Dude, you don't get it. Prices are NOT fixed by costs. It's a free world (as our former communist comrads in China are proving to us on a daily basis) and vendors are free to set their prices, and people vote with their pocketbook.
Oh, I get it you need not worry.
I just disagree that you get anything for the extra money as you were claiming. You were saying that Apple laptops were of higher quality, and it is that claim I'm disagreeing with. Further, just like vendors are more or less (not entirely, as an example is dumping, or if taking advantage of a monopoly) free to set their prices, so do consumer have every right to point their finger when the emperor walks around with no clothes on.
If the Apple MBP is such a commodity, easy to replace, how come there isn't another system provider that has created their own operating system (whether or not it has open source components), on hardware of their own design (based on commodity components), that had developed such a revenue base? Nobody has.
Again, you seem to get a bit confused as to what we're discussing. First you try to say that the MBP's quality is worth the extra money, and now you try to use an appeal to popularity as an argument, which, as most should know is a logical fallacy, and therefore an invalid argument. Besides, it's the iPod that have made Apple into a company with a broad appeal.
Microsoft is selling software, Dell/IBM/HP/Gateway/Acer/Sony/blah-blah-blah are selling hardware (and reselling software). Nobody else "owns" the system, they own a part of the system.
Why do you need to make such pseudo arguments? It doesn't matter if nobody else "owns" the system or not unless of course, you believe that it's true what all the other fanboys run around and claim: That it makes for better "integration".
If it's such a commodity, then someone else should step up and take over the profits that Apple is reaping.
Utterly invalid argument. It's a logical fallacy when one claims what you're claiming. In reality you could claim anything. For instance "Apple has the best products ever, otherwise they wouldn't be making so much money or be so popular", "Apple's closed kingdom is the best way to run a company, otherwise they wouldn't be making so much money or be so popular", "Apples products are flawless, otherwise they wouldn't be making so much money or be so popular" and on and on. All of them utter invalid, of course.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html
But it's not ~easy~ to do so. That is why Apple can charge so much: They are the only one offering the combined system. Whether you call it integration or "an experience", everyone else is strapping Windows and/or Linux on their hardware, or selling Windows. Nobody else controls the whole experience.
Who cares? See above.
I get it. You treat food as fuel. Food in, sewage out. That's what life is to you.
Is it possible you could act more ignorant? I guess you feel it's necessary to misconstrue what I say on purpose, in order to defend your opinion. We wouldn't want to actually understand an argument, would we?
I treat LAPTOPS as TOOLS. THAT was the comparison.
So Intel systems are turds? Why are you so passionate about them then, mister "you have a bad analogy"?
Again, with the attempt to twist what I say, mixed in with purposely ignorance, all in order for you to make-believe your analogy still works.
I was using a rewrite of the "you can polish a turd, but it's still a turd", because I tried to tell you, that your analogy about how expensive the rent was in that restaurant (as if the MBP had more costs associated with it than its competitors) wasn't proper, and that even if does, it's the innards of a laptop that matters when your analogy is comparing a BWM and Honda.
You never stop to wonder why I think you have some really crappy analogies? Oh, that's right you do you just choose to misinterpret what I say in order to make the analogy survive
I wasn't comparing a 2008 product with a 1995 product, mister "Reading Comprehension Runner Up". I'm telling you I am a PC enthusiast, who has spent way more money on PCs than Macs, for a long time.
Yes you were. You backed that up by using a 1995 product's price and thus implicitly made a comparison. You seem to forget the context here. We're talking about MBPs in 2008, so when you suddenly talk about the price of PC's and invoke the product price from a 1995 product, you are indeed making comparisons.
It looks like my reading comprehension far surpass your writing and deduction skille.
The fact that you say there are no qualitative differences between vendors amazes me.
I don't say that. I'm saying that Apple specifically doesn't have anything OVER the competitors.
They all operate the same, are identically reliable, are just as easy to use, etc.? yeah, right.
See above, and please stop with your continued use of strawman argumentation.
Grossly ignorant post. The point is that your opinion and my opinion differ. If you think that all people should share your opinion, you are closed minded. How are you going to justify your superiority if everyone was just like you? You need people like us, to look down on, to satisfy your existence.
What do you mean "people like [you]"? Oh, you must mean the fanboy part? No, it's not a need I have, I just call it when I see it.
Just like the Honda driver and the BMW driver in my example look down on each other, and neither is wrong, and neither is right.
Oh, so by your own admission you look down on people who uses a pc? Excellent. I guess I was right when I called you a fanboy.