The last
time we gave multiple examples of how we value
artifacts, including machines. I value my wedding
ring. I value tools which make me productive.
I value artifacts because of their beauty. This
should be enough to silence anyone who claims
that attachment to a Mac is irrational simply
because it is a machine or artifact. Using the
same logic as PC users, we would have to say that
the value we place on wedding rings, works of
art and certain tools is unjustified. This argument
from analogy shows the waywardness of their reasoning.
We also showed that under any given interpretation
of “machine,” “It’s just a machine” is not sufficient
to justify the claim that attachment to the Mac
is unjustified. We want to explore these themes
further this week. In the conclusion we will answer
the question, “Is the Mac just a machine?” The
answer may surprise you.

 

In a sense I am
still speaking the unspeakable. In Infinite
Loop 1 we showed that the reaction we have
to the Mac is visceral, out-running our abilities
to describe it. Language seems an insufficient
mode of expression to describe our attachment
to the Mac. This is not unique to the Mac, and
this is important for the reader to keep in mind.
Because we have the same reaction to the Mac that
we do other things, including both artifacts and
natural objects, perhaps all these things share
certain properties which prompt this reaction.
Maybe the significance I place on my wedding ring
is prompted by the same kind of elements that
prompt the significance I attach to the Mac. In
this essay I wish to describe what those elements
are. Hopefully, this will demystify the Mac mystique
to a certain point.

There are three
such elements. Get these down. You will then be
ready to cogently answer anyone who asks “Why
the Mac?” Your answer could be about megahertz
and the availability of software. It could be;
and indeed these things are needful. But everyone
doesn’t understand them. Or you can, as I will,
connect them to things all people appreciate if
attentive. You can answer using certain universal
concepts which anyone can understand. So if someone
asks “Why the Mac?” you should answer simply,
“Because of its utility, beauty and symbolism,
like many other things in my life.”

Utility

I defined “utility”
in the last article as follows: The utility of
an object means it helps us reach our ends and
does it well. That is, the utility of an object
is defined by how good of a means it is to the
ends we seek. (This is the basis of Microsoft’s
phrase “Where do you want to go today?” in fact.)
The better an object assists us in achieving our
ends the more we value it. Obviously, the Mac
has utility.

 

 

Utility is found
on many levels. One is simplicity: A tool
has utility when it not only helps us achieve
our ends but helps us achieve them simply. The
simpler a means is to our ends the better it is
as an instrument. Take any end you have. You always
want to know, “What is the simplest way to achieve
it?” We could take circuitous routes to our ends.
But human beings desire simplicity by nature.
We want the simplest to use VCR and the simplest
theories in science. So is it any wonder we value
the simplest to use computer?

 

 

We have been involved
with buying two Macs in the last year for each
of our parents. We bought my parents an original
iMac and my wife’s parents a blueberry iBook.
We imagined both parents trying to get anything
done well and simply on a Wintel. We couldn’t
see it. They have limited computer backgrounds.
The choice was clear. Within a few months of getting
my parents the iMac we visited them again. My
mother was up late playing quiz games on line,
something I had never done! And this is their
first home computer. Both parents do not know
what the “Finder” is, or what an extension is.
And that is the point: They don’t have to. The
only things we had to explain were what a desktop
and file is (in the real world). The rest explains
itself.

 

 

We buy computers
for many reasons. Some of the reasons we have
for purchasing a computer include but are not
limited to: business, creativity, education, fun
and games, and all manner of productivity. One
computer may serve several of these ends. I use
my Mac for education, creativity and business
for example. I write, prepare classes, build web
pages and play on my Mac. I could do all
these on a Wintel. But I do not. The reason is
because Wintels do not serve these ends with the
same utility as a Mac. I can be up and running
in no time. I do not have to mess with “C:drives”
or the registeries. I do not have to go in to
command line mode to tweak the Mac. When I place
a disk in a drive it shows up on the desktop and
I do not have to search for it. There is no mile
upon mile of hierarchical menus to wade through.
If I wish to quit a program I quit, I do not “Exit”
which makes it seem that the program is still
running somewhere. File names make sense. What
is “HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT” anyway? Installation of
software, any software, is easier by far. The
whole OS is simpler and more elegant. It is clear
what I am doing all the time. (And with the sneak
peek we had of OSX at the Expo, this is only going
to get better, and cooler.) All these add up to
utility. Simply put: “There is no step three!”

 

 

The point of all
this is clear: We are justified in valuing the
Mac because it helps us simply reach some of our
goals and ends in life. If those ends are rational,
and one cannot argue that if education is our
goal then it is not rational, then it is also
rational to value the best means to those ends.
“I love this thing!” is a rational response to
the Mac.

Symbolism

 

 

In Infinite Loop
1 we examined the symbolism of the Apple logo.
In Infinite Loop 2 we examined the symbolism of
a wedding ring. Here I argue that we rationally
value the Mac because of its symbolism.

 

 

I value my wedding
ring not because it is just a piece of metal but
because it represents, symbolizes, certain other
values, such as fidelity, obligation and love.
And again, what we say here is not confined to
the Mac. We value lots of things, lots of artifacts
and natural objects, because of their symbolism.
An obvious example is the US flag, which is after
all just a piece of cloth. And if the values an
object symbolizes are rational, so is our attachment
to it. Think about it . . .

 

 

As I sit here in
my study there are many artifacts around me which
I value because of their symbolism. One example
is my degrees hanging on the wall which are after
all just pieces of paper, right? Wrong. They symbolize
hard work, determination, expertise and fond memories.
All of these are rational values. Another example
is my library and in particular certain books,
which are after all just pieces of paper, right?
Wrong. Some of the books remind me of how I was
changed for the better by reading them. Some represent
challenges met (I actually finished the thing!).
Some represent fond memories of sitting alone
and reading. These are all rational values. Then
there is a plaque from World War I honoring my
grandfather for his service in that “Great War,”
which is after all just a piece of wood, right?
Wrong. What this symbolizes is beyond words. And
then there is our Mac SE/30. This was our first
Mac ever. We got it the first year we were married,
in our first home, with our first savings. Sometimes
I still fire it up just to remember those firsts.
So much symbolism.

 

 

Classes started
this week. Before one class I was making small
talk with the students. I asked one who claimed
to be a computer guy, “What kind of computer do
you have?” I was fascinated not so much with his
response but with how he responded. He
kind of slumped in his chair, looked down and
said, “I have a Gateway.” There was almost a sense
of shame and embarrassment in how he said it.
(If my computer came in a box that looked like
a cow, I would feel the same way!) Imagine asking
someone, “What’s your favorite football team?”
and they answer, “The Cleveland Browns.” Same
thing, same kind of embarrassment perhaps. Now
it is not the Gateway machine per se but what
it symbolizes which caused this. What does a Gateway
box represent? Oh, I don’t know, perhaps just
mass consumerism, appliance mania and conformity,
despite talk about “Eye-catching Futuristic Designs”
(a quote from gateway.com). We see this in the
iMac copy Gateway Astro commercial. You know the
commercial: a pudgy donut-eating common man wiping
sugar all over himself as he is exposed for the
first time to the internet. A faint attempt at
utility. And Dell has flooded society with so
many machines that they have lost any meaning
they may have had. They have become throw aways.
It only goes to show that utility and mass consumerism
can be the opiate of the people.

What does the Mac
symbolize? This is actually a very personal question.
When we got our G3 my wife and I spent hours playing
Maelstrom together. Those were good times. It
was fun. We grew closer during this play. That
G3 represents those times to us. But I am thinking
in bigger terms here. What does THE Mac represent?
Creativity, simplicity, quality, counter-culture
values, thinking different, iconoclasticism, nonconformity,
you know the routine. I think all of these are
rational values on some level. If my Mac represents
them to a high degree then my attachment to it
is rational.

 

 

But in reality,
one’s Mac symbolizes whatever he wants it to.
There is so much personal freedom we have with
a Mac. It is seen in the desktop pictures we use,
the system fonts we install, and the icons on
our desktops, for example. We choose these on
a very personal level. When I say, “I have a Mac,”
it lets people know something personal about me;
it is almost like saying, “I’m Catholic.” This
personal symbolism is not unique to the Mac. It
applies to the cars we drive, the neighborhoods
we choose to live in and the clothes we wear.
All of our choices are representations of our
ego and nature. So in a sense, ultimately, as
with so many other things in our lives, my Mac
symbolizes ME. (Perhaps this explains the shame
spoken of earlier: If in fact these artifacts
represent us, poor representations reflect poorly
on us and we know it.)

 

 

So the Mac, your
Mac, is really not that different from many other
things in your life. It functions as a symbol
and performs that function well. This is why we
value it, and doing so is rational: It symbolizes
rational values. It is an extension of our souls.

Beauty

The third element which draws us
to the Mac is beauty. This is the icing on the
computer cake. I received a PC catalog in the
mail the other day. After leaving it lay untouched
for several days I thought I would give it a quick
look. One thing stood out: These things are ugly.
I am sorry, there is no other way to say it. Why
shouldn’t we make computers beautiful? Computers
are an important part of our lives, and becoming
more important (some say too important) all the
time. We do the same thing for appliances, don’t
we? We do it for cars? Why not computers? (By
the way, my Mac is not an appliance. I am preparing
an article on computer appliances to be published
at a later date.)

 

In Infinite Loop 1 we discussed
the Mac’s beauty. We will have more to say on
this as we think about it. But these machines
are aesthetically pleasing, and it occurs on so
many levels. They look good and they feel good.
Go ahead, touch it. See? The curves and colors
are attractive. The plastics shine unlike other
plastics. We didn’t realize how beautiful the
original iMac was until we took it out of the
box and placed it on a desk in a den. In its natural
environment, as it were, the iMac looks great.
Our G4 is one beautiful machine too. And it grows
on you, it becomes more beautiful to you over
time. You notice little details the longer you
are with it. And I read somewhere that if one
looks at the round mouse from the top it looks
like a woman’s figure, that is, an hour glass
shape. Perhaps. Be that as it may, Apple has a
corner on the form factor.

 

But this is only hardware. When
one adds the Mac OS to the mix the two fit together
great. Indeed, hardware without software is dead,
and software without hardware is impotent. This
is why it is important that Apple is the only
company in control of both (and why we do not
run Windows emulators on our Macs). Think of Aqua.
Now think of Aqua actually inside the curvy, shiny
and colorful Mac. OSX’s icons share the shiny
plastic look of the iMacs and G4s. The geometry
of the monitor, the angles of the design, match
that of the OS. It was a match made in, well .
. . Cupertino. Measure the Mac, both hardware
and software, by aesthetic standards, for that
is where it really shines, as it were.

 

 

So Is It or Isn’t It?

 

 

So is it just a
machine or isn’t it? As in so many things in life,
the answer is yes, AND no. On one level of description
the Mac is just a machine: A concoction of plastic,
silicon and metals arranged in a certain way.
I guess on one level of description, say that
of the neuroscientist, I too am just a machine:
A concoction of tissues, organs and bones arranged
in a certain way. But I also seem to be much more,
something the term “machine” just doesn’t capture.
Human love can be described in a neurochemical
way, but that doesn’t really capture the experience,
does it? So it is with the Mac. Calling it a “machine”
just doesn’t capture everything the Mac is and
represents. It’s like calling the Mona Lisa just
a painting, or Mahler’s Second just a symphony.
And now we know why. We value the Mac because
of its utility, symbolism and beauty. In this
way the Mac is like so many things in our lives.
So the Mac is a machine, but much more. So, perhaps,
are we . . . and that does matter.

David
Schultz