Will my Macintosh become obsolete?

June 26 1998
by John Galt
Contributing Reader

A frequent concern of prospective computer purchasers is obsolescence. Even the cheapest new computer represents a significant outlay of after-tax dollars, and no one wants to be stuck with a boat anchor with performance measured in GB and MHz. Windows users who are unfamiliar with the Apple line often cite perceived obsolescence as their reason for choosing a Pentium box over a G3 equipped Macintosh. How does the Macintosh's life expectancy compare to Windows machines?

When you buy a new computer, even a Macintosh, you must acknowledge that you will be able to buy that same computer in a few weeks or months for less money (in real dollars, unsold computers in inventory lose from about one-half to one percent of their market value every week). By waiting for prices to fall, though, you forfeit the potential productivity you'd gain by using a computer right now. Advice of typical PC users is typically to buy the latest and greatest Wintel box because no matter what you buy, it will soon become obsolete. What to do? The decision is of course highly personal, but an easier one if you decide upon a Macintosh. Here's why:

Macintosh computers enjoy a longer lifespan than their Wintel counterparts, due at least in part to the fact that upgrades and improvements to their operating systems do not make existing applications (your investments) obsolete. For instance, if I had bought the latest and greatest 80386 PC in 1988 instead of my SE/30, I would have had to replace the processor and increase its clock speed in order to run Windows 95. Then, I'd have to upgrade all my software as well. And since Win95 is so memory and hard disk hungry, I'd likely have to buy a new hard disk and more memory as well. With the plethora of device drivers, configuration software, and other nonsense that would have to be installed, I'd be in for several long weekends of crashes, rebooting in "safe mode", calls to tech support, and digging through manuals while deciphering mystical eight-character file names. When I'm done, I would still have the same crummy display and peripherals that I started with. Moreover, the investment in required hardware and software would likely exceed that of simply purchasing a new computer with a bunch of software already installed. So it's no wonder that no reasonable person bothers to upgrade a PC unless he starts with a totally free computer. Now you know why the PC people say always buy the best. In the Wintel universe, they're right!

Of course, this is brilliant marketing strategy. Planned obsolescence at its best. Microsoft exists and thrives on it. Don't misunderstand me; I'm not bashing the Intel - Microsoft behemoth. Directly or indirectly, they've created millions of jobs and contributed trillions of dollars to our economy. The United States' unprecedented economic success has been driven by computer technology and marketing strategies like this for nearly a decade. No one is forcing the public to buy Wintel products, the free market has created their success in spite of the existence of Apple's superior products. The fact that Apple enjoys less than five percent of the personal computer market share is a curious phenomenon of public gullibility that inspired me to write my previous story, Get the Word Out.

In terms of life expectancy, what can Wintel users expect today? For the answer, lets see what Microsoft has to say. Mr. Yusef Mehdi, speaking at trade shows as Microsoft marketer, has been advising corporations to upgrade directly to Windows NT, an immense operating system that makes it easier to add peripherals like scanners, joysticks, and video cameras to their computers. (This is news? Haven't Macintosh users been doing that without problems for years?) Microsoft's senior vice president in charge for development of operating systems, Jim Allchin, calls Windows NT "the platform for the next millennium." Wait a minute! What happened to Windows 98? Stillborn. Said David Bank in the June 24, 1998 Wall Street Journal, "the technology underlying Windows 95 and Windows 98 is a dead end." Wasn't it just yesterday that the Rolling Stones introduced Windows 95 as the oh-so-cool operating system for the forseeable future? Apparently, Win 95 has gone the way of Milli Vanilli.

So what does all this mean to an existing Wintel user? Microsoft says that Windows NT will require - that's right, REQUIRE - a 400 MHz Pentium II class processor and from 64 to 128 MB system memory. This from the company that originally said that Win 95 will run in 4 MB. Yeah, right. Windows NT's operating instructions are nearly twice that of the stillborn Windows 98. The vast majority of systems being sold today simply won't be able to handle NT. Software vendors are directing their energies toward NT since they know 95 and 98 are dead. It's entertaining to watch the expression on people's faces when they're told that their sexy two month old fastest-computer-on-the-block three thousand plus dollar 333 MHz Pentium has just become a relic.

Microsoft is naturally quite pleased with this situation. They stand to gain about twice their present revenue on each copy of NT over Windows 95 or 98. PC manufacturers are happy because they know everyone will want to trade in their 166 and 233 MHz relics for whatever machine they convince you to shell out another $2000 for. Wall Street is happiest of all, because investors know that consumers will be more than willing throw a significant amount of their disposable income at whatever Microsoft and Intel tell them they need. The likelihood of this is certain -- for many years now, Wintel buyers have been conditioned to tolerate planned obsolescence and the perceived requirement to upgrade their hardware and software every few months.

On the other hand, it can be argued that Apple has suffered financially because its products don't need to be sold in garage sales three years after they're bought. But from a consumer's perspective, when faced with an investment decision between the best Pentium box or Apple's current products, the choice is an easy one -- IF you're informed.

In contrast with the 1988 vintage PC, today my SE/30 runs many of the same programs that I bought for my Mac Plus back in 1984 despite major improvements to the hardware and innumerable operating system upgrades. In fact, if I want to use my SE/30's hard disk on the floppy-only Mac Plus, I simply unplug it from the SE/30 and plug it into the Plus's SCSI port. The Plus will even boot from the hard disk without skipping a beat even though it had never seen a hard disk in its life. Same thing if I want to transfer files to my Dad's Performa, or my brother's G3 running Apple's latest operating system. It's literally that simple. Could anyone using a PC from that stone-age era make the same claim?

The future isn't certain, but in the computer business (unlike mutual funds) past performance is an excellent indicator of future results. Wintel's future will be more fragmentation, more confusing CPU choices, more required upgrades, more unstable and resource-hungry operating systems. As for the present, a 233 MHz G3 is approximately twice as fast as a similarly equipped 300 MHz Pentium II. If you look at the Wintel products in a similar price range, they don't have anything comparable today and wont for years. In announcing Merced's delay, Intel has conceded that they wont have a competitive alternative to the G3 for about two years -- an eternity in terms of computer evolution. And will their new products require Wintel users to upgrade their software? What do you think? These indisputable facts guarantee against Macintosh obsolescence at least that amount of time during which Apple products will continue to evolve as they have in the past. As a Macintosh user, how can you go wrong?