That might have been true for a couple of years if you just compare pure computing power, as soon as you factor in build quality and compared it to Thinkpad X1s, XPS & Co you were in similar price ranges again. Or if you don't care about build quality, another classic is the high-res displays (and software support) which took the competitors years and some might argue that they're still not there.

Oh and there was also a couple of generations where Apple had pretty much kind-of exclusivity on Intel's newest CPUs and they were really only available in MacBooks for the first few months.

Build quality is a term non engineers use. It's a marketing term.

Seems like you got sucked up into it.

Edit- butterfly keyboard, airpods, bad iphone signals come to mind

Yeah, all stuff that sucked. There is even more, Staingate, Bendgate, ... Never said Apple is flawless :) You think the comparable offerings from Dell, Lenovo or HP are flawless? Oh I have news for you.

You know what, if you look close enough, "they all suck".

Nice Ad hom though. :)

Apple and Build quality should not go anywhere in the same sentence.

Take a watch at any of the Louis Rossman's "Think Different" Series to see Apple Build Quality....

Not for comparable quality, you weren't. The prices varied depending on features but it wasn't twice as much unless you failed to control specs (I remember forum posters accusing everyone of being fanboys when they came up with a number like that by comparing, say, an Apple device with an SSD to something with a previous-generation processor and spinning metal drive). If you're buying comparable quality you get fairly comparable cost.

Back in the Intel days? You mean one month ago? lol