The fact that you view it as expensive does not make it overpriced. Apple certainly has no trouble selling at their prices.

no problem selling to a minority of users worldwide. The rest simply enjoy PCs and other options and ignore Apple.

So what? Are you claiming that all luxury products are overpriced because most people can't afford them?

The thing is. Both the Suface Pro and Pixel(shining examples of companies not quite being Apple) have sold at exactly the same price as their Apple counterparts for the past few years.

And neither product (I used both) compares to a Mac. There is an elegant simplicity in using a Mac that isn't there when using a PC or other.

Having been a *nix admin for a hair under 20 years, I prefer only Free & OpenBSD to macOS.

What’s a useful definition of “privacy oriented company” in your mind?

To me, it’s: “a company whose profit incentives are aligned with their user’s privacy.”

You can go on and on about whether they’re “truly” privacy-oriented but to me that’s a meaningless distinction; a company’s profit incentives are the very definition of what they’re “oriented” towards.

Overpriced? Not if they are selling products at te price offered. If they were OVER priced, they would sell zero. If a good is above the price people are willing to pay, they will sell zero. Clearly, that is not the case. An economic nitpick to be sure but factual. They are correctly priced given their sales and profitability numbers.

No, you can have at least one customer even it is overpriced (e. g. if Apple sold the iPhone X for $10,000, it's very like that still at least one person buys it, it definitely would be overpriced though).

It's overpriced if you could make more revenue by lowering the price.

> and profitability numbers

I was referring to the "Not if they are selling products at te price offered. If they were OVER priced, they would sell zero. If a good is above the price people are willing to pay, they will sell zero. Clearly, that is not the case. An economic nitpick to be sure but factual." part, not arguing about Apple's case.