are the facts that consumer demand and multiple vendor options have driven the margins and prices so low that you really do get a very low quality product at the lower end.

Where consumers fail is they take that low end model and then compare it to a Mac and talk about differences. The issue is you are not comparing like products from the start.

The other issue is Apple controls their entire eco system from the top down. They control the experience the user gets. This means less bloat software, less virus ect.

Someone like HP for instance can control HW but they are still left to the will of Microsoft and potential limitations of the OS. This becomes a problem when the consumer has an HP (in this case) and runs into multiple failures, ect. Often most those problems are related to the OS but HP will take the blunt of the complains because consumers package it all together.

HP has a distinct consumer vs commercial models and the products are 2 completely different animals. Consumer is built for low costs where commercial is built for practical business use and longevity. I know plenty of companies getting 5 years out of their commercial products. However, the ROI at that point is just not worth it and it makes more sense to simply replace the unit. These same companies take their macs for 5+ years. The difference is I got the HP for $1200 and the mac for $2300+. I can replace the HP halfway through the life cycle, upgrading the specs in the process and do so for the same costs as a single mac.

For the average consumer I guess Macs are practical but why pay >2x costs if all you are doing is daily household things as referenced by soupie above?