[adorno]

Close competition to Apple's products tend to cost about the same.

I hear that from you Apple fanatics all the time, but, when I look to compare, feature by feature, and price-wise, whenever there is a PC that is the equivalent of a Mac in performance and utility, the PC always ends on top. The only thing that Macs have currently that is not available for a laptop or ultrabook, is the retina display, otherwise, the laptop/PC always wins the price war for comparably equipped computers.

Macs have higher resale value than PCs.

True, just like they always start with a much higher initial price. Is that something that you Apple fanatics should be bragging about? BTW, why would someone want to buy a used Mac, since, they start out with less real utility in the world of computing? There is a fool born every minute, I guess.

Apple has a relationship with Intel that has actually gotten them the "latest and greatest" before it was available to any other OEM.

Whatever that relationship is, is not something that likely benefits Intel more than it does Apple, since, to get exclusivity on any chips or other components, Apple would have to be paying more or purchasing in massive quantities to make it worthwhile to Intel. But, such relationships with Intel are for just a few months, since, Intel is a lot more dependent upon the other OEMs for sales than on Apple. Apple may think they're getting a good deal, but, it's Intel that's actually getting the most benefit.

Intel gets its chips and components introduced to the market via Apple (or whoever else), and the rest of the field gets to join in later, with Apple or whoever else was first, having done their guinea pig duties for Intel.

But, no matter who was first, it's the one that ends up in the lead that matters. PCs are in the lead, by a very wide margin. Apple may be making more money from each of their Macs, but, the Apple fanatics were never accused of being prudent or that smart. (Have you seen the current set of Apple commercials? Essentially, it's advertising that, basically says that, Macs are made for dummies, since, they don't have to do any thinking to use those Macs. It's the "computers for dummies" commercials from Apple. People who need that kind of dumbing-down of their computers, shouldn't even be using computers. But, I'm guessing that, it's not about a dumb-clientele; it's more about Apple looking down on their fanatical base, making them seem like imbeciles that can't be trusted to learn how to press a button or two on their computers.

Ultrabooks equivalent to the MacBook Air cost about the same. Notebooks equivalent to the Retina MacBook Pro, well, they just don't exist yet at any price.

Ultrabooks, comparably equipped, will always be lower priced than the Macs. I've already seen them at best buy and elsewhere.

However, it's not about having to purchase an overloaded Mac were most people wont need to use the available power. People don't need to purchase a MacBook Air in order to get the simple forms of computing done. Even a simple notebook/netbook will satisfy them. But, when it comes to Macs, the fanatics will purchase them, just for bragging rights, since, the vast majority of them don't really need or will ever use that power. Most of what they'll use a Mac for is for the same things that a tablet does. But, impressing their friends is more important than being practical and prudent.

Also, guess what?

Retina displays are unnecessary for any type of computing or web browsing that people do. So, in today's world, it's overkill and just adds to the expense.

Even so, retina displays are not proprietary to Apple, and Samsung and others are promising Windows 8 devices with retina displays. Apple will have go back to the "re-innovation table" to invent a new "super-duper-ultra-superior retina" that they'll have exclusively to themselves.

Have you noticed that, so far, you've mentioned "retina displays" and Intel components? None of those were Apple inventions. So, what is it that any of Apple's gadgets have inside them that is exclusively theirs? Packaging and gluing and welding, and shiny exteriors, do not make Apple's wares any better.

And, you are right about the much higher cost of Apple's Macs. They are the champions there, for sure.

But, resale value? Yeah, there will be others, in the same religion known as "Apple", who will believe that, owning an Apple gadget will bring good luck and much fortune in their futures, if they just go around bragging about those Apple gadgets.

Also, when it comes to buying a used Mac, that is purely idiotic, since, a used Mac of 1 or 2 years, will still cost more than the newest generation PC with the latest and greatest technology inside, and which will be much more valuable than even the latest Mac, since, it will still be a PC with an application market-place which numbers into the millions. Yeah, no one will ever have a change to use/purchase those millions of applications, but, it's awfully nice to know that, for whatever you want, their is an application for that, and, one that is not crippled by the more limited Macs, which have OSX inside, which means that, most applications wont be served as nicely as they will with a Windows system.

There was a time when even I, thought that, having a Mac was better for whatever I wanted to do, but, live and learn, and I learned that, I didn't really need to own a Mac in order to get my computing done, and I also learned that, I could do it a lost less expensively. Perhaps you have a lot to learn too.

So, go ahead, and get into the real world, where Macs are redundant and expensive and unneeded. If Macs were to suddenly disappear from the face of the earth, would anyone notice or even care? ;)

[antiRepublicrat]

but, when I look to compare, feature by feature, and price-wise, whenever there is a PC that is the equivalent of a Mac in performance and utility, the PC always ends on top

I'm sure you won't count things like superior machined aluminum to be a superior feature, or the inclusion of Thunderbolt, or the dual graphics of the MacBook Pro. But if you go down a CPU/RAM/GPU/HDD checklist, the Mac will usually (usually) lose. I can run an HP/torque checklist between an Escalade and a Mercedes M-Class, and the cheaply-built Escalade will probably come out on top too. But that doesn't necessarily make it the better product.

BTW, why would someone want to buy a used Mac, since, they start out with less real utility in the world of computing?

Since they start out with more real-world utility, buying one used is a way to get one for someone who could normally only afford a PC. Upgrade to a newer Mac OS and you'll likely even get more speed out of that old hardware.

Apple may be making more money from each of their Macs

That's because Apple doesn't play in the low-end, low-margin crap computer market. You know, the one you're encouraging everyone to use. News flash: A lot of people don't like buying crap.

Ultrabooks, comparably equipped, will always be lower priced than the Macs. I've already seen them at best buy and elsewhere.

Wait, I thought Macs were too low-specced. Anyway, I looked recently, they're all around the same price or more. You just can't make a Mac for less than a Mac. Apple already has the suppliers locked up tighter than anyone else.

Most of what they'll use a Mac for is for the same things that a tablet does.

True, which is why my wife replace her PC notebook with an iPad. Yes, she looked at the available Android tablets first, and they were crap. There were no Windows tablets, because they ditched those projects as soon as the iPad was announced, redefining what a tablet should be.

Retina displays are unnecessary for any type of computing or web browsing that people do.

Standard PC-maniac logic, if PC doesn't have it, then it's not important. I do like Retina displays. The one on my iPhone means these not-too-great eyes have an easy time reading things. Anti-aliasing, which always strained my eyes, isn't even necessary anymore.

Even so, retina displays are not proprietary to Apple, and Samsung and others are promising Windows 8 devices with retina displays.

That's how it usually goes: Apple comes out with it, PC industry catches up, Apple released the next innovation, back to the copy machines for the PC industry.

None of those were Apple inventions. So, what is it that any of Apple's gadgets have inside them that is exclusively theirs?

The SoC running the iDevices? Apple has invested almost a billion dollars in chip design know-how over the last few years. In addition, the factories making the aluminum cases, the Retina displays, etc., were often partnered with Apple to bring them up to speed to be able to produce the parts. Apple invests hundreds of millions per year in this kind of thing, and it guarantees exclusivity of parts and manufacturing capacity for years. Hell, Apple was actually behind the initial creation of the ARM processor. As far as PCs, yeah, since they moved from 680x0 and PPC, they mainly use reference designs these days. However, they are often highly customized, especially with the heat issues.

awfully nice to know that, for whatever you want, their is an application for that, and, one that is not crippled by the more limited Macs, which have OSX inside, which means that, most applications wont be served as nicely as they will with a Windows system.

OS X software isn't crippled, and because of some extremely nice goodies in the OS, it's easier to develop high-speed software for the Mac. Want to leverage the GPU for some animation, or image or video manipulation? Want to do it multi-threaded? Oh, that's already done for you, it happened when you invoked the call to the API.

I have all the programs I want for me on my Mac. Office for the Mac is even nicer than the PC version. Best thing: no IE even available! And when I want to do work stuff (I'm a Windows admin), or do Windows development (I do both), or just test some admin ideas, I have a complete virtualized Windows network on my Mac.

If Macs were to suddenly disappear from the face of the earth, would anyone notice or even care? ;)

Microsoft Windows development would stagnate since Microsoft's R&D department will have disappeared. So I think PC users would care quite a bit.