 20 of 28
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    I just had a look at the eMac video on Cnet.

    And I must admit now that it really looks quite stunning.



    Unless Jowiak is 6 ft 4" tall, this eMac looks rather compact. I especially was impressed by how the sides are tapered giving it a really narrow footprint.



    Hmm...makes me kind of wish I had held out for this (even though no one saw this coming).

    At this price point, I could have had a 17" G4 with money to spare to go towards an iBook!



    Oh well. I'm still enjoying my iMac though.
Sign In or Register to comment.