Ah, you've chosen to argue semantics... the argument of last refuge, to paraphrase Mrs. Norton.
You chose to argue semantics when you warped the existence of a "premium" to fit a situation of no merit. You responded to a post saying the fabled Mac premium didn't exist (that is, that Macs cost more money than equivalent PCs). You changed the definition to "Macs can cost more money to some customers because they might not care about everything in the Mac" which is NOT the historical complaint of the "Mac premium."
Any computer from any vendor can include features of no value to an individual consumer; that does not create a categorical premium for the brand.
A product doesn't carry a price premium just because one customer doesn't have a use for its features.
This should have tipped you off that what I was getting at is that -- shock, horror -- comparing two computers is not purely down to specs but also consumers needs, given that's what it actually, you know, says. In writing.
Consumers have to rule out products to begin with. You're comparing products based on needs while ignoring the price impact of the other features--which is the exact same thing as looking at the specs and the price without interest for needs. You complain about a comparison ignoring individual needs, but your comparison ignores that the features you don't care about cost money regardless of whether you want them. Those added features don't create a "Mac premium"--they might create a "(your name) premium" for your own buying needs, but that is irrelevant to the product as a whole.
If you're interested in optimizing your purchase--buying the exact computer you need for the lowest price, and you don't need the features of a given Apple machine, then the Apple machine is not part of that comparison.
If you're looking at 15", DVD-R, sub-$1000 notebooks, there is no Apple machine that is a member of that class. Therefore, if you're looking at a Mac, it's because you
want a Mac and, as an individual, are considering a product beyond the parameters you established for yourself-- a "(your name here) premium."
It's rather ironic that my original post didn't include the word premium except in the quote written by iWoot. However, since you've chosen to fixate upon it, let's see what the dictionary has to say:
You might want to look up "irony" while you're at it, and note these well from your post:
"...but rather if there's a "Mac Premium" or not."
"Thus, there *may* be a 'Mac Premium'"
"It's about if one is paying a premium"
Should I keep going?
You can belabor the point as much as you like, but since that definition is in my dictionary
Your application of the definition is inadequate. A yacht is more expensive than a hamburger, but a yacht does not carry a "premium" (as it would using your definition). A yacht is not a premium toy boat. A yacht is not a premium runabout, speed boat, fishing boat, or party boat, or houseboat, or tug boat. A yacht is a yacht. If you're not shopping for yachts, don't include them in the products you're comparing, plain and simple.
Since we're talking notebook computers, they are of the same class.
No they're not. A class for comparison are the ones that meet your parameters entirely. Ultraportables wouldn't fall into those needs, nor would multi-hard drive desktop replacements. If you found an HP that was $75 more than the Toshiba, there wouldn't be an "HP premium"--the HP would just be more expensive for your uses. If it carried no extra value for that cost, you would buy the cheaper one and that would be the end of it.
You simply can't say you're being charged a premium for a computer that isn't comparable to the other one you're looking at. If it's more computer than you need or are willing to pay for, you aren't actually considering it. You might
desire it, but that's not a "Mac premium."
She could use either one for her purposes and they would both be suitable (unlike the cactus). They do very similar things and the end result is identical.
She could also use a $4000 Dell XPS gaming rig for her purposes. That doesn't mean there's a "Dell premium." Setting a minimum threshold and then looking at a few computers that far exceed those requirements and comparing them to machines that
barely meet those requirements is not a reasonable base of comparison.
If you can get everything you want by using a lower price category, by all means do it. That doesn't mean that the Apple sitting in a higher price category is a premium version of the cheap computer you bought any more than the Sonys, Dells, and Toshibas in that same higher price categories carry brand premiums simply for having better features and higher price tags.
Coca Cola, interestingly, is often described, along with Pepsi, as a premium brand.
What does "premium brand" have to do with a price premium? Perhaps you should keep reading the dictionary entry. In your comparison, it would be like claiming that Coke carries a premium over Pepsi because the Coke you're looking at costs more (regardless of whether the Pepsi is equivalent). Apple and Toshiba are both name brands. Both would be considered "premium brands" as computers.
A discrete GPU is something she would never notice....
What you're saying is that a MacBook Pro doesn't have any
value for
her as an
individual. That is perfectly true. She solved the problem: she didn't buy it. It really is that simple.
To her, the two items are equivalent, and thus can be compared.
They're not equivalent to anyone. The latter is clearly more computer. Just because both meet her needs does not make them equivalent.
She didn't seem that interested due to the price premium (there's that word again!) she'd have to pay over the Toshiba
So where's all the whining about the Toshiba premium for the more expensive Toshibas? The Dell premium? The HP premium? The Lenovo premium?
These computers are simply more expensive. There's no HP premium. There's a higher price tag, a premium to the individual, not to the brand.
However, the Mac would cost significantly more than the Toshiba. One might say it was - wait for it - a premium for the Mac. A Mac premium.
THE Toshiba. You keep saying that like it's the only one. What about all the Toshibas that exceed her requirements and budgets the same way? Did she complain about a Toshiba premium? Or did she simply eliminate them from consideration as being more than she needed?
That's right. She just eliminated them from comparison. Why wouldn't you do the same for the Mac?
The point is that Apple offers grapes that it says are sweeter and more enjoyable than other grapes and therefore worthy of the premium.
No, his point was that he only needs four grapes, so even if there are 12 grapes, it's only fair to compare prices LIKE there's just four, because the other 8 are unimportant. The result of that is that the 12-grape bunch comes with a "premium" because it costs more than getting exactly what he wants somewhere else. He wasn't even talking about the law suit, but rather just confusing the issues in the thread entirely.
) that their panel are unmatched by any other portable.
button pushing and expose flipping and flopping have convinced me that is in Apple, besides, none of the have crashed yet so they can't be windows.
