Human psychology is an interesting topic, isn't it?
When I made the Storm/G5's, I ended up making up about 5x of them of what I originally thought there'd be people who'd be prepared to pay the cost to get them made up. In fact, I've already gotten emails for about half as many again despite that they're essentially unavailable for a while.
Trying to rationalise it is pointless. Why do people spend $500-600 on a video card which only offers 10-20% better frame rates, and then, only when using 4xAA and at 1280x1024 and above? Why do people pay ~$1000 for CPU's which are only 5% faster than a $800 model, and that's only 10% faster than a $500 model? Do they need it? As in really need it? 99% of the time the answer would not be that their livelihood depended upon it.
People buy the best because they want the best. That's what people do. Why buy a $1500 Tag-Heuer watch when a $150 watch does just as well, and offers the same functionality, and a $15 watch probably does as well?
There is no rationalisation based upon measurable performance/$$. People have money, and then people have "disposable" or "luxury" money, which is money that they have over and above what they need to live. They spend it how they see fit to spend it as suits their personal desires. Is it pointless, bad value, or wasteful? Arguably so from some perspectives. The point is that the person buying it made that decision for themselves, spent their money how they saw fit to spend it, and derive whatever satisfaction from their purchase as suits them. It's no-one's perogative to presume to tell people how they should spend their money, or by what criteria that their money should be spent. Sure people may not agree with it, but really that's the disagreer's problem. The person spending the money doesn't have a problem with doing so, so why should someone else?
