Adam Robert Guha's excellent article published last week, Processor Upgrades a Waste of Money?,
regarding the impossibility of upgrading older Macs to the point that
they will perform equally and have equal specifications to the newest
Macs available makes some salient and valid points. But for a lot of
us, particularly those who read and make use of the information on
the Low End Mac site, there are
other factors which have to be considered, factors which may lead to a
different conclusion.
Many of us have an older Mac (mine is a Power Mac 7300 with a 200 MHz 604e
CPU) which we use for all our computing needs. These may include word
processing, graphics with the likes of Photoshop, PageMaker and
Illustrator, Internet (both work and recreation), and various other
things. While perhaps not "power users," we find the Mac to be a very
efficient work partner in its present form. We may have neither the
resources nor the need to think about a new iMac, inexpensive and
powerful as it may be.
Let's suppose we decide that a speed increase may make things go a
little easier, especially in areas like graphics and the Internet.
Perhaps we want to "get our feet wet" in such activities as audio and
video editing or burning CDs. A brand-new Mac would make these
activities fast and easy, but what if we don't have the money? Or what
if we don't know if we really want to jump in that quickly with that
much, at least until we really know what we're doing?
These factors are a part of many of our lives, no getting around it.
There should be an alternative to spending what to many is a great deal
of money on the kind of upgrading we are not sure we need. Thanks to
the companies that make CPU upgrades, such alternatives exist.
Let's take a little side trip and look at the other computer
platform. There is much made of the fact that Wintel computers can be
built almost from scratch. Starting with an empty case, and just about
anyone can put one together any way they want it. It follows that you
can upgrade all of this piece by piece for not much money.
It's kind of like building a hot rod in your garage. You can cobble
together a pretty fast car on your own, and there's a certain amount of
pride and satisfaction in doing so. It can even be a great car, but it
will never be a Porsche or a BMW - the engineering and design quality
of these cars aren't likely to be duplicated in your garage or anyone
else's.
But what if it were possible to take an older model of one of these
superb cars and put in an engine that would give performance that
surpassed the original, would pin your ears back on the road, and was
still of quality superior to the hot rod? I'm sure you know where this
analogy is going. One of the most desirable qualities of the Mac is its
long-lived resistance to obsolescence, in direct opposition to the
Wintel machines.
What if such an upgrade could do what we need it to do for our
present purposes? What if we don't have the present need to upgrade
such things as hard drive speed and size, connectivity with FireWire
and USB, or go to the latest and probably greatest operating system
(which will only run on the newest machines)? Some of us really don't
have such needs - at least not yet. And many of us are not impressed
with technical specifications which mean faster running of newer
software, but which have little practical benefit when running the
older versions.
What we must consider is genuine, practical need. No, we
won't be getting the total equivalent of a new Mac, but neither do we
need it.
For us, an upgrade of perhaps $200-250 for a faster CPU with another
$50-75 for more RAM not only makes sense, but it is in fact the ideal
answer. Whether the considerations are economics, practical need, or
both, this is the perfect fix for us at the present. It's less
expensive than a new machine, there's no need to buy USB-to-SCSI
adapters for peripherals, and the chances are good that it will fill
our needs admirably.
This is what the Mac does so superbly: Filling present needs with
the best hardware and operating system for "the rest of us" while
holding the promise of staying power in the long run. I believe it is
no accident that the companies manufacturing upgrades for Macs are
doing pretty good business. The Mac is not a computer to throw away
when it gets a little slow; there's too much life left in it.
If you can't buy (or don't need) a new Mac, you just upgrade for
awhile. And when that upgrade no longer fills your needs, sell it or
give it to someone who can use it, then move on to a newer (or
brand-new) model.
It's possible, it's practical, and it makes sense. It puts computing
within the reach of those who do not have (or cannot justify spending)
the kind of money a new system requires.
This may not reap the short-term rewards gained by companies that
practice planned (or forced) obsolescence, but the Mac inspires
customer loyalty and keeps the toxic waste dumps a little less
full.
Share your perspective on the Mac by emailing with "My Turn" as your subject.
