Over the past three decades I’ve owned many computers – big towers, notebooks, laptops, desktops, transportable all-in-ones, and ultra-light portables. Worked on everything from a Tandy 100 to a SPARC station. So I have a pretty good idea of what computers can do.
I’ve also owned a good number of blending devices. In fact, right now I have a large 12-cup food processor, a small 3-cup food processor, a heavy duty blender that can crush ice, a light-duty blender that would disintegrate if it tried to crush ice, a hand mixer, and the various food processors that still work but have been replaced with bigger capacity/better featured machines. So I have a sense of what their capabilities are as well.
The problem with blenders is the issue that plagued the earliest personal computers. They just do one – or maybe two – things… they may do them well, but the machines are limited to a narrow task. If I want to mix a large batch of cookie dough, I use the big processor. But it’s a waste to dirty up all the moving parts of the large machine if I just want to chop some parsley, so out comes the baby processor. If I want a blended margarita, better use the 200-hp, high-torque blender. Grinding coffee requires cutting blades tailored to the task. Need to whip some cream? Got to use that trusty hand mixer.
I’d love to have a blending, chopping, mixing, ice crushing machine that is portable, uses only a few watts, costs less every year, and can add new features by simply downloading the latest software.
In other words, a computer.
In response to Bruce Sallan’s: Why Doesn’t It Work Like a Blender