When a consumer can afford to means they have the opportunity to, not that they will. If you told me that I could buy widget A for $10 or widget B for $30, where both widget A and widget B will satisfy my needs, I am going to buy widget A. It doesn't really matter if widget B tries to justify that premium by doing a bunch of stuff that doesn't reflect my needs.

> if you told me that I could buy widget A for $10 or widget B for $30, where both widget A and widget B will satisfy my needs

Sure. But most high-income consumers value many of the perks that Apple products provide.

But widget A is objectively worse. My MacBook M2 Air last two workdays before needing a charge, it’s light and silent. An x86 Windows PC has none of those attributes.

I can actually use a MacBook Air on my lap without endangering my ability to have little scarface_74’s

You could choose a collection of metrics that would make either widget look better. In the end, the individual metrics may be objective yet the selection of metrics will be subjective. For example: those who prefer widget A may cite things like software availability, repairability, and upgradability.

It’s a battery powered portable device. Wouldn’t it have better battery life and being lighter - ie better portability - be kind of important?

Also a “laptop” computer that doesn’t fry your reproductive organs when working on your lap is an obvious metric.

To many people these days, computers are synonymous with laptops. They have limited need for portability or, if they need portability, a couple of hundred grams does not mean much to them. As for battery life, it is possible to get PCs that will run for a full day without charging. Yeah, that is not as good as two days. On the other hand, it's not necessarily meaningful. People who travel a lot or do a lot of field work may need it, but it won't be a primary concern for most.

I'm still trying to figure out the reproductive organ bit. It sounds like an issue for people who use their computer in awfully unergonomic postures, particularly since most computers radiate heat towards the back rather than the front.

Not as much anymore. But I use to travel a lot as a consultant and I still travel with my wife quite frequently - I work remotely.

Seriously honest question as someone not too deep in the x86 ecosystem anymore. Which of these that are listed as having the best battery life would be comparable in performance to the latest MacBook Airs?

https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-battery-life-laptops

The tradeoff use to be performance or battery life.

Exactly. This is now 15 years out of date, but in 2009, Macs had 91% marketshare in the >$1,000 computer market per some industry estimate. My guess is they're still doing great in that segment. https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-has-91-share-of-premiu...

Ok.

So instead of being able to upgrade to a 8TB in a few years when the prices come down, I can just throw out my 3K Mac and buy a new one. Only 5k for the 8TB Mac.

I make music and I'm getting into photography and film making. I prefer more space over being having to carry around an external SSD with me

I also enjoy gaming, which is still much better on Windows. If I want to play some COD or Tony Hawk HD, that's very well supported.

Not really going to work on a Mac.

Macs do have a much more premium feel to them, but I've had great experiences with cheap laptops. Even if I drop it, shucks, I'm out 750$, not 3k.

> Macs do have a much more premium feel to them, but I've had great experiences with cheap laptops. Even if I drop it, shucks, I'm out 750$, not 3k.

Not to mention that feeling premium doesn't mean that it is more durable. I used to joke that those cheap plastic bodies found on cheap products did a much better job of protecting a device from the shock of a fall than the glass and metal bodies of premium feeling products.

And while my experience with Macs is dated, I had an optical drive in one that refused to accept disks because there was a minor bend in the case. That machine never suffered from a fall, though it was likely a result of how I stuffed the machine into my book bag.

> instead of being able to upgrade to a 8TB in a few years when the prices come down, I can just throw out my 3K Mac and buy a new one

Mac buyers fall into two groups: those who don't need that upgrade (most consumers) and those who can afford to spec it up at the beginning, cost be damned. That's what OP meant by "when the consumer can afford to."

> also enjoy gaming, which is still much better on Windows

100%. I don't think Apple has meaningfully contested this space.

Realistically I can afford a 1500$ M3 Pro with a 512 drive.

I'd just prefer to save my money and get significantly more storage.

I will miss Logic though...

I submit a third camp: some of us use a NAS or other networked storage solution because no laptop sanely provides the amount of storage we want or need, or don’t want all our data local.

Or something cloudy, though not necessarily iCloud Drive.

You don't need an 8TB Mac. You need a 1TB Mac (at most) and a good external SSD.

How do you know what 999900000999 needs better than them?

> I make music and I'm getting into photography and film making. I prefer more space over being having to carry around an external SSD with me

The rest of your points are all valid, but for photography storage purposes you can just use SD cards. They take up virtually no space, and MBPs (since at least M1 gen) have an SD card slot built-in.

I use SD cards, but I still copy my photos to my PC to back then up to the cloud and edit them.

If I had to use a Mac, I guess I'd change my workflow a bit.