Mark Haase <no[at]spam.please> writes:

> unjustified expenses) to many. (Even at $800, the eMac might be a great
> deal, but its still too much for some families. Why else would Walmart
> sell a $200 Lindows machine??) You know its true, and I know its true,

It's not really quite close to true. To make that $200 machine
usable - at all - requires at least the salvage of some other
hardware (possibly off of another machine that one is about to
dump).

I went the cheap-pc route for a linux box for the house. The
basic machine at $399 was pretty slick, but before it was
in any way usable, I had to dump another $150 in ram and a
video card, salvage a monitor, etc. Top to bottom, the eMac,
which includes MacOS, rather than Linux/Lindows (which while
interesting are still not really useful to most end users),
is really not a substantially more expensive choice. A
comparable Windows machine costs very close to the same.

> Personally, I don't have the money to buy a new G5, and I won't for at
> least a couple of years, but I am basically a minimalist when it comes

The G5s are interesting, but I don't see myself getting another
desktop machine like that any time soon. The real demand explosion
will come with that chip gets into the notebooks, I think.

And, of course, the elimination of the G3s. Last ones left
are the iBooks, no? Given the 12" powerbook with its recent
price drop, we're almost there.

--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

On 24 Jun 2003 15:01:43 -0400, BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net wrote:

>Mark Haase <no[at]spam.please> writes:
>
>> unjustified expenses) to many. (Even at $800, the eMac might be a great
>> deal, but its still too much for some families. Why else would Walmart
>> sell a $200 Lindows machine??) You know its true, and I know its true,
>
>It's not really quite close to true. To make that $200 machine
>usable - at all - requires at least the salvage of some other
>hardware (possibly off of another machine that one is about to
>dump).

Please explain how a 128MB Linux machine (AMD 1.1 Ghz) with CDROM and
10GB (20GB?) HDD is unusable. Please bear in mind that was a fairly
high end machine in the Wintel world just 3 years ago.

>I went the cheap-pc route for a linux box for the house. The
>basic machine at $399 was pretty slick, but before it was
>in any way usable, I had to dump another $150 in ram and a
>video card, salvage a monitor, etc. Top to bottom, the eMac,
>which includes MacOS, rather than Linux/Lindows (which while
>interesting are still not really useful to most end users),
>is really not a substantially more expensive choice. A
>comparable Windows machine costs very close to the same.

$200 for the Lindows box, plus $100 for a 17" monitor (Staples and
Office Depot have specials from time to time) is still just $300 -
pretty cheap.

>> Personally, I don't have the money to buy a new G5, and I won't for at
>> least a couple of years, but I am basically a minimalist when it comes
>
>The G5s are interesting, but I don't see myself getting another
>desktop machine like that any time soon. The real demand explosion
>will come with that chip gets into the notebooks, I think.
>
>And, of course, the elimination of the G3s. Last ones left
>are the iBooks, no? Given the 12" powerbook with its recent
>price drop, we're almost there.

Just $600 to go - or 60% more than the base iBook.

foo <foo[at]bar.com> writes:
> On 24 Jun 2003 15:01:43 -0400, BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net wrote:
>
> >Mark Haase <no[at]spam.please> writes:
> >
> >> unjustified expenses) to many. (Even at $800, the eMac might be a great
> >> deal, but its still too much for some families. Why else would Walmart
> >> sell a $200 Lindows machine??) You know its true, and I know its true,
> >
> >It's not really quite close to true. To make that $200 machine
> >usable - at all - requires at least the salvage of some other
> >hardware (possibly off of another machine that one is about to
> >dump).
>
> Please explain how a 128MB Linux machine (AMD 1.1 Ghz) with CDROM and
> 10GB (20GB?) HDD is unusable. Please bear in mind that was a fairly
> high end machine in the Wintel world just 3 years ago.

At a minimum, add more RAM. Probably have to add a video card
with its own video memory, too. Typical $200 machine uses
motherboard RAM for video and video's crap. There's another
$100 or so additional right there.

> >which includes MacOS, rather than Linux/Lindows (which while
> >interesting are still not really useful to most end users),

> $200 for the Lindows box, plus $100 for a 17" monitor (Staples and
> Office Depot have specials from time to time) is still just $300 -
> pretty cheap.

Toss in the $100 for hardware, and another $100 for an OS -
I use Linux daily - I'm on it now - but I'm not delusional
enough to consider it usable for general purpose end-user
activities. Until I'd be willing to let set my mom up with
an OS, it's not ready. Windows barely makes it. OS X has
been working like a charm.

Your $200 machine is now $500.

> Just $600 to go - or 60% more than the base iBook.

Of course, the bottom-end eMac comes with a pitiful 128MB
ram, too, so you'd have to bump that up from $800 to $900
to get a decent, usable machine. But it also comes with
a 40GB drive. Toss another $100 onto your $200 machine
to bring the drive up to there.

Your $600 cheapie versus the $900 eMac. For the $300,
you're getting a faster machine and the simplicity of
simply pulling it out of a box and plugging it in. Maybe
worth it, maybe not. Typical end user isn't going to
know what to do to get that piecemeal $600 system cooking,
either. But, of course, that's assuming you're starting
with a $200 generic box. Had you simply started with a
package deal, say, the $500 system Dell's got listed
right now - 2.2ghz P4, 30GB drive, 256MB, 17in CRT, even
a freebie cd-burner and including WinXP. Hell, that's
a hell of a lot of system for $500 and indeed does kick
the ass, pricewise, of any Mac system I can think of.

Seems like the way to go is definately not to start with
a generic $200 lindows box.

[Of course, jTroll might whine, as this Dell doesn't
include a floopy drive...]

But you're right. Indeed, one can get a pretty capable
windows machine pretty cheap - substantially cheaper than
a comparable eMac.

However, you're quite delusional if you think a $200
Lindows 1.1Ghz AMD is in any way comparable to the
current bottom-of-the-line eMac. It can become comparable,
but you have to invest a lot more than that $200 alone.


--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

> From: BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net
> Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
> Newsgroups:
> comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.apps
> Date: 24 Jun 2003 15:01:43 -0400
> Subject: Re: No IE 6 -- Is this Good or Bad???
>
> Mark Haase <no[at]spam.please> writes:
>
>> unjustified expenses) to many. (Even at $800, the eMac might be a great
>> deal, but its still too much for some families. Why else would Walmart
>> sell a $200 Lindows machine??) You know its true, and I know its true,
>
> It's not really quite close to true. To make that $200 machine
> usable - at all - requires at least the salvage of some other
> hardware (possibly off of another machine that one is about to
> dump).

Yeah, but if you know what yer doing, it's trivial salvage that's already
paid for.. otherwise yer right.

I've bought two different 7600 systems including shipping for under $350,
from that I've built one system with G3, two HDs (3G & 1G) and upgraded
graphic card and a USB card.. PLUS two monitors (17" Sony & 15" Apple AV)
and two printers (only one worth mentioning is the HP 870cse) Just to make
clear, that included shipping of everything for both systems.

Cheap Macs aren't hard to come by.. but "cheap new off the shelf" Mac is
almost an oxymoron. Market is too small and Apple just doesn't have the
heart, or guts, to make it happen. In many ways, not much has really
changed between the iMac and the old 5/6/7xxx "system of the week" days.

Hardware is only one issue, of course.. computers are nothing without
software.. if OS X (or a subsequent Mac OS version) breaks some or all of
the critical software I use, then that's not an upgrade path.. it's a brick
wall.. A shelf full of useless Mac software isn't much of an incentive to
keep buying Mac hardware that only run's the offending brick wall OS -- for
a number of reasons. Supporting OS 9.x avoids that problem. Dumping
support creates it.

*Just* upgrade.. *just* buy new.. yeah..? How'bout: Just send me your name,
credit card number and date of expiration. :-)

d.

On 24 Jun 2003 19:37:17 -0400, BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net wrote:

>foo <foo[at]bar.com> writes:
>> On 24 Jun 2003 15:01:43 -0400, BreadWithSpam[at]fractious.net wrote:
>>
>> >Mark Haase <no[at]spam.please> writes:
>> >
>> >> unjustified expenses) to many. (Even at $800, the eMac might be a great
>> >> deal, but its still too much for some families. Why else would Walmart
>> >> sell a $200 Lindows machine??) You know its true, and I know its true,
>> >
>> >It's not really quite close to true. To make that $200 machine
>> >usable - at all - requires at least the salvage of some other
>> >hardware (possibly off of another machine that one is about to
>> >dump).
>>
>> Please explain how a 128MB Linux machine (AMD 1.1 Ghz) with CDROM and
>> 10GB (20GB?) HDD is unusable. Please bear in mind that was a fairly
>> high end machine in the Wintel world just 3 years ago.
>
>At a minimum, add more RAM.

NOT needed for a basic home user, but available - $10 for 128M, $20
for 256M at your local Office Depot.

>Probably have to add a video card
>with its own video memory, too. Typical $200 machine uses
>motherboard RAM for video and video's crap. There's another
>$100 or so additional right there.

....and completely unnecessary for the vast majority of people out
there. But if you want to add a PCI nVidia card, you can do so for
far less than $100.

>> >which includes MacOS, rather than Linux/Lindows (which while
>> >interesting are still not really useful to most end users),
>
>> $200 for the Lindows box, plus $100 for a 17" monitor (Staples and
>> Office Depot have specials from time to time) is still just $300 -
>> pretty cheap.
>
>Toss in the $100 for hardware, and another $100 for an OS -
>I use Linux daily - I'm on it now - but I'm not delusional
>enough to consider it usable for general purpose end-user
>activities. Until I'd be willing to let set my mom up with
>an OS, it's not ready. Windows barely makes it. OS X has
>been working like a charm.

For many, that will work fine. It's still a $300 machine - most
people just don't need 1GB of RAM or XP's interface or a flashy video
card (what - your mother plays games? C'mon!)

>Your $200 machine is now $500.

No, $300. Maybe $310 if one for some odd reason needs the extra RAM.

>> Just $600 to go - or 60% more than the base iBook.
>
>Of course, the bottom-end eMac comes with a pitiful 128MB
>ram, too, so you'd have to bump that up from $800 to $900
>to get a decent, usable machine.

Only on the Mac. On Linux memory requirements are nowhere near as
high.

>But it also comes with
>a 40GB drive. Toss another $100 onto your $200 machine
>to bring the drive up to there.

Why? (Nevermind $100 buys a 160GB drive) 10GB is fine for many people
that don't download movies/pictures - I know people using 4G and less
on their machine; a 10G drive will be fine for most people.

>Your $600 cheapie versus the $900 eMac. For the $300,

$300 vs. $900, you mean.

>you're getting a faster machine and the simplicity of
>simply pulling it out of a box and plugging it in. Maybe

And one can't do that with the Lindows machine because...???

>worth it, maybe not. Typical end user isn't going to
>know what to do to get that piecemeal $600 system cooking,
>either.

$300 system, you mean? Well, turn it on, plug it in....

> But, of course, that's assuming you're starting
>with a $200 generic box.

We're not talking about a generic box. Walk on over to walmart.com or
kmart.com and check out the Lindows or other Linux OS boxes.

> Had you simply started with a
>package deal, say, the $500 system Dell's got listed
>right now - 2.2ghz P4, 30GB drive, 256MB, 17in CRT, even
>a freebie cd-burner and including WinXP. Hell, that's
>a hell of a lot of system for $500 and indeed does kick
>the ass, pricewise, of any Mac system I can think of.

So does the Lindows system at $300. It *works*. It doesn't have XP,
but for many people, it's a fine system for e-mail and the web and
basic word processing. And we *are* talking about the low end of the
market here.

>Seems like the way to go is definately not to start with
>a generic $200 lindows box.

Only if you desire to spend more money.

>[Of course, jTroll might whine, as this Dell doesn't
> include a floopy drive...]

Available for $20 if needed, but not needed by many.

>But you're right. Indeed, one can get a pretty capable
>windows machine pretty cheap - substantially cheaper than
>a comparable eMac.
>
>However, you're quite delusional if you think a $200
>Lindows 1.1Ghz AMD is in any way comparable to the
>current bottom-of-the-line eMac. It can become comparable,
>but you have to invest a lot more than that $200 alone.

Why? Linux doesn't need the RAM, and the user doesn't need the hard
drive space or the video card (what - your mother plays Quake??)