iMac vs Profile 4
Don't know if it's good for us or bad for Apple? or both? look for the test in this PDF:
<a href="http://www.etestinglabs.com/main/reports/gateway.pdf"; target="_blank">http://www.etestinglabs.com/main/reports/gateway.pdf</a>;
Don't want to talk about the look or the SuperDrive or the iApps. But just performance. These are really bad !
What Apple can do? They must react to this!
What do you think?
Put a 133 Mhz bus? add L3 cache? better Java support for browser? better IE (thanks to not tell me that Chimera/Mozilla exist, I'm talking for the lambda user here)? Give a 5GB iPod for free when you buy an iMac?
What do you think?
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>
<a href="http://www.etestinglabs.com/main/reports/gateway.pdf"; target="_blank">http://www.etestinglabs.com/main/reports/gateway.pdf</a>;
Don't want to talk about the look or the SuperDrive or the iApps. But just performance. These are really bad !
What Apple can do? They must react to this!
What do you think?
Put a 133 Mhz bus? add L3 cache? better Java support for browser? better IE (thanks to not tell me that Chimera/Mozilla exist, I'm talking for the lambda user here)? Give a 5GB iPod for free when you buy an iMac?
What do you think?
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>
Comments
People who buy a Mac buy it because its better than Windows. And have you ever bought a CHEAP PC? How long did they last? Not too long, eh?
My Mom still uses the 'ultra cheap' iMac 233Mhz bought in September 1998. At the time, for 1299$ you could buy much more performant PCs (MHz, etc) but I dare you to find me a person that still uses a PC from 1998 for everyday work and graphics?
You pay more, but you get more.
i wonder if somewhere on a PC message board, someone is writing
"Look, i don't want to talk about specs, but just the lack of a DVD-R drive and bundled apps. to run on the machine."
if that's how you want to go into this, i don't see the point talking about it at all....
I use an even older PC! I don't do graphics, mainly cause I don't know what I'm doing, but I could. I have a guy who did some signage work for me still haply using a couple of PII 400's.
It's just as possible to keep an old PC in service as it is an old mac. However, fewer PC people do so because the cost of upgrading is so cheap.
AMD300 BABY!!! With some P75 parts in it too! WOO-HOO. 6 years and still going strong, though it exhibits the odd quirk here and there.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
There is nothing Apple can do about IE.
Java is not a problem; the suite tested JavaScript, which (despite the name) is totally different and completely unrelated. IE uses its own implementation of JavaScript.
Startup time is a non-issue. The iMacs probably wake from sleep much faster than the Gateways, and that's how they're intended to be used.
I notice that they avoided any tests that involved media. And how many consumers load gigantic PDFs, anyway? (And what's Apple supposed to do about Adobe?)
This is a test commissioned by Gateway, so the tests were probably carefully chosen to make the Profiles look good. If the bootup times are any indication, they were done with OS X 10.1, not 10.2 - not a fault with the test, because 10.2 just came out, but a reported result that's not relevant to anyone buying an iMac now. In fact, it would be interesting to run those tests again with 10.2 installed.
Apple hired the guy who was working on Chimera, so I hope they release a super-slick browser based on Moz and ditch IE. That would do more to solve OS X's reputed "problems" than bumping the bus speed. Of course, there would still be some issues, because MS just can't seem to follow standards in its Windows browsers...
Finally, you carefully disclaim all the things where the iMac totally owns the PC, which are all far more relevant to its quality as a consumer machine. Sorry.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
true or not, reliable or not, the ad campaign around this is of the kind that appeals to people. Spec and price: higher than brand A, lower than brand A. DING DING DING!!! We have a winner, sale to brand G
Apple's gonna suffer, and that's good. Their prices are still MUCH TOO HIGH.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
This "thing" is ugly as hell, what were they thinking. That pdf is a joke, but the problem is most of the people that are gonna read it and take it word for word, are a joke also. Apple needs a god damn jaguar ad campain, they need to put on tv what it can do, and all the sofware you get with it. Their are enuff idiots on tv, they should'nt be any in apples ads. Or they could have a commercial where the imac beats up the profile, that i would like to see
sorry just had to vent
hrmmm....
all that marketing money could be aimed at Dell, or Compaq/HP or Sony.
lol, then again maybe those guys actually scare 'em off.
Lets face it, it's a free market and any computer maker can make an all-in-one. Apple doesn't own the idea. It looks nothing like an iMac, so there is nothing to get all bent about. Do you think Gateway designed this computer JUST to go after Apple iMac users?! They put this product out for those who need a space saving computer that is still powerful enough to keep up with the desktop competition. They'd be foolish not to go after the 'dorm room' market. So this IS aiming towards Dell, HPaq and so on as they do not offer one.
I personally think the Profile looks sharp. Not a stunning design, but then again, neither is the iMac (IMHO). The silver and black is a great combo (though often hated simply because it's seems to be a PC trend now. If Apple went that route it would have been 'revolutionary'). I like this design because it simply looks like an LCD display with a matching keyboard and mouse. I love the extended stand that it rests on to offset the black. Not everyone likes the fluffy white and lucite look. The design may not be for everyone, but it's simple and has all the ports you need whether your peripherals are new or old. What's the best thing about this PC? It's customizable. Something Apple has yet to offer for their limiting 'consumer line'.
Also, why is anyone shocked that it performed better than the iMac? Why is anyone suggesting that the iMac will 'kick it's ass'? Who the hell cares? It's no big deal, it has better specs than the iMac. If the iMac has a faster processor, bus and ram then yes - it just might kick it's ass. For now, that is not the case.
Apple makes great computers with an OS to match. If you are happy with what you have and have no plans on switching to a PC, then don't let the Profile bother you. For someone like me who uses and enjoys both platforms daily, it's a little hard not to notice the differences and acknowledge the unjustified bias.
No, no. Apple is a much better target because they are in a particularly tight spot hardware and price-wise.
Why go after DELL? Dell has not clearly defined/created a market with very strong brand recognition. Dell's buyers don't fit an easily targetted market. Apple has, is and does.
Let me explain. Everybody knows what an iMac is. But they think it's too slow and costs too much for the limited expandability that it offers, aswell as being "non-standard" (FUD). So by offering a machine which adresses the two major complaints (too slow and too expensive) and adds a healthy does of FUD relief -- it runs all those windows apps you feel you need to survive -- Gateway can emphasize why they make the best all-in-one.
I'm not saying it's true, just that it is effective. That's why you go after Apple, because at the moment they aren't in any position to refute price or spec claims. You may not win mac-to-PC converts, but you keep a lot of potential Pc-to-mac converts for yourself. This should not surprise anyone. A familiar maclot complaint is that Apple defines a category and then someone in the PC world takes it over. They're not attacking the iMac so they can get marketshare from Apple, they're doing it so they can get sales from Dell.
That is very significant because the iMac is 'switch' machine. A space efficient AIO with good reliability and connectivity is what the potential switcher is looking for. This machine looks to offer that without the need to switch. It gets the potential Dell to mac convert to make a stop along the way and has potential to take sales from both.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
Gateway wins with 33 XP crashes in just 2 days. (my current running total from our IT department- that is for 3 computers- avg of 5 crashes per machine per day. GOooooooo Microsoft!)In the same time, my G4/500 on OSX - NOT ONE CRASH.
Uber <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
The Mac is more than benchmarks. Period.
Microsoft is stupid for making their own version of jave even if it is hell of a lot faster then suns version. So what if window uses get better java experience Micro$oft should comply with standards and stay slow like Apple is doing. Speed is not everything Apple is a great company thats why they stay with the open java spec. I applaud them for their determination.
Motorola is having some troubled times now but G5 and G6 should be here in a year or two and will blow away anything the pc has now.
In conclusion this is a lamer pc test that proves nothing to anyone. Gateways look like ass anyways so who cares...
<strong> I dont care if the peecee can do things faster it still looks ugly doing it.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
A PC can't "do things faster." It can process some stuff faster, but that is fairly irrelevent. When someone sits down to mix some audio, and Windows crashes in the middle of their work due to some soundcard compatibility problem or just general crapiness, then that person lost potentially hours of time. Same thing with video and image editing. When someone sits down and edits something like this on a Mac, OS X doesn't crash and stuff gets done. Furthermore, the majority of time spent working in an application is spent contemplating and figuring how you want elements to work together, NOT applying some kind of filter or doing the final mix-down (although the Mac can often beat a PC in this).
If I am editing a video, I can "do things" faster on my 400mhz G3 iMac then I could on a 2.8ghz P4...
In conclusion, get a clue and go use OS X. I know you never have.
<strong>Everybody knows what an iMac is. But they think it's too slow and costs too much for the limited expandability that it offers, aswell as being "non-standard" </strong><hr></blockquote>
Matsu,
I can't help but wonder what makes you think you're such an expert on what the "average person" thinks about the iMac, or computers in general. Is it from what you read people on message boards writing? Average people don't post on message boards, or even use the internet to update their own software on a regular basis.
I guarantee you I spend more time around people who are thinking about buying a computer - iMac or otherwise - and I say you are wrong. These days, if a person is buying a computer, they usually have a purpose for it in mind when they're shopping. None of the things mentioned in that test relate to the average things that people want to do - in my experience.
I think these ads will make the Profile come off looking like a copycat (moreso than it is). As has been said, everyone knows what an iMac is - and now Gateway is trying to show their response to it. If it makes people curious enough they'll got to Apple's website to check it out for themselves and chances are they'll discover they can do some amazing things with an iMac that they just can't do on a Gateway. At least, I didn't see anything on Gateway's site talking about what it actually does (they'd have to send you to Microsoft's website for that I guess).
And their website IS atrociously designed. The pop ups enough will turn people away.
Half of the battle is in the presentation and the Gateway loses big time there.
And in response to iMacs not selling well:
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techreviews/products/desktopcomputers/2002-08-25-apple-imac_x.htm"; target="_blank">Apple can't keep up with demand for newest iMac</a>
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: seb ]</p>
<strong>Who uses an old PC (circa 1998?)
I use an even older PC! I don't do graphics, mainly cause I don't know what I'm doing, but I could. I have a guy who did some signage work for me still haply using a couple of PII 400's.
It's just as possible to keep an old PC in service as it is an old mac. However, fewer PC people do so because the cost of upgrading is so cheap.
AMD300 BABY!!! With some P75 parts in it too! WOO-HOO. 6 years and still going strong, though it exhibits the odd quirk here and there.
[ 08-26-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not true Mastu, until the G4 iMacs came out my office was using a mixture of PC's from 486 DX100 to a Celeron 300! All were using W98 and Office 97. It would have been hughly expensive to upgrade any of these machines as MS changed the way Windows works and it prevents you from installing any office application older than Office 2000.Consequently I would have had to re-purchase most of my existing software.
The office is now Mac's 8 PC's 2 an we onml;y have 2 PC's becuuse they are running proprietory software which can't be run on Macs.