PC Magazine 10 Worst Products of the Year

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1735287,00.asp



Feel free to discuss. I think the evaluation of the eMac as a gaming computer is wrong.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 45
    Lack of a DVD burner? So what. That makes a Mac bad if it doens't have a DVD burner? I'm using a Dell Inspiron 8600 that doens't have a dvd burner. So what.



    And you don't buy a computer to play games. That's what the PS 2 and XBox are for.
  • Reply 2 of 45
    giaguaragiaguara Posts: 2,724member
    oh gosh. and the guy who wrote that page thinks that _ALL_ the pcs on the market have a dvd burner? or are better than that entry level emac? how come i think entry level HPs dont have a dvd burner ...
  • Reply 3 of 45
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Note, this is the same douche bag who did "commentary" for TechTV's Macworld Keynote Address a few years back and basically said everything was dissapointed and sucked. I remember watching this guy on TechTV and thinking he's the sleaziest and worst used car salesman i've ever seen..... more so than Phil Schiller



    Despite that, and despite him being a major dick about the eMac, he brings up a few valid arguments in his harsh critique. At 800 dollars, the eMac is at the high end of the market it is being sold to. I know its hard for mac users to understand that when its our cheapest product and our high end is 3000 dollars plus 3299 display but its true. And for the eMac to have some of the specs it does today with hard drives, ram, graphic chips and optical drives being so cheap is truly pathetic.
  • Reply 4 of 45
    toweltowel Posts: 1,479member
    Tripe. The lack of a DVD burner "makes off-loading files impossible"? I guess "off-loading" files can't be done either over a network or with the included CD-RW?
  • Reply 5 of 45
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Apparently he's concerned about offloading multi-gigabyte porn files.



    nut, I have a theory about the eMac pricing - it's not really geared towards the consumer, but at education (hence the 'e', duh) for labs. Education customers demand (and get) education discounts... so Apple jacks up the public price, gives the edu market what it *really* should sell for, and still makes a profit, unlike other box makers who might sell to edu at a loss strictly to get the service contract.



    The public sees an overpriced entry box, but edu sees the price they like, and Apple gets to keep making a profit.
  • Reply 6 of 45
    I, for one, agree with the general consensus about the eMac.



    I don't see what's positive about it, except its ability to absorb a fair amount of physical damage. It's huge, heavy, slow in all respects for a 2004 desktop computer, isn't expandable, has a mediocre display, is ugly, and on top of that, they charge $800 for it. Absolutely one of the worst desktop computers of 2004.
  • Reply 7 of 45
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    For the public consumer, not great.



    For an education lab, it's quite excellent. Put it in the proper context, at the proper price (edu), and it becomes much more attractive. It's the context people miss. It isn't intended for public consumption - but if it were only offered to edu, they'd want a discount over and above whatever price Apple pushed it at... so this way Apple can point to the (too high) retail price, say "See? You're getting a heck of a discount!", sell it at the proper price, and *still* have room to go down further if necessary to undercut competitors.



    It's clever for the intent: selling eMacs to education. It does, however, mar their public perception a bit. However, since they don't really have any credibility in the low end market *anyway*, they didn't have much to lose.
  • Reply 8 of 45
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Zapchud

    I, for one, agree with the general consensus about the eMac.



    I don't see what's positive about it, except its ability to absorb a fair amount of physical damage. It's huge, heavy, slow in all respects for a 2004 desktop computer, isn't expandable, has a mediocre display, is ugly, and on top of that, they charge $800 for it. Absolutely one of the worst desktop computers of 2004.




    For a consumer PC, you may be right. For its primary market, the lack of expandability is a good thing--you don't want people to get insider it and mess around. Heavy is good, make it harder to steal and harder to knock off the dest. Speed could be better, but it's mostly going to be used for web research and word processing, and it is plent fast enough for that. Absorbing damage, in a primary school setting, is an abolute must. Also, bought in bulk at a discount, they pay a lot less than $800 dollars.



    Originally, the emac was not even going to be released to the consumer market--but there was enough of an outcry that apple made it available. But viewing it the same way you would a cheap PC at CompUSA is incorrect.



    Although I do wish Apple had a model like that.
  • Reply 9 of 45
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    I think we're in consensus here!
  • Reply 10 of 45
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    I think we're in consensus here!



    Dang, you do type fast.
  • Reply 11 of 45
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    Apparently he's concerned about offloading multi-gigabyte porn files.



    nut, I have a theory about the eMac pricing - it's not really geared towards the consumer, but at education (hence the 'e', duh) for labs. Education customers demand (and get) education discounts... so Apple jacks up the public price, gives the edu market what it *really* should sell for, and still makes a profit, unlike other box makers who might sell to edu at a loss strictly to get the service contract.



    The public sees an overpriced entry box, but edu sees the price they like, and Apple gets to keep making a profit.




    yes. of course. schools get them for 499-599 in bulk.



    however, I have yet to see sales numbers of the eMac to education. Now this is just a guess based on sales patterns of schools I've been to and seen.... but eMacs aren't too popular. Despite being an all-in-one they are still huge, the screen is included which is quickly becoming undesirable with cheap LCDs, and more and more elementary and high schools (which the eMac is targeted at) are purchasing iBooks for 800 bucks instead.



    With that said, the eMac is certainly better suited for schools than the consumer space. However, the reality is, it is Apple's only desktop below 1300 dollars and as a result deserves and scrutiny it gets for being a poor consumer product.
  • Reply 12 of 45
    Quote:

    Originally posted by D.J. Adequate

    <snip>



    Yeah, it has some qualities that are positive in the educational sector, while they are negative on the consumer sector, like heavy. If the price is right, which it isn't for the consumer, it's not too bad.



    We are in consensus. :-)
  • Reply 13 of 45
    PCMag needs to be added to the list.
  • Reply 14 of 45
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    This is my take on their commentary:



    1)

    it costs $800



    2)

    it's not a gamer machine

    it doesn't have DVD-R

    also other components are slow, old



    1), 2) -> the price is unreasonable and the computer is bad in its consumer market segment.



    All true. I don't think every computer must be a gamer machine (hey, I'm using a Mac, aren't I), I don't think every computer has to have DVD-R (mine doesn't, in fact in the past I've lived for four years without optical drives at all, using only the network). But these are the kind of things that would explain the price. None are present in the eMac.
  • Reply 15 of 45
    It is not one of the worst products of 2004, it does its job for K-12.
  • Reply 16 of 45
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Messiahtosh

    It is not one of the worst products of 2004, it does its job for K-12.



    It's sold as a consumer product too, and PCMag's assessing it in that capacity.



    Certainly there are worse products, starting from those that don't work at all, but I think the eMac might be the best known bad PC.
  • Reply 17 of 45
    I have been looking for a new computer for my kids, ages 8 and 6. The eMac is perfect!!! They do not need anything fancy -- learning tools, games, Internet, that's it. If they want to burn DVD's, which they don't, that's what my Powerbook is for. At $800.00, it is cheaper than the PC I bought 3 years ago that has seen better days. The eMac is built for a specific audience. If you want high performance, Apple has computers for that. This is entry level stuff, meant to hook you in at a young age, so you will tell your parents about the cool computer you use at school, so then they will buy one or a more expensive model for themselves.
  • Reply 18 of 45
    pyrixpyrix Posts: 264member
    I wonder how much Microsoft is paying him. it is PC magazine after all.



    I have to agree, his evaluation of the eMac as a gaming machine is unfair. At least it HAS a graphics cheap, not intels bloody Intel Intergrated Graphics, which believe it or not, Dell still puts in their machines costing up to $5000.
  • Reply 19 of 45
    He has a valid complaint, which is that Apple doesn't really have a low end consumer machine. Many people would like it to, but Apple doesn't seem to think it can profit in the niche.



    The problem is he couches that complaint in terms of slamming the eMac as if it were that offering. I don't even think the emac was introduced this year, so I don't see how it can be one of the worst products of 2004.
  • Reply 20 of 45
    toweltowel Posts: 1,479member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pyriX

    I have to agree, his evaluation of the eMac as a gaming machine is unfair. At least it HAS a graphics cheap, not intels bloody Intel Intergrated Graphics, which believe it or not, Dell still puts in their machines costing up to $5000.



    Good point. In PC land (e.g. my eMachine), you have to get up above $550-600 just to get an integrated GeForce, forget about an independent graphics card. And that price obviously doesn't include a monitor. what's the cheapest Dell bundle you can get with a real graphics card?
Sign In or Register to comment.