When a consumer can afford to means they have the opportunity to, not that they will. If you told me that I could buy widget A for $10 or widget B for $30, where both widget A and widget B will satisfy my needs, I am going to buy widget A. It doesn't really matter if widget B tries to justify that premium by doing a bunch of stuff that doesn't reflect my needs.
But widget A is objectively worse. My MacBook M2 Air last two workdays before needing a charge, it’s light and silent. An x86 Windows PC has none of those attributes.
I can actually use a MacBook Air on my lap without endangering my ability to have little scarface_74’s
You could choose a collection of metrics that would make either widget look better. In the end, the individual metrics may be objective yet the selection of metrics will be subjective. For example: those who prefer widget A may cite things like software availability, repairability, and upgradability.
To many people these days, computers are synonymous with laptops. They have limited need for portability or, if they need portability, a couple of hundred grams does not mean much to them. As for battery life, it is possible to get PCs that will run for a full day without charging. Yeah, that is not as good as two days. On the other hand, it's not necessarily meaningful. People who travel a lot or do a lot of field work may need it, but it won't be a primary concern for most.
I'm still trying to figure out the reproductive organ bit. It sounds like an issue for people who use their computer in awfully unergonomic postures, particularly since most computers radiate heat towards the back rather than the front.
Not as much anymore. But I use to travel a lot as a consultant and I still travel with my wife quite frequently - I work remotely.
Seriously honest question as someone not too deep in the x86 ecosystem anymore. Which of these that are listed as having the best battery life would be comparable in performance to the latest MacBook Airs?
