Nah, then high-priced products from competitors would be quite popular as purchases from people in the know.
The fact of the matter is that this isn't the case. In the PC world, Apple commands something like 95% of the market above $1000. Apple has an inordinate command over this market. If Apple and Windows PC manufacturers made equally as good >$1000 computers, the breakdown should be relatively comparable as other price points.
With PMP devices, the comparison is even more ridiculous. Apple basically owns the media player market despite the fact that in many cases, Apple music players are literally four times pricier than the equivalent non-Apple competitor. That's right, you can buy a 4GB iRiver player for $25 whereas the 2GB iPod shuffle is $49.
Even comparable high-end notebook PCs like Dell's Adamo failed miserably. Built to compete against Apple's MacBook Air, it found no traction.
Remember that Apple's profit margins are far greater than their competitors. Why can't Acer build a PC and make the same margins as Apple? There is nothing really stopping them from doing so, unless the customers simply don't see any additional value in the Acer device. If you compare specs, the Macs don't usually come up on top. Perhaps there's something other than hardware specs that affects the ownership experience.
Note that much of Apple's recent marketshare increases comes from people moving from Windows to Macs. Something like half of the Macs sold in bricks-and-mortars Apple Retail Stores are to first-time Mac buyers.
If saving money by buying Windows PC is so great, why are those Windows PC owners happier?
There are quite a few "people in the know", though. And, i would assume that quite few of these build their own rigs :- )
Second, the bold-typed conclusion is dependent on the assumption that consumer goods are bought only based on their intrinsic good. We know this is not the case.
Third (second bold-type), competition is stopping them. Unlike Apple, companies e.g. Acer (while running Windows) competing on a shared platform have little chance to differentiate and thus experience margin-pressure in commoditized segments (i.e. most of the pc-market).
Fourth, where the **** else would they come from? :- )
With microsoft having +90% there is few other ways to grow in a sector that itself experiences very little growth (pc market is quite saturated).
----------
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)
Speaking from personal experience, anApple will outlast and make things right compared to the competition. Still using a 2006 Intel iMac with no issues. 2008 MB Pro with AppleCare, tons of issues and four repairs resulted in a brand new 2011 MB Pro replacement. Apple takes care of its customers. I'll be a customer for life.
And i could fire up my xp-box from 2002 and say the same... what's up with this idea that 5 year old computers shouldn't be functioning?
Also,
1) AppleCare is something you pay for. Do the same with other companies and receive similar treatment (sometimes better, sometimes worse).
2) If the product had tons of issues, and needed four repairs how the hell i'd be damned if i wouldnt get a replacement even without AppleCare (or equivalent). After all, i paid money for a functioning piece of technology, not some defect junk.
3) Customer service is always nice. Just dont go around thinking its free, or something only Apple can offer. You'll miss out... :- )
