How Much are You Spending on Mac Pretension?

by Chris Seibold May 01, 2008

If you've never taken the time to visit a winery, you should. The tour generally goes as you would expect, you get lectured on the barrels and how important they are, how many grapes it takes to make a single bottle of wine and how the must is filtered out. It is interesting if you want to learn about making wine but you can get educational tours anywhere. The payoff with a winery tour comes at the end when you get to taste the wine.

Tasting is when something really interesting happens. You get tiny cups full of wine and you are told what you'll taste. If someone hands you a merlot and says that you'll taste currents and oak you'll taste (not surprisingly) currents and oak. By the time the tasting is done you've had a enough wine that you're a little tipsy and, since drunks are easy to sell to, you buy the complicated bottle that reeks of cherries, lawn darts and boar tongue to serve the next time you have a complex dinner.

A few weeks later, when you get around to cooking the meal and cracking the wine, the discovery is that the wine is neither as complex or as complimentary as you thought it was. It is just regular old Mad Dog 20/20. How can once complex wine with hints of rose petals and acorns become the most banal of table wine? The answer is obvious. When you bought the wine you bought both the description and the wine. When you opened the bottle you got just the wine.*

This brings us to Macs and the goodness thereof. Most Mac users make a conscious decision to use the Mac but there are a few that use the Mac out of necessity. The interesting thing is the different takes the types of users have on the Mac. Those that willfully use the Mac are generally big fans and when something goes wring they'll blame themselves. Those that are forced to use Macs have a different take, for the people in the "have to use a Mac camp" the Mac is far from perfect. Generally they see it as another device with its own set of annoyances and irksome glitches. Not necessarily better or worse than alternatives, simply another machine with another set of issues.

It would seem to be a battle of the kool-aid drinkers versus those that are forced to use the Mac. Can there be reconciliation between the two? Of course not. The Mac users who buy in are always going to spew the happy crap Apple sells and those who feel forced feel naturally bitter.

This brings us to the more important question of how can you separate the amount you want to love your Mac to how much love your Mac is worthy of? Turns out you can't. Like wine drinking the bottle has as much to do with the taste as the liquid inside the bottle. That is to say why you like the Mac isn't as important as how much you like the Mac. In a perfectly logical world you'd coolly choose the best machine for your needs but since the world isn't made up of a bunch of Vulcans go with what makes you happy.

On the other hand, maybe you're wasting money buying more Mac than you need. If you're really all about the Mac experience, how much Mac do you need to get your daily recommended intake of vitamin Steve? We need a way to quantify the feel good part of the Mac experience and separate from the upsell part of the Mac experience.

Separating what you need from what you think you need is trivially easy. Turns out that Apple has been lying to you, well not exactly lying but letting you believe what comes naturally. What you believe is that you need a faster processor. What you believe is that you need a faster hard drive and FireWire 800. What you believe you need is hard drive bays. Apple is happy to let you believe that you require a beefy processor and a dedicated raphics chip while simultaneously selling what you actually need. What you actually need, and "need" is used in the loosest sense of the term, is a Mac Mini.

A Mac mini? No, no, no you'll say I need more than that. I use my computer for four years, if I don't get the latest and greatest I'll be too far behind in computing years to do anything useful. The machine will be too slow. How can I possibly limp along with a external FireWire 400 hard drive for Time Machine? Those thoughts fit in nicely with accumulated computing wisdom which says:

Decide on your budget for a new Machine, add 10% and get the absolute most machine you can for that amount of money.

The reasoning is that the superfast machine you buy today will hold up much longer than the low end machine you buy today. Which is true, the faster the machine you buy right now the longer it will be comfortable to use. That isn't the same as saying that buying the faster machine is the best value. Maybe in the old days, but it isn't true anymore. We can prove this to ourselves with the following exercise:

Original Mac Mini (January 05): $499, Xbench Score:~45

Top of the line G5 Quad (January 05): $3299, Xbench Score: ~130

Mac mini Dual (Current) $799: Xbench Score:~125

Xbench isn't a perfect indicator of computing power but the suite of tests does support the conclusion that high isn't where the best bang for the buck is found, it is at the low end. In this example you would've been better off by buying two Mac minis (you can do stuff on an Intel Mac mini you can't do on a quad core G5) than one top end G5. How much better off? Well, suppose you bought a mini today, it will stack up to the G5 and you'll have two grand left in your pocket for tattoos and such to impress your friends.

The real question is why you don't want a mini. You don't want a mini, supposedly, because it is underpowered. You're a power user after all, using a mini would somehow be beneath you. Yep, you've drunk the kool aid, you've taken huge gulps of the stuff. In fact, you probably have to pee now. Apple is good with your decision by the way, every mini that turns into an iMac means more profit.

Why you're not the 90%

When Steve introduced the mini he said it would cover 90% of users. He was lying (Steve spins the truth better than any politician), his estimate on the number of people who would be well served by the mini was off by 9%. Although erroneous, Steve had made an interesting statement, not because of the breadth of the users covered but because it made 95% of Mac users sure that the mini wasn't for them. Brilliant marketing really, on one hand Apple is kowtowing to those fools who base the decision solely on cost meanwhile the company is telling you that as a rarified Mac user you certainly couldn't get by with a mini. Because you, of course, see yourself in the top 10% of computer users (you are using a Mac after all).

Who doesn’t the mini work for? Anyone with an extra dollar. You don’t want to be the guy who uses the lowest cost mac, you want the Mac that will make folks envious. Not many people are immune to this syndrome. Imagine you wrote the Big Book of Apple Hacks and you decided it was time to get a new computer. That is an instant quandary: Mac Pro or 24" iMac? A rational examination of your computing needs and computing resources reveals that, in fact, a Mac mini would suffice. Remember though, you wrote 600 pages about Apple, wouldn't it be a bit ridiculous for you to have the bottom of the barrel Mac?

The truth is that computers are becoming ever more powerful but users aren't. What was a huge increase in performance isn't the leap it used to be. Going from a 68000 Mac Classic to a 68040 meant palpable time savings and access to programs that weren't usable on the early Macs. But with every chip revision the gulf between the higher end and lower end machine becomes narrower. To give one concrete example: a local publishing place which once relied on tower after tower to fuel the Adobe heavy programs they use have switched from towers to iMacs. This decision was made after heavy analysis. There was simply not enough time savings to justify the added expense of towers.

Perceptions are obviously getting in the way of wise computing decisions when it comes to the Mac and the slow selling mini is the prime example. There's nothing wrong with falling in love with the Mac, most of us can't help it. But there isn't a good reason to buy more Mac than you need just to keep with the web Joneses. That's something I'll keep telling myself right up until the moment I plunk down the cash for a new MacPro.

*It's true. In blinded studies wine snobs couldn't tell very good wine from table wine, or even white wine dyed red from actual red wine. Instead they rated the wine based on the fanciness of the bottle. If they expected good wine the wine got good ratings. If the expected cheap stuff, the wine got bad ratings. Hadley Stern provides an excellent case study here. After I signed on to write The Big Book of Apple Hacks (you can never have too many references to the book in an article) I wanted to do something nice for Hadley to thank him for helping me get the project. I purchased a semi exquisite bottle of port for the guy. Sadly, my longing for alcohol got the better of me and I drank it. I filled the bottle up with isopropyl rubbing alcohol and Robitussen cough syrup, recorked it and sent it to Hadley via UPS. Later, when I asked him how the port was. Hadley said it was very good. Though he did allow that it took some time for his sight to return.

Comments

  • No personal offense meant, as the article seemed to be interesting, right up to those benchmarks. Frankly, it’s bullshit. My G5 Quad still performs like a champ, just having passed its second birthday. It cost be three grand and I run professional software (Creative Suite, etc).

    The G4 Mini could not have performed up to snuff (I often tax 3 out of the four processors), or take enough RAM to do this work. Also, I recently used a C2D based MacBook Pro, and found it unable to handle my working habits in a satisfactory manner, as two cores just didn’t go far enough.

    I bought ‘more mac than i need’ in order to make it last. I can plonk a further 10Gb RAM in here and attach a 30” cinema display before it runs out of usefullness. This should see me through at least CS4 and most likely up to CS5.

    The only limitations I have noticed is that some software is now Leopard only, which causes me a problem.

    Your advice, however is correct. If I were to rush out and buy the latest 8 core Mac Pro, I would be buying more Mac than I need, as my current model meets my requirements. And the irony of being able to get a 4 core PC for 1/3 the price I paid is not lost on me either.

    evilcat had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 66
  • You lousy Mac-hating 2 digit a holes.

    zato3 had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 26
  • Mac hating? That will be the day. I’ve got 4 of the things right now, plus 4 ipods and an iPhone. And an Apple TV. And I’m getting ready to buy another one. I just don’t know which one. The iMac? Annoying glossy screen. The Mac mini? I just don’t know. The MacPro? Too much dough…

    @evilcat
    For some isolated cases people really do need the high end stuff. Video work is extremely demanding for example and working with really large files in photoshop can cause some machines to choke I’ve been told. But the people who truly need the big iron know who they are and they usually use cost benefit analysis to decide on their hardware.  If your Mac is tax deductible, or if work is paying, I’d buy the the top of the line Pro tower every time.

    Chris Seibold had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 354
  • Instead they rated the wine based on the fanciness of the bottle…CS

    Indeed. Perhaps those upward pointing nostrils of our Mac snub comrades are what you are insinuating in your hyper-extended article.

    But I don’t buy it even when it’s for the taking, CS. Your readers here at AM are more intellectual than that. These Mac guys/gals know what they want from a Mac. Yes, sir! Your very readers happen to love the Mac for it is the very BEST damn computers out there.

    Of course, those high-end XPS, Alienware, Falcon Northwest gaming rigs will protest <no surprise there> that their systems can beat the s#1t out of a Mac Pro any day but that is another discussion for another day.

    CS, your article’s premise is interesting but hovers above hypothetical, meaning it can never be proven and that means it will never become a factual information. Your fine taste in Macs is based on its tangible properties and will never equate to your exquisite taste in red wines - neither here in Cali or France.

    I can see why Zato is very inflamed by this article. Hey Zato, can you please illuminate your anger at CS with an intellectual input? Creative inputs?

    Thanks! -Robo.

    Robomac had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 846
  • Interesting points Robo, allow me to respond.
    “Indeed. Perhaps those upward pointing nostrils of our Mac snub comrades are what you are insinuating in your hyper-extended article.”

    I don’t see Mac users as snobs in general, though there are exceptions. As for the length thing I consider that an valid criticism and I will try to keep things shorter in the future.

    “But I don’t buy it even when it’s for the taking, CS. Your readers here at AM are more intellectual than that. These Mac guys/gals know what they want from a Mac. Yes, sir! Your very readers happen to love the Mac for it is the very BEST damn computers out there.”

    I agree completely. The point I was trying to make wasn’t that the Mac is inferior to say an alienware machine or something but rather that the Mac is great, in fact the MAc is so good all anyone likely needs is a mini.

    “CS, your article’s premise is interesting but hovers above hypothetical, meaning it can never be proven and that means it will never become a factual information.”

    Well that is a relief. Actually, this article is purely opinion so any factual information that crept in was purely accidental.

    ” Your fine taste in Macs is based on its tangible properties and will never equate to your exquisite taste in red wines - neither here in Cali or France”

    Most of the goodness that is MAc can be found in a mini. I don’t know much about wine except to order the second cheapest bottle at the restaurant.

    “I can see why Zato is very inflamed by this article.”

    I never write articles as comment bait, or to make readers irate. I stick to writing whatever topic seems interesting at the moment. that said, I didn’t really imagine this article would actually generate any passion at all.

    Chris Seibold had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 354
  • Most of the goodness that is MAc can be found in a mini. I don’t know much about wine except to order the second cheapest bottle at the restaurant.

    You know what? I wholeheartedly agree with you, Chris. For much of what I do in real life and off (work?), the Power Mac G5 is much too much. How much more of an 8-core Mac Pro? It is way overkill for much of the Mac crowd. Yes! A mini is all you need my Mac brothers! wink

    But, in a way, Apple has to offer the “best of this world” Mac Pro to keep the elite Mac snobs from jumping ship - not that they have any reason to. That is the reasons for Apple selling those velvety pro apps - Final Cut, Logic Studio, Aperture, Shake? They are just too sweetly compelling for any right minded professional to leave. The only thing left for Apple to complete the pro domination is a replacement for CS3 and that is rumoured to be coming sooner than we think. And what of iWork Pro? I WANT ONE STEVE!

    CS, for the record, I never said your article is “too long” or a “flame bait”. I only said it is “hyperextended” meaning it is longer than a typical CS or AM article. Article length is good when an article has lots of minor topics to brush over - like RDM or Ars Technica or AppleInsider would typically do for several pages (and inline banner ad$? hmmm…)

    If an articles has only one or two premises to gloss over, a hyperextension starts to sound like nagging wife or gf (bf?) or Vista? - blah, blah, blahdi, blah… wink

    But sure keep throwing us AM readers really good Mac bits - news, opinions, reviews, rumours? We love to bite every Mac crumb that we can get - even when they are hypotethical and flame-bait-sounding, like this one.

    That is why I am inviting Zato to redeem his opinion more creatively to the rest of us, not just an uncool middle-finger-pointing to our Mac hero, CS.

    Robomac had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 846
  • Oh, and as for the “second cheapest bottle” can I bum a glass from you? After $$$ spent on those sweet minis and iPods the ol’ gully can forfeit a bottle of Merlot lest it is bummed free or feels like free if bought by the wife. wink

    Robomac had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 846
  • Thanks for the reply Chris. I really stretched myself to buy my Mac because I knew I needed it to last as long as possible. I wouldn’t call it snobbery—I prefer OS X to Windows after being a hardcore MS user since ‘91, and figured I should take my one opportunity to get the best I could, since it will be a long time till I can afford to pay out on a Mac again! The wife got a 17% educational discount, and I took out a big loan to cover the £3,000 it cost, even with that discount. In fact, I just made my last payment! So I stretched myself, but this machine enables me to work from home, and has probably recouped three times its value, simply in work ‘on the side.’

    Putting it into perspective though, my parents need a new PC and I’m pushing them to a Mac Mini, which _is_ all they need smile

    evilcat had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 66
  • This article smacks of: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”

    Get rid of those fancy-schmancy Mercedes and BMWs. Nobody really needs them. Get a Tata (http://tatanano.inservices.tatamotors.com/tatamotors/)

    10,000 square feet for a house! Absurd! The Japanese and New Yorkers raise entire families in 900 square feet.

    I could go on. But your point is well taken - we have needs and we have wants. The point of product marketing (from ANY company) is to convince the buying public that you WANT their product, goods, or service. Not that you NEED it. But that your WANT it. If you NEED it, all the better - an easier sale.

    MacHelp had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 3
  • I can see how you could get that out of the article Machelp but that wasn’t my intention (though the fault is on me for not being clearer).
    Allow a digression into the genesis of this particular article. I’m am constantly torn by yearning for a new Mac and knowing that I don’t really need one. When I look objectively at the situation a mini would do but, dammit man, I need something better just so I don’t have a mini! Still, for my needs a mini is adequate. Which wasn’t the conclusion I wanted to reach. Still it was an enlightening exercise because I also realized if I went with my first choice I’d be paying 2,000 just to say I didn’t have a mini. That is a lot of money just to be pretentious.

    The intent of this article wasn’t to say that people should only get the mini or anything like that. I was trying to point that, in many cases, when people slap down money for a new machine they are paying X for the solution to their problems and Y for the prestige factor. It is good to know what you’re paying for.

    Chris Seibold had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 354
  • You said: ‘That is a lot of money just to be pretentious.’

    But that’s the way with everything! Why would anyone spend $5000 on a pen from Monte Blanc, when you can buy a Bic for 19¢? The entire industries are built around ‘designer’ or ‘exclusive’ products - Cars, Clothing(Fashion), Housing, Computers, Entertainment, Country Clubs, Sports, etc, etc, etc.

    Here’s an example - http://www.rolexcenter.net/platinum_rolex_president.htm - Now someone bought this item originally and, I suspect, traded it in to purchase a newer, snazier model. But why?!? Because he wanna, not because he needa.

    MacHelp had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 3
  • I agree Machelp. But there is a difference between buying something consciously realizing you’re paying more to be cool (I suppose there are people who really think that a Mount Blanc is worth the five g’s based on utility alone but they’re in the minority) and buying something because you think you need something more.
    Honestly, I could get by with a mini no problem but there’s a good chance I’ll get a 24” iMac or a MacPro. In the past I’ve always told myself I needed something more than the entry level but this time I realize that I don’t. So if I get something more than a mini I’ll know I’m paying X for the pretentious factor.
    On a side note: That watch is an excellent value. If anyone is interested in purchasing it they can feel free to send it to me for safekeeping.

    Chris Seibold had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 354
  • Steve was right about the Mac Mini if you already own a keyboard and a monitor. A good friend of mine bought his first Mac when the Intel Mini became available. He ditched his PC for the mini as his primary home computer after saving the keyboard and LCD monitor. His PC was always loaded up with spyware and other junk and he got tired of it’s high upkeep. He bought an external firewire drive for more storage and is very happily running both OSX and Windows XP (when necessary for weird windows only applications) using VMware’s Fusion. His Mini has one gigabyte of RAM and does everything he and his family need to do with a home computer. His wife is very happily using Mac mail, Safari, and the iLife suite.

    flyboy had this to say on May 01, 2008 Posts: 30
  • Interesting article although it overlooks the fact most of us have houses (not me right now) and cars larger than we need.  The Mac Mini does almost everything one needs fairly inexpensively.  It does lack the graphics and memory for high level stuff.  The point of the article though is correct.

    CPTKILLER had this to say on May 02, 2008 Posts: 3
  • Chris wrote: “Mac hating? That will be the day. I’ve got 4 of the things right now, plus 4 ipods and an iPhone. And an Apple TV. And I’m getting ready to buy another one. I just don’t know which one. The iMac? Annoying glossy screen. The Mac mini? I just don’t know. The MacPro? Too much dough…”

    You’re a liar and a Mac hater. And so is everyone associated with Apple Matters/iPhone Matters.

    zato3 had this to say on May 02, 2008 Posts: 26
  • Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >
You need log in, or register, in order to comment