Well, finding 2 computers that are exactly equal in specs is more effort than I care to put in, but here's the first reasonable comparison I see at Best Buy:
Compare it to the 13" Macbook Pro (for the sake of being generous towards the Mac). It's just over half the price, has a bigger screen, more ram, a larger hard drive, and seemingly identical processor and graphics. Naturally there are give and takes on both sides (just about everything is inferior to Apple in terms of "build quality", though this is tough to put a price on), but I don't think it's unreasonable to say this is a comparable laptop, and the specs easily make up for it being $50 over half price.
I don't say this to disparage Apple, I've got a MBP myself, but whenever I look at PCs with comparable specs, I do find that they tend to be about half the price.
I'll withdraw 3x though, that probably is too high and even if I could hunt around and find one example, it's not like that would prove the point.
Worse quality screen, graphics card, audio, and slower cpu. Worse keyboard(no backlighting), worse trackpad(my missus has one they are pretty awful), thicker case.
Nothing is stand out worse but everything is just a bit worse which when your pushing the upper edges adds up to a lot of cost. Not even counting build quality.
By this logic, is anything but a Macbook comparable to a Macbook? How would you compare build quality objectively? I think it's safe to say if you're paying extra for a backlit keyboard, you're throwing around money.
Yes but they cost just as much. As you'll note I said ignoring build quality even though it should be factored in.
If you've ever had a backlit keyboard you will realize the usefulness of them. I consider them as essential as a good screen but again I just pointed out that its a worse keyboard not that the keyboard is make or break.
I guess I tried to address two issues in this. Let's put it this way: one man drives an Audi RS4, and the other has a Toyota Camry. Nobody argues that the man with the Audi has the better car, but one might infer that he also has more disposable income. That is why we assume people with Macbooks have more disposable income; they've purchased a luxury item when there is a commodity alternative. A backlit keyboard is definitely not required to use a laptop, no more than heated seats are necessary in a car. You think they're essential because you have enough disposable income that the utility of the money you'd use to buy the keyboard has become less than the utility of the keyboard. This is the notion of value. You can also, likely, afford to give a few dollars to a charity if you'd like.
Thats a fair comment but is a different discussion than the one this subthread is built on which is whether a mac is more expensive than a comparable pc. When discussing that then features like a backlit keyboard are important.
Comments
Well, finding 2 computers that are exactly equal in specs is more effort than I care to put in, but here's the first reasonable comparison I see at Best Buy:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Toshiba+-+Satellite+14%26%2334%3...
Compare it to the 13" Macbook Pro (for the sake of being generous towards the Mac). It's just over half the price, has a bigger screen, more ram, a larger hard drive, and seemingly identical processor and graphics. Naturally there are give and takes on both sides (just about everything is inferior to Apple in terms of "build quality", though this is tough to put a price on), but I don't think it's unreasonable to say this is a comparable laptop, and the specs easily make up for it being $50 over half price.
I don't say this to disparage Apple, I've got a MBP myself, but whenever I look at PCs with comparable specs, I do find that they tend to be about half the price.
I'll withdraw 3x though, that probably is too high and even if I could hunt around and find one example, it's not like that would prove the point.
Worse quality screen, graphics card, audio, and slower cpu. Worse keyboard(no backlighting), worse trackpad(my missus has one they are pretty awful), thicker case.
Nothing is stand out worse but everything is just a bit worse which when your pushing the upper edges adds up to a lot of cost. Not even counting build quality.
By this logic, is anything but a Macbook comparable to a Macbook? How would you compare build quality objectively? I think it's safe to say if you're paying extra for a backlit keyboard, you're throwing around money.
Yes but they cost just as much. As you'll note I said ignoring build quality even though it should be factored in.
If you've ever had a backlit keyboard you will realize the usefulness of them. I consider them as essential as a good screen but again I just pointed out that its a worse keyboard not that the keyboard is make or break.
I guess I tried to address two issues in this. Let's put it this way: one man drives an Audi RS4, and the other has a Toyota Camry. Nobody argues that the man with the Audi has the better car, but one might infer that he also has more disposable income. That is why we assume people with Macbooks have more disposable income; they've purchased a luxury item when there is a commodity alternative. A backlit keyboard is definitely not required to use a laptop, no more than heated seats are necessary in a car. You think they're essential because you have enough disposable income that the utility of the money you'd use to buy the keyboard has become less than the utility of the keyboard. This is the notion of value. You can also, likely, afford to give a few dollars to a charity if you'd like.
Thats a fair comment but is a different discussion than the one this subthread is built on which is whether a mac is more expensive than a comparable pc. When discussing that then features like a backlit keyboard are important.