My friend got an eMac over the weekend. 80GB HDD, 512MB RAM, 3GHz processor. I asked him the price, and guessed 699. He said 499. I instantly asked if it was an eMac. yes it is. Now, having experiance with eMacs, and bad ones at that, I told him he should exchange it.
No, he said. "My friend has had one for a year, works great!"
"Plus, I got service pack 2!"
At this point, I told him he was screwed, and then laughed in his face.
You think this will work out for him?
ID:187684
 Oct 25 2004, 4:49 am
|
|
Do you mean eMachines, Airjoe?
| |
this is a Emac http://www.apple.com/emac hehe but anyways E-machines are cheaply made computers but who's to say they wont last along time you never know.I just know i would never buy one your better off building your own so you know you have a quality computer components
| |
can you play byond games on emacs? Or is it just windows you can play, and it's just a linux type byond version?
It'd be silly not to appeal to macs with our games! hehe | |
linux type, the newest version of Mac (OSX) is built on top of Unix therefore I can presume it was a relatively simple port.
| |
Airjoe wrote:
eMac=eMachine. Sorry if that wasn't clear. ah so you were not talking about the newest incarnation of Apple's eMac then. sorry! | |
Windows = Programing computer
Windows = Game computer Windows = unreliable Mac = Reliable Mac = Some good games I have one there good for doing actually work and there fast to. the good thing is there not as effected from pop-ups. | |
You can run MS Virtual PC for MAC on there and then run BYOND on top of that, but it might go pretty slow.
I ran SWiSH Max on a MAC like that. ~Kujila | |
Strawgate wrote:
Windows = Programing computer Windows is unreliable if your an idiot and have absoulty no protection from virus's, spyware and havent updated your Windows since you first installed it. I dont think Macs are any more reliable, they crash all the time, and emacs are slow, i can barely run quake 3 without it lagging. And my Hypercard assingment on it got corrupted and its going to be extremely hard to get back. Macs, reliable? They dont have many virus's or spyware because barely no hackers want to hack it. And they arent secure either, i managed to change the root password on a mac in about 2 minutes. | |
I'm getting my Mum an eMac in the near future. The way I see it she doesn't need anything more then an eMac and it's probably going to be much more stable than any Windows machine I build for her.
Hopefully it wont screw up, and if it does she'll be able to fix it without having to <s>annoy</s> consult me. [Doh. I was talking about the Apple eMacs. My bad.] | |
Critical wrote:
Windows is unreliable if your an idiot and have absoulty no protection from virus's, spyware and havent updated your Windows since you first installed it. So you need to have constantly up to date virus protection, spyware protection and security patches? That sounds like a reliable OS alright. That's like saying living in the ghetto is safe, as long as you carry a semi-automatic weapon (or more), wear a flack jacket and hire an army of pimps to watch your back at all times. The thing is, even when you have everything setup and secure you face problems with Windows (and any other OS). When someone creates a new virus it isn't instantly added to Norton's virus definitions with a nice new Windows Upgrade to patch up the hole. Macs, reliable? They dont have many virus's or spyware because barely no hackers want to hack it. Well, that would make it more reliable in that you're not at as big a risk. No one wants to kill me, does that make me more likily to get killed or less likily? It doesn't matter that I'm just as vunerable as the next guy because no one is trying to kill me. | |
Eh, I don't think it's your bad so much as it's the bad of the people who decided to use the name of an actual computer as shorthand for a completely different computer.
| |
Critical wrote:
Strawgate wrote: wrong- a *lot* of good games have been ported to the Mac in recent years, especially with the advent of MacOS X. they crash all the time... only if you are doing things to them to make them crash- at my office we have 5 Macs (two G3s, two G4s, and one G4 eMac). all but one of the G3s are running MacOS X and they are far more stable than the three WinXP machines in the same office. And we play LAN games all the time (when we are not working of course) with no trouble, not to mention daily use of DreamWeaver, InDesign, Photoshop, *and* Cinema 4D rendering. One of the G4s also doubles as the in-house websever and database server (and does this while we play LAN games too), and has even run Chatters under the Mac version of BYOND. Macs, reliable? They dont have many virus's or spyware because barely no hackers want to hack it. wrong again. hackers (or more accurately: crackers) get into Mac systems all the time. it's just Windows-bashing is more in fashion, and updates/patches happen far more often and quickly on *nix-based OSs, compared to the swiss-cheese OS known as Windows. also, browsers like firefox, camino, and safari implement methods to prevent most problems that Internet Exploder *still* has issues with. And they arent secure either, i managed to change the root password on a mac in about 2 minutes. yes, but you had to have access to the machine to do it didn't you? I can do the same to a *nix or Windoze machine if I am sitting at the keyboard too. this does not mean it is not secure. your machine is as secure as you make it. Macs just come a bit better protected out-of-the-box. MacOS X comes with ssh (secure shell remote access), yet Windoze only has a telnet (often a security risk)... how are Macs less secure? | |
Windows is popular so people hack it more, which means that your going to have more problems with virus's and spyware, and the only way to counter it is to get software to stop it. Mac's crash a lot on basic programs like TextEdit(happened lots of times) and classic(which we use a lot) crashes a lot too. If macs were popular as pcs, they'd be the same amount of virus's as windows, but it isnt. And the fact that they cost so much, and i'd rather spend a bit less and get a computer that can run every latest game extremely quickly.
| |
I bought an eMachine yesterday, WITHOUT SP2 =P. It has 90% Intel-made parts.
eMachines used to be a cheap computer company, but they have made enough money in the past years to catch up to their leading competition. | |
Critical wrote:
Mac's crash a lot on basic programs like TextEdit(happened lots of times) Sounds like bad memory to me. The only time I've seen a program like TextEdit crash was due to bad memory. Replacing it fixed the problem. Occasionally a much more complex program will crash itself due to a bug, but that happens on all computers. TextEdit (OS X equivalent of NotePad/WordPad) is pretty darn simple. and classic(which we use a lot) crashes a lot too. No surprise there. Classic Mac OS was relatively unstable, and the same goes for the emulated environment. Not much you can do about that (other than seek native OS X alternatives). If macs were popular as pcs, they'd be the same amount of virus's as windows, but it isnt. Maybe, maybe not. Certainly the relatively low market share of Macs is a huge contributing factor to the lack of viruses. But there's also the fact that the system is designed to limit user privileges so that viruses can only do minimal local damage with little chance to spread. Windows XP has gone a long way towards taking similar steps, but the problem with Microsoft remains that too much of their software trades security for extra functionality. Sure, it's nice to be able to have a web page automatically run a program - if that program is well behaved. Sure, it's nice to have a program automatically execute upon receipt of an email, if that program does something useful. But this leaves the door wide open for malicious programs, and it seems that Microsoft leaves too many of these doors open by default. It would certainly be interesting to see how things might be different with a more equal market share between Windows/Linux/Mac/etc, but that's never gonna happen. We can all speculate til the cows come home (as long as it doesn't degenerate into a flame war) but we'll never know. And the fact that they cost so much, and i'd rather spend a bit less and get a computer that can run every latest game extremely quickly. Not being much of a gamer, I'd rather spend a little more and get a computer that gives me powerful command line access and can run the latest video/music editing software extremely well (but not quickly). :) Different strokes for different folks. | |
Mike H wrote:
Critical wrote: But a computer that can run the latest games can run the latest video/music editing programs. I dont see how macs are any better at doing that than a pc is. | |
we have a new eMac (2 months old) here in my office, and it runs pretty good I think. it is nice and compact (better looking than the older iMacs), has decent speed and functionality, and is pretty quiet.
i think as long as he keeps up with all the Mac OS X updates that he needs (for example, if he does not have an iPod or Airport wireless networking, then he can ignore those updates), then he should do ok. aside from a keyboard that failed (we suspect user error in the form of eating cookies above the keyboard) the eMac ought to do everything he needs for school, work, internet, and a reasonable amount of gaming (and before anyone starts, there *are* lots of new games available for the Mac now-a-days).
it's not a bad deal for $500.