And Apple retailers frequently add discounts to Macs, so I guess it’s a hard comparison to make as well. But the bottom line is, if we look at the actual non-discounted prices for the two, Microsoft’s prices are higher.
As to the distinction of it being a tablet, that’s, again, a point in my favor. There’s no way that the added value of 16GB of RAM on a tablet (which will overheat when trying to perform the same tasks and will have far less battery runtime), is double the value of 16GB of RAM on a Pro laptop that can easily make better use of those 16GB of RAM. And in this case, we actually know for certain that the Surface Pro is just using standard RAM chips. The footprint of a 16GB RAM chip isn’t different from an 8GB one, so arguing that “squeezing those specs into a small form factor is a complement for Microsoft”, doesn’t make much sense, as there’s not really any more “squeezing” involved in sticking a 16GB wafer in instead of an 8GB. You’re correct that it’s a somewhat niche product, but so is the MacBook Pro. The MacBook Air is far more popular, the MacBook Pro is a higher-end device. Most top-of-the-line premium devices are a bit niche. And I saw similarly higher or equal RAM upgrade pricing with Microsoft’s Surface Studio Laptop as well, not double, but at least equal, and generally higher.
At the end of the day, you could accept that Microsoft does, in fact, charge more for RAM upgrades, and at the same time argue that Apple is charging too much as well. But pretending Microsoft isn’t charging more really isn’t an option, the hard evidence shows Microsoft is, in fact, charging more, it’s not a very disputable case. Personally, I think the M3 MacBook Pro is a great value even with a $200 upgrade, so I don’t really have any problem with their RAM pricing tier. Others disagree, and I respect that, but I do think it’s fair to point out that some are asking an even higher price for the same thing, and pointing out that other competitors charge a similar price as well.
