High tech and razors

In an article titled When we really don't need new technologies, Andrew Kantor writes:

The fact is, razors aren't computers. You can't introduce a faster or more powerful model. Once your face (or legs) are smooth, they're smooth. Period. That M3Power razor is not going to cut my face any closer; the hairs just can't get shorter than zero. It's technology for technology's sake and nothing more.

Has he got a point?

It's an interesting question. With Gillette being taken to court due to some claims about their latest razor, it's worth asking, certainly.

Of course, there is something he left out. Shaving isn't just about getting the closest possible shave, though that's what tends to be advertised. Shaving products can improve by making the experience more comfortable, and if technology contributes to that, then it's not just technology for technology's sake.

But that still leaves us with the question, does adding this kind of technology to razors really benefit the consumer, or is it simply a ploy to make more money from gizmo-obsessed consumers?

At least one person who emailed me about the M3Power suggested that it's not about the closeness for him. He finds the M3Power's vibration feature to be soothing and feels less irritation as a result. He considered it worth the price.

For me, I think there's more flash than substance ot the M3Power. I still prefer the regular Mach 3 for my shaving needs.